One of the most discussed and divisive fighters on this board. Some think he was one of the greatest, others see him as little more than a hype job. I figured it would help clearing up the discussion and establishing who is claiming what exactly if people summarized their opinions on Jack in this thread. I would be thankful if you could avoid polemics or overstatements and just gave as honest an assessment as possible. I am also more interested in how you rate him as a h2h fighter primarily based on video analysis and news reports rather than just his legacy. Of course, his achievements and opponents he actually faced (or not) play into this as well so legacy must still be discussed to some degree. Looking forward to reading your thoughts. Cheers!
1. He was the baddest man of his time lmao. 2. He was a ferocious fighter and a powerful puncher. He was sort of an all-arounder; fast, strong, durable, and very skilled. One weakness his former trainer said he had was that he wasn't really used to going up against the best fighters, but he did do very well and beat Willard, Firpo, Gibbons, and he beat Sharkey when Dempsey was far past his prime. Several people have also criticized Dempsey's defense as being easy to hit. 3. Dempsey's power was amazing as both a heavyweight and p4p. He's had a lot of first round knockouts, has constantly floored his opponents and has damaged many of them, like Jess Willard, greatly. 4. He's in my top 15 p4p. 5. I think Dempsey would do well against all future heavyweights, and I believe he has the potential to beat any heavyweight, although there are some like Louis and Marciano who I see have a better chance at winning. But he's definitely up with the best. Personally he's ranked as my 4th best heavyweight. 6. While he did fight like a mad dog, he was also a smart fighter. A mix of savagery and skill. He shows off how much he understood the art of boxing in his book, "Championship Fighting". 7. I think he's actually underrated, but some people do overrate him as well. I feel like revisionism kinda brought him down. 8. I think it was taking a shot at all his hooks lol. Those are my two cents on Dempsey. Also I like your username lmao
Never seen a man do so much damage to another man without killing him. Dempsey broke Willard's everything. And his path to the title has so many 1st round KOs, including the rising star and hopeful Fred Fulton, who didn't last 20 seconds. Let us not forget what Dempsey did for boxing, as well. Boxing was always a popular sport in America, but Dempsey made it THE MOST popular sport in America, surpassing baseball, getting million dollar gates and cementing the heavyweight champion as the king of America.
1. Yes 2. Strengths: Speed, Power, Chin. Weaknesses: Hollywood women, his manager 3. I rank him 7th-8th among heavies, below guys like Liston, Foreman, Shavers, Lewis and Marciano, but above guys like Louis, Baer, Bowe, Walcott, etc. Btw I rank him higher as a puncher, rather than just pure power. 5. I think he'd clean out this division. He hit he point of diminishing returns for size and he's as ferocious and powerful as they come. He could lose to Lennox Lewis in terms of SHWs, but the rest he clobbers. 6. EXTREMELY REFINED TECHNIQUE. HE WAS A MAD GENIUS OF BOXING. READ CHAMPIONSHIP FIGHTING. 7. He was the greatest heavyweight up until Louis hit the scene. His hype was a product of him. 8. Visible confusion
All of the above. A true heavyweight champion of the world is a badass like Dempsey .His savaging of Willard ,thankfully caught on film ,shows just what a beast he was .That and Foreman s ripping the title from Frazier is one of the greatest title winning fight s in heavyweight history .
Ferocious fighter with a desperate desire to win. Athletic, with a great left hook. Was better as a rising contender than as a defending champion. Fought great when hurt and had a solid chin. What if - looms over him with his failure to face Wills, some ppl also claim Greb, but if he fought and beat Greb I don’t believe it would be remembered rightly or wrongly as a defining win. He fights Wills and wins- and rest of career plays out exactly as it had - he is firmly entrenched in top 5. Also the biggest star the sport has seen. Ali and Tyson are up there too
I think Dempsey was legitimately bad news as a fighter. It's clear he had a mean streak a mile wide, and he could legitimately hit like a truck. He was light on his feet and had fast hands. I think a weakess of his was his love of a brawl. He was clearly better than Firpo technically but still chose to go toe to toe to prove a point. Sort of Holy with Bowe. That's not so wise imho.
This is laughable. Where is the analogous 190 guy who cleaned out the division in the past 25 years? He couldn't even clean out late stage lightheavy Tommy Gibbons. Tyson would be the best comparison but at least we have Tyson beating modern heavies. And even then, Mike's charade only lasted so long. Yet he got extremely careless and threw all that technique out the window when his victim would not comply. He was a 4 round fighter who blew his load in the first stanzas. That said, he was a helluva 4 round fighter. I would agree with the first sentence. The second sentence is just willful ignorance. He was carefully matched. His championship run and reign were as contrived as possible by the most astute braintrust the sport would see until his facsimile, Tyson, would come along decades later. He was a great product.
Duh? 190lbs people don't even compete in the hwy division, they fight cruiser. Though this doesn't change facts like a 150lbs Bob Fitzsimmons knocking out a 300lbs fighter and 260lbs 6'4" contender in the 1st and 2nd rounds respectively Dempsey is a larger talent than anyone today so I can't compare him to anyone. Though it'd be funny on your part if Usyk conquered the hwy division at 6'3" 200-210lbs About Gibbons, Gibbons is an ATG and one of the toughest boxers ever. He once beat Harry Greb. Dempsey was also stated to look less sharp that day. One mishap against a great like Gibbons shouldn't overwrite the innumerous maulings of larger fighters. Do you mean to compare Dempsey to Butterbean here? Dempsey could fight for longer than 4 rounds. His stamina was sufficient, even running up to 7 miles in roadwork. A fair opinion, though, minus Wills, he fought the best of his era. Fulton, Brien, Willard, Gibbons, Firpo, Sharkey etc. Wills was due to a color bar set by his manager for publicity. Greb was a half blind Middleweight, bad for publicity, although Greb was known to beat heavies.
Exciting fighter of his day, no one can deny his star power... Can't justify ranking him so highly at HW though seeing as how he didn't fight colored fighters.. Even in the 1920s, plenty of white fighters broke the color barrier and fought colored fighters. Not Dempsey though, that will always count against him as far as I'm concerned...
Good insights except for one. Dempsey below Shavers??? Consider how Quarry demolished Earnie in one round! Dempsey would slaughter Shavers!
Prime Dempsey was a complete fighter: skilled, mobile, and ferocious. He had a solid chin, was not a bleeder, and possessed devastating punching power in both hands. Jack was also fast and he had good stamina. Success did hurt his career, but prime Dempsey was like a flame of fire and a force of nature!
The original question was raw punch power. Yes, Dempsey would destroy shavers in a boxing match, but shavers still hit harder with one punch
