dempsey vs jones jr

Again I would have to disagree strongly.

You somtimes acuse old time fight fans of being delusional and looking at their subjects with rose tinted glasses, but when you start picking Roy Jones over Jack Dempsey you are taking a giant step into mid air.

 

What out of the extensive footage of both fighters available makes you think either has a stylistic advantage despite being way past their prime and in Miske's case at death's door?

If these 2 P4Per of the 20s were around in the 90s, I doubt many would pick them over Jones

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbZ8Mb0MdT8&p=0C2616D89C814B3B&playnext=1&index=5[/ame]

 

...erm, yeah?

 

Because Jones isn't in the league of these men atsch

5'9 Meehan

This content is protected

5'10 Flynn

This content is protected

This content is protected

6'0 fleshy looking Tunney

This content is protected

 

We seen what happens when Jones gets cracked in the jaw. And yeah, Dempsey would crack him in the jaw.
Here's the two time Jones conquerer, Antonio Tarver

This content is protected

And one of the greatest fighters to ever lace up gloves, they guy who thrashed Jones so bad, Jones had no interest at all in a rematch. Glen Johnson.

This content is protected

Dempsey would pancake Jones.

This content is protected

 

I don't see how you can judge him "fleshy" based on that picture.

This content is protected

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXRw0XfAsmM[/ame]

5:40

Seemed to be in perfect physical condition at 190 lbs.

Fair point about Meehan though, who was a fat slob and certainly takes some of the luster off of Dempsey's reputation as an early round destroyer, although in fairness Dempsey deserved to win some of those bouts and it's difficult to say how much Dempsey improved from those days without film.

 

That's playful sparring though. Tommy looks good against Jack Bloomfield on film, Mike looks good against O'Dowd. I don't give Gibbons much credit for going the distance with Dempsey as he was strictly trying to survive and hardly threw any punches. It was a nothing fight.

 

Even if Miske was at deaths door for the third Dempsey fight he wasnt for the previous two.

Why do I think that Tommy Gibbons would beat Jones?

He was one of the hardest punching 175 pounders of all time and a good technician to boot. He was also extremely savy at drawing his oponents into fighting his fight.

Jones would give him some problems but Gibbons would draw him into a trap and close the deal.

 

Tommy Gibbons was no Mike Gibbons. Not skillful enough to give Jones any problems.

 

A. He was still a prety good technician.
B. You dont actualy have to be that good to give Jones problems.

 

In the first Dempsey-Miske fight several papers reported Miske winning and he was on the decline after that

And the question was 'a 32yo Gibbons' who was faded losing to Miske and being dominated by Greb, 2 fighters he'd previously beat. I do have to give you points for analysis, although I'd point out no one managed to counter Jones with success in his prime despite facing 1 of the best counter punchers ever

 

If we aren't talking about old Jones, you have to be, you'll also need some serious speed/reflexes together with skills.