Went with Dempsey, but changed my mind Dempsey has the tools to win this, but took too many needless risks, both in leaving himself open and exhausting himself.
I'm more interested why you ask, are Frazier and Dempsey your idols? Boxing is and always has been an evolving sport, (tactics, nutrition, training etc.) so fighters today or in the recent past would always have an advantage. Frazier would obviously have the advantage in strength/stamina.
Dempsey's shots were wide in that fight because he had his man all over the place,when facing incoming he threw short accurate punches and the Firpo fight is a sterling example of them.
Frazier was never a fast starter and that ain't good against Jack, if Joe survives the first 2 or 3 rounds he could come back to stop Dempsey or take a decision , but I think this fight has KO wrote all over it. 50/50
He was a natural born fighter. He's not laying down for anyone. The only way he gets stopped early is due to recklessness, which is a possibility, or in that gap when he realizes his initial onslaught will not be winning the contest and when he slips into 2nd gear.
I don't think anybody is disputing that Frazier has the best single win of the two. I am not saying that Dempsey is necessarily greater, and I don't personally think that he would have done as well against Ali as Frazier did. What I am saying, is that Dempsey is all wrong for Frazier stylistically. If I was managing Frazier, then I would not let him near Dempsey, unless Dempsey held the title. If I was managing Dempsey, then I would probably take the fight with Frazier.
No. If I am managing Holyfield, than we will take the Firpo fight, if it gets us closer to a title shot. Dempsey was one of the best finishers in history, and he was particularly dangerous in the early rounds. Brilliant as he was, Frazier was slow of the starting blocks, and not very elusive. You don't beat Dempsey that way. You either go defensive, or you get him first. Anything else will get you killed!