Where do you rate Jack Dempsey and why?

Right on both counts.

You can go too far in picking holes in a win.

 

How on earth can anyone say?

Anyhow, I'm a big opponent of giving people credit for what they "would have done". I like "did" much better.

 

I rank him as an atg hw. Something very few are out of the ten if not hundred thousands of fighters over the last 130 years.

 

Yeah, we often do around here.

Personally, I'm undecided about Dempsey. I'm satisfied he was very impressive in his prime, but would have liked him to prove more. I also see him as a leap forward from the previous era, even though I see Louis as a further leap.

 

I don´t think Willard was that weak of a champ. IMO he is very underrated. Not a great but under the rules of his time a hand full even for most atgs.

 

You are quite right to take that aproach.

While we cannot give Jack Dempsey a win over Harry Wills outside the ring, we can say that Jim Jeffries simply didnt need to defend his title against Joe Butler and Bob Armmstrong because the contenders he was fighting were better.

 

Martin and, especially, Johnson, though...

 

I'm not willing to really give him a number. For what it's worth I think he's a great champion, not the best but better than a lot think. I rank him highly for his 1RKO power and speed of hand and foot, innovations in swarming attack, solid but not great reign, great ability to recover and get off the mat and come back harder, etc. The high high estimation of Dempsey by peers like Tunney, Langford, Arcel, and many many others plays a part in how highly i rank him H2H at his peak. People are right about him missing the couple high quality notches on his belt he would need for truly great HW placement. It really is too bad that Kearns ****ed up his title reign with inactivity.

But I don't understand people putting a guy like Rocky over Dempsey, a weaker hitter who took out absolute faded blown up versions of great fighters, never fought any big heavies, or any great sluggers... At least Dempsey is proven against the big boys to an extent. I also think Wills has gotten a big bump in reputation as a result of the "duck", is he worthy of this reputation? Was he truly that great? Why does nobody talk about him in the same breath as any ATG heavyweight?

 

Martin in my opinion was as good as some of the the guys Jeffries was defending his title against like Ruhlin, but he only came allong relativley late in Jeffries title reign. He was not such an outstanding challenger that I would haul Jeffries name over hot coals for the fight not happening.

Johnson in my opinion did have a verry strong argument for a shot at Jeffries title, but even if we assume that he would have won, it would have been around the time of Jeffries last fight anyway.

I think that Jeffries would always have been a dominant champion for a few years.

 

I think Dempsey had a short prime like Joe Frazier, but while he was in it, he was a very quick moving athlete with skills, range and KO power in both mitts. Dempsey in his prime was too quick and aggressive for the slick types to out box, and turned much bigger-slower opponents into punching bags.

However, Dempsey had some uneven performances, and did not have the best title reign in the world. I have him around #8-12, but it seems I have been moving him outside of the top ten recently.