Dempsey vs. Brennan II

Brennan is underrated here by many .. he was a tough customer, a pretty decent puncher and fought the fight of his life that night against a Dempsey that may have taken his eye a bit off the ball .. that said , and I've watched the best versions of it I could find many times and while it was competitive I see Dempsey fighting much better than many seem too .. here's what it showed me .. Dempsey had stamina .. he did not look at all tired. Dempsey had late round KO power. Dempsey had moxie. He came back from a shaky start and flattened a highly motivated Brennan on BIll's best night ..

 

It was a Tyson Douglas moment, where Tyson turned it round!

 

I don't see that dominance .. I see early success turned into a grueling fight where if anything Dempsey had the edge but the fact that Brennan was still in there at all the story ..

 

To me, this is the most important film we have to judge Dempsey. He's still in the prime of his youth, less than two years after he fought Willard, unlike when an older Dempsey fought Tunney. He is fighting a true heavyweight of the era, unlike when he faced Gibbons and Carpentier who had trouble building themselves up to the light-heavyweight limit. He is fighting a truly experienced and legitimate contender who, though his very best days were probably behind him, still retained most of his skills, unlike Billy Miske who was ill and way past his prime (also very over-rated as a heavyweight and even as a light heavyweight, IMO, but that's a topic for another thread) and also unlike Luis Firpo who was very unskilled. And unlike Willard, Brennan was in shape.

So how does Dempsey do? I agree with hegrant's very insightful comments that the film shows Dempsey had staying power and late-round kayo power, but so did other heavyweight greats. I've never taken my thoughts this far before, but I think he'd be no more than even money fighting guys like Louis and Marciano and maybe a few others (I'm limiting my comments to the pre-Ali era here when such discussions were most topical). Still a tough cookie and a great fighter, but not quite as great as many fans from earlier eras have thought. Answering this question really makes me wish that it could have been a still relatively young Harry Wills in the ring with Dempsey on that night of December 14, 1920 rather than Bill Brennan.

Just to emphasize my point, I'll repeat the opening sentence of my answer to your question. This is the most important film we have to judge Dempsey.

 

I have 7 rounds of 12 for this fight. It was a rough one for Dempsey for sure. Brennan brought the fight to Dempsey and it was back and fort until the 12th round.

 

It's worth noting that all accounts suggest Dempsey handled Brennan much more easily in their 1918 fight and finished him in half the time.
So, perhaps a case of Dempsey taking Brennan a little bit lightly the second time around and Brennan improving his own performance with the championship at stake.
Possibly Dempsey's "decline" started as soon as he won the title. The hungry Dempsey of 1918-'19 started to fade when he had the fame and could make money doing movies and stage appearances.

 

great fight! a wonderful fight indeed!
from a bygone era where top HWs faced each other in super fights and didnt bow down to entitled princesses from the CW division coming up and being gifted top ratings in order to hold up historic fights

 

Thank you for your classy way of expressing your opinion ... I have a few thoughts to add but I'm off to work and will circle back.

 

No question about that .. inactivity, options and new found celebrity.

 

Very interesting fight. Dempsey looks physically imposing. Note the musculature on his back. But weaknesses show here. Critics at the time pointed out that Dempsey had trouble with an opponent who got off first, such as Meehan, and Brennan's improved performance in this second fight might have been due to his figuring out that the way to fight Dempsey was to be aggressive and throw punches first. His jab seemed to often keep Dempsey off balance.

Of all the filmed Dempsey fights prior to 1926 and 1927, this is the only one in which he is up against an opponent possessing the tools to fight him on fairly equal terms. Old Willard and crude Firpo lacked the speed and skill to deal with Dempsey. Carpentier and Gibbons were small.

How good was Brennan? Well, off boxrec, his final record, including ND's, was 77-18-8 with 49 KO's. There appears to have been a great deal of padding. Of his better opponents, he fought Greb, Miske, and Levinsky four times each. He went 0-4 against Greb. 0-3-1 against Miske. And 1-1-2 against Levinsky, for a total record of 1-8-3. His best wins, other than against Levinsky, were over Bob Devere, Bartley Madden, Bearcat McMahon, Homer Smith, Bob Martin, and an aging Willie Meehan. He went 0-3 against Tom Cowler. I think it fair to judge him an ordinary contender. His strongest suit appears to have been durability.

Dempsey showed in this fight he had stamina and could outlast an opponent in a tough fight. He clearly had top punching power.

My take is Dempsey benefitted from being the man who brought in a new style which was difficult for the old passive big guys to deal with. It strikes me as a lot like when a gridiron team comes up with a new formation, or a new variation on an old one which had long passed from use, such as the wildcat a few years ago. At first the defenses can't deal with it and there are blowout defeats. But opponents also figure out how to handle the innovation and soon the new form of attack is brought to earth. Carrying his hands as low as he does, Dempsey looks vulnerable to a fighter who had a good jab and pumped it at him all night. Tunney would follow that plan several years later.

 

Some very interesting analysis here .. I think pretty much anyone has trouble against a good boxer with a good jab .. a few things to keep in mind .. a few years earlier Dempsey destroyed the same Brennan ... for the rematch Brennan trained for the fight of his life and Dempsey while fit may not have been as focused as he might have been for the fight .. I actually feel this fight is a big positive for Dempsey .. he was fighting a big , well conditioned boxer puncher in prime condition who he did not blow out .. Dempsey regrouped , swithched tactics to a ground it to fight , endured a horrific injury to his ear , remained calm, showed control , did not tire out with the lack of stamina many claim he had and displayed huge late round punching power by flattening Brennan .. he showed stamina, grit, mental strength, stamina and power .. fights like this to me show what the fighter is made of .. similar like how Holmes had his hands full with Weaver and came back late .. how Louis did the same with Conn ..

I look forward to your take on Dempsey Tunney 2 because when that fight is really studied you see two all time great under 200 pound fighters .. Dempsey was clearly not the fighter he was in his prime .. his legs never came back and he's fighting an exceptional Tunney but when you slow it down you see the while Jack of course lost he still had a lot of game, had many interesting moves and often was just a fraction of an inch from winning ... a fascinating film to study.

 

Nice and a wonderful contribution you're making to this Board.