Dempsey 1919 vs Tyson 1989: What would happen?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by eslubin, Feb 13, 2010.


  1. Jersey Joe

    Jersey Joe Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,820
    7
    Mar 8, 2005
    Dempsey had quick hands but young Tyson's were quicker.
     
  2. Jersey Joe

    Jersey Joe Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,820
    7
    Mar 8, 2005
    Lol - easier than me knocking up a "Jack Dempsey was NOT an anorexic weakling" post :D
     
  3. Jersey Joe

    Jersey Joe Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,820
    7
    Mar 8, 2005
  4. KCD

    KCD All aboard. Full Member

    8,219
    2
    Sep 30, 2007
    Tyson in the first 2 rounds.
     
  5. jaffay

    jaffay New Orleans Hornets Full Member

    3,980
    17
    Jun 24, 2007
  6. bodhi

    bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,229
    257
    Oct 22, 2009
    :huh Dempsey has better headmovement than Tyson, has the better footwork defensive-wise and better footspeed. Dempsey has the the shorter punches is a better infighter and better at long range. Handspeed is about similar and he hits as hard. Tyson was stopped 5 times. Dempsey once. But Tyson has the better chin?
     
  7. Double Jay

    Double Jay Active Member Full Member

    578
    0
    Sep 24, 2009
    It doesn't matter how many people agree or not. Do you think Jesse Owens could out run Usain Bolt? Do you think football players from the 30's are better then C.Ronaldo, Messi, Ronaldinho, Kaka? Then why do people think boxers from that period could beat modern boxers? It doesn't make any sense.

    And to answer your question Diaconu would ko the 1919 Dempsey in 3-4 rounds.
     
  8. Double Jay

    Double Jay Active Member Full Member

    578
    0
    Sep 24, 2009
  9. bodhi

    bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,229
    257
    Oct 22, 2009
    Boxing is not an athletic sport. It's not comparable to these sports.
     
  10. Double Jay

    Double Jay Active Member Full Member

    578
    0
    Sep 24, 2009
    ARE YOU ****ING KIDDING ME? Boxing is not an athletic sport? So stamina has no impact in boxing. Agility has no impact in boxing. Speed, power are irrelevant. How about the way you hit and move in the ring, has that improved over the years? Everything from medication, food, training has improved over the years. It would be a miracle if a boxer before WW2 beat a modern boxer.
     
  11. turpinr

    turpinr Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,227
    1,247
    Feb 6, 2009
    :-(no it doesn't make any sense, but it doesn't stop some on here thinking jeffries and dempsey would beat tyson.
    tyson would batter dempsey to defeat inside 2 rounds
     
  12. bodhi

    bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,229
    257
    Oct 22, 2009
    Do you consider the Foreman of the 90s athletic?
     
  13. Double Jay

    Double Jay Active Member Full Member

    578
    0
    Sep 24, 2009
    Yes. But I guess some people don't know what "athletic" means.

    Here's a clue

    "involving the use of physical skills or capabilities, as strength, agility, or stamina"
     
  14. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    264
    Jul 22, 2004
    They have no clue
     
  15. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    264
    Jul 22, 2004
    Yes a 29yo Dempseys head movement and defensive footwork was incredible against Tunney, he just slipped the jab and right so effortlessly

    Tyson has 10-15 opponents better than Dempseys best win