Who rates higher all time Jeffries or Dempsey?

I think Fulton has as good a claim to the number 1 spot in1917 .
What did Wills do in1920 to merit the number one spot? He was in two fixed fights with Thompson and McVey beat a half blind 34years old Langford and stopped Fulton who hadn't lasted half a minute with Dempsey a year earlier.In1921 Wills beat Tate, Dempseys sparring partner three times ,stopped the undersized Jeff Clarke,beat journeyman Thompson twice and was slung out with him for not giving his best in another fight.Beat a ham and egger Andy Johnson. Put over the thoroughly washed up Gunboat Smith who said he only took the fight," for the boatride",and beat a 40 years old Denver Ed Martin.
In1922 Billy Miske beat Weinert,Fulton,Fulton, Roper and Gibbons thats better than Wills that year imo Wills beat Old Sam,Norfolk,Clark Clarl,lost and drew with Tate and beat three second raters.Clark was very near the end of his career.
"The disparity in size was alarming (Wills 6'2" 230 and Norfolk 5'9" 185). Wills stood almost a full foot taller that Norfolk and looked as if he could sweep him away with one stoke of his long ebony arms. The fight itself was little more than a public beating with Wills plastering the helpless Norfolk for a full round and a half before depositing him on the canvas with a vicious right hand midway through the second. Norfolk gamely tried to rise but could not find his footing. The fight was waved off when the Kid rose stumbled and then fell back into the ropes. "

 

Fitzsimmons might be the hardest p4p hitter of all time

 

So you think, Miske, who was dying of Bright’s disease should have been the number 1 contender in 1922?

Funny you put down wills win over Norfolk, when Norfolk twice beat a prime Miske

 

There's so much wrong with these rankings. How the hell does he have Gibbons in the top 10 in 1917? He weighed 160 lbs the entire year and even into 1918. He was fighting other middleweights and light heavyweights.

At the end of 1918 Joe Jeannette is still ranked in the top 10 but Norfolk isn't despite beating 2 of the fighters ranked there.

Greb certainly does not deserve a top 10 ranking as early as 1917. That's 2 middleweights ranked in the top 10 that shouldn't be anywhere near there.

 

Look at Miske's record and compare it to Wills in 1922,that's all I ask you to do.

 

That would be relevant if we were discussing p4p rankings. Dempsey (one of the best heavyweight punchers) beat on Gibbons for 15 rounds. Fitz fought at a slower pace and wasn't as good of a puncher as Dempsey at heavyweight.

 

I was quoting you. Your exact words were "good to know I really rattled you."

"Senile old fool."

I was quoting you. I thought you were fairly young, but this does make your fatuous posts understandable.

Frankly, I am finding you more and more distasteful and boring. You seem to want to cover ignorance and a lack of intellectual voltage with insults. The childish usually do. I think it best to put you on ignore.

 

He had a few nice wins, I wonder if any of those had been fixed for the dying man. A few notable historians I’ve talked too believe the Brennan fight was fixed.

Wills didn’t lose in 1922

Miske lost to gibbons in 1922

Wills beat Norfolk in 2 in 1922. Norfolk twice beat Miske before Miske got sick.

 

Projecting at its finest. I've given you many outs to end this exchange even telling you that we should agree to disagree because there is no chance of us agreeing. You declined to take the offer.

 

Gibbons only weighed 170lb. Fitz was about 165lb. P4P is very relevant here.

Dempsey did not “beat on” gibbons for 15 rounds. Gibbons did very well the first 5-6 rounds then went in retreat the last 10. Gibbons hardly took any big punches

Fitz was on a near level to Dempsey as a puncher at heavyweight. And he was a lot bigger puncher than Tunney

 

Only you could pick a fight with a fine poster like Edward

 

"had been fixed for a dying man"

I have also wondered about that. I have no evidence of anything. But a guy being mortally ill and bedridden getting up and knocking out some of the top men in the world seems odd, especially as his post-illness record is more impressive than his pre-illness record.

 

The film clearly shows Dempsey landing the better punches on the inside. Gibbons didn't do "very well" at any point in the fight. He's only noted for going the distance. His game plan was to survive from the opening bell. Dempsey was a lot bigger of a puncher than Tunney too. What were his results again?

How many defensively savvy fighters did Fitzsimmons beat? Just one, Corbett. Corbett had Fitz down in the 6th and failed to capitalize on it with his slaps.

I'm going to ask you an honest question here. Have you ever seen Fitzsimmons fight? He looks like garbage on film. He throws a low amount of punches that are wide, telegraphed shots and has bad balance. I mean there's footage of him missing a looping left hook on Corbett and he falls face first into the ropes. Check out this short little clip and you'll see what I mean.

This content is protected

If Fitz was fighting today people would say he didn't know how to fight.

 

Doesn't your hand ever get tired?

 

I can't see the strong argument for Wills not being the #1 man in 1920, as Fulton was considered, other than Wills, the outstanding contender.

In 1922, I can see Wills not being #1. The best alternative would seem to me to have been Greb, though, not Miske. Greb beat both Gibbons and Tunney that year. Gibbons beat Miske. Greb also beat Roper, who drew with Miske.

If I were doing the rating for that year, I would have given the #1 contender position to Greb.