Jack Dempsey Vs. A black 120 pound Crack head who never boxed

again, agree for the most part but i think there were big differences in the styles of some fighters.

benny leonard, for all his brilliant footwork, fought (asthetically at least) quite differently from modern lightweights. not worse mind you, but combination punching was new, hands (as you noted) were not in the same position, and you could still see many similarities to the fencing that helped shaped boxing

hand position and shoulder rolling i totally agree with and is certainly nothing new. watching jersey joe walcott (decades later from dempsey as well) he utilized it quite a bit. every style is different but i think the 20s were an era of transition, with the introduction of combination punching and the complete elimination of bare knuckle fighting

 

Dempsey skills are so subtle no one can see them.

 

I don't believe combination punching was new in the 1920s. Reports from fights going way back to the 19th century describe effective and educated combinations.

Benny Leonard's style was his style, I can think of fighters from the 1980s whose styles were similar to principles of fencing.
I really don't see much difference, but of course the crackling old grainy film make movements look sometimes comical. Imagine Lennox Lewis or Wladimir Klitschko with their left hands extended and pawing away, pulling and wrestling their opponents, captured on flickery shadowy old film, some people here would deride them as primitive uncoordinated bums.

I actually think Dempsey used the shoulder guard technique more than Walcott did. Tunney himself said Dempsey expertly protected his chin that way.
Not that I'd declare it a "superior technique" to alternatives, I just know Dempsey used it.

Dempsey had a ton of skills, and actually wrote a book on the science of boxing and punching. I find it strange that so many people would even dispute his technical ability. He may not be the most skillful of the great heavyweights, but he appears to be far from the least skillful.

 

can i just say this has turned into a great and informative thread. despite it's origins and how the forum has been lately, this is something of a treat considering we're talking about BOXING here

 

Where does 'lubin even get these videos from?

 

Maybe not that subtle.



Anyone who knows a bit about boxing can see his masterful slips and parries, his maneuevering on the inside, his combined defense-offense moves, his lateral body positioning, and feinting.

Obviously all fighters do feints and little tricks that we never see, (unless you're in there fighting them) but we can't comment on that stuff.

 

Dempsey used slips and blocks in a very effective way, most of his fighting was designed to be on the inside which is why its more difficult to see, but looks at his hooks against Willard, tight and powerful as they should be, thats not bad technique, as for hand positioning, I always wondered by fighters kept their hands low in the past and didnt realize they did it to protect their bodies and used slipping to protect against their heads, useful information.

Dempsey's style was just a product of its own time, hed probably keep his hands high if he was fighting today, Look at Duran in the 3rd Dejesus fight, he held his hands high as you see most guys do in the gym, Duran was the mini Dempsey, both fought in the same way and Duran held his hands high because its like that today, hes a product of his own time. the fact that Jack wasnt getting hit with low hands is a testament to his skill, tunney also confirmed how hard it way to his Dempsey.

Since Tyson, its like thats how everyone fights, and if you keep your hands low, youre a wild slugger, anyone who knows boxing knows this isnt true.

 

I'm not sure I can think of any footage from 1905 or before where I can see much of anything.
The footage that old is so obscured, so unclear, you cant really see if punches land, and often it's unclear whether a punch was even thrown, or whether the fighters are in a clinch or just out of one.

 

Firstly, have you seen the full fight ?

Secondly, the film quality is awful. There are bits even in this clip where I can see that more than one punch is being thrown, maybe three, maybe four, possibly five in a row, but not sure if from the same fighter.
You simply cannot see what's going on.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOFdL5VkcQM&feature=related[/ame]

Thirdly, many great fights I see in any era dont contain a "double' jab right uppercut double left hook" combo .... that's a five-punch combo.
I watched the first two rounds of Holyfield-Bowe 1 and neither of them sustained more than a three-punch combo (thrown or landed), and Bowe didn't even managed that. Holyfield was a great combination puncher, but never managed or even attempted anything more than three punches in quick-fire combination in a lively 6 minutes.

It was different. More wrestling and clinch-fighting in general.

Saying Johnson doubles and triples the jab but doesn't generally hook of it is more than you can say for several other great fighters of more modern eras.
To use Larry Holmes as an example, a great jabber, wasn't much of a rapid-fire combo jabber. Holyfield probably threw a better double and triple jab. Rather than 1-2-3 in rapid combination, Holmes often preferred 1----2-----3----4 etc.
And his combos too were rarely more than 3 punches, and rarely a hook off the jab. He did have a great way of throwing right uppercuts followed by overhand rights though, or visa versa. Let's not exaggerate what "modern" fighters do in relation to combination punching, or downplay what they do either.
Some of Holmes' best finishes consisted of holding the other guy in place with his left arm and shoulder and bludgeoning him with rights over and over to head and body. Not pretty combo-punching, just old school bludgeoning, picking the shots one at a time, accurate and sustained beating.

 

It's not that difficult to see what's going on in Corbett-Fitzsimmons:

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