Jack Dempsey's Ranking

"Langford . . . 'Dempsey is the greatest fighter I have ever seen'. Game set and match."

To what. Did Langford see Joe Louis or anyone who came after Joe Louis? Do we even know if he even saw Jeffries in his prime. Of all time greats, he thinks Dempsey is better than Johnson, and perhaps Jeffries.

And off this quote, he thinks Dempsey is better than Wills, or at least says so when in the deep South.

And we have to put on the scales that Langford seems to have hated Johnson.

 

How is it less extreme than what Sharkey said of Dempsey's power? I think it is more plausible for a fighter to be able to knock shoulders and hips out of place rather than a 160lb Middleweight to punch as hard as a 220-240 lb heavyweight. Especially when Andre Dirrell said that he didn't even remember Golovkins power from when they fought twice in the amateurs. That kind of supposed punching power isn't something you forget either.

 

Those guys back in the day wore 5-6oz gloves, and a few yrs before fought with skin tight gloves.

If you want to see if a little guy can ko a much bigger guy
watch this. https://youtu.be/qdR3cv4Wiao

Jeff Fenech was in Atlantic City and got into it with a huge bouncer, Fenech laid the guy out with one punch.

That's with no gloves on. It gives you an idea what a smaller man can do to a much larger man. The bigger guy has the advantage but the little can turn the trick with one well placed shot.

 

A guy flew into a boxing ring in a parachute, but someone can't dislocate a shoulder in a rough sparring match with Dempsey?

 

Your comparing a street fight to two world class boxers to make your point? That's a bit ridiculous don't you think?

 

I am sorry but I never heard of anybody breaking anyone's shoulder with a punch. My guy tore his rotater cuff, in a fight with Eric Morales. I believe he got it throwing a punch. I had another guy get hit on his bicep as he was throwing a punch, that dislocated his shoulder. The guy was not a puncher that did the damage it was more like the punch my guy was throwing and the other guy was throwing met. So it happens, but a punch no. That other thing about the hip, that's a low blow and even then a punch wont break a hip bone or dislocate the hip bone.
Unless you were 80yrs old and had brittle bones.
Does anybody have proof of this?

 

"Again picking a winner of sporting events has no bearing on sports expertise."

So you are arguing against your own position.

If picking winners and expertise have no relationship, the opinions of "experts" on who would win a fantasy match-up is worthless.

By the way, one purpose of an education is to teach one how to think for yourself.

 

He may have, I don't know.

In my heart of hearts, I think that a sparring partner got injured on more than one occasion from a punch from Dempsey, or a push or some kind of force coming from Dempsey. I don't think it's as cartoonish as one might be imagining it being.

That's my intuition based on balancing everything. I don't know, but that would be my guess.

 

It's only ridiculous if you don't understand what my point was. Since today there are loads of vid's showing ko's, and specifically smaller guys vs way bigger guys but only in street fights. How a smaller guy could flatten a bigger guy with one shot. Both boxing and MMA have wt divisions. A punch is a punch whether with gloves or not. Back around Dempsey's and Greb's time they were using 5-6oz gloves, back in the early 1900's they used skintight gloves. The closest you will get today is the 4oz gloves MMA fighters use.
If you want to see what kind of damage those smaller gloves can inflict, watch the Billy Collins - Luis Resto fight, They were supposed to be using 8oz gloves, Resto's cornerman took out about 2-3oz, there's a picture of Collins face afterwards unbelievable the damage Collins took.
So you see I wasn't comparing them at all, I was trying to illustrate a point, sorry if it wasn't clear enough.

 

Thank for your reasonable reply. I do understand that 4oz gloves causes more damage than 8oz gloves and l'm familiar with the Resto -Collins fight but you don't seriously think a middleweight champion today could beat top quality heavyweight just because they were wearing 4oz gloves do you? Because that's pretty much what your trying to infer.

 

Again. You have the best of those times vouching vigorously that Dempsey was the best. That's just three. Let's then add the comments of Stillman, Fleischer, Schmeling, Sharkey and a host of others. There is an avalanche of first hand information that clearly shows how completely off base you are. You in actuality could not be more off base. So off base that your reasons for degrading Dempsey must be ignorance or some deep seated hatred which you yourself need to come to grips with.

Sam Langford "Dempsey is the greatest fighter I have ever seen."

 

Greatest heavyweight fighter, not P4P. And that's when Langford basically saw only far-far past his prime Jeffries in 1910, possibly far-far past his prime Fitzsimmons, and never saw Corbett or Sullivan in real fights. Basically he had to choose between Burns, Johnson, 1910 Jeffries, Willard and Dempsey.

 

Who did Dempsey beat to make him the greatest fighter of all time?

Beating Fred Fulton doesn't get you in the conversation, let alone the top spot.