Why the polarised views on Dempsey?

Thank U,Rocky. sometimes i feel that i'm so damn isolated in my opinion of the merits of Jack Dempsey . So thanks for your words.
Rocky,it is so frustrating for me to repeat my admission that the opposition that Dempsey fought and whipped as champion ,was not on the level in general that Ali faced as champion ! But some posters just forget my opinion
to prove a point. I also happen to believe that Ali in general ,fought better men than my idol Joe Louis fought, with some exceptions, of course. Having said this, I would take the Joe Louis of his coil-spring prime ,ala, Baer, and
Schmeling #2, over any version of Ali. Even though in Ali's era there happened to be a better crop of heavyweights than Louis faced. i cannot envision the Ali who was dropped and hurt by a Henry Cooper in 1966,ever
surviving an assault from the Brown Bomber for 15 rounds.
So my point is, I believe the opinions of men such as Langford, Tunney,
Walker, Ray Arcel, Max Schmeling[read what he said of Jack Dempsey,in his bio],and a host of hard nosed boxing experts, who insisted that the prime Jack Dempsey was in their eyes, an alltime great heavyweight,along with my
idol of my youth Joe Louis. Their opinion means more to me than the doubting Thomas's of some sincere posters of today. So thanks again for
your welcome support Rocky.:good:good:good

 

P,I beg to differ. I used to sing ! I sang for the sherrif, the police department,
and the FBI. I was a stool pigeon.atsch

 

:good

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xh7GTyFJQAw[/ame]

Fixed.

 

..you ca always bet that Dempsey threads would go on for 20+ pages.

 

My view is that, on these all-time lists, there isn't necessarily much of a gap between a 1st place and a 10th place, because it's really just a made up list based larely on preference .
It's likely that both men (#1 and #10) were world champions - or should have been - in their own times, and that they kicked the **** out of some damn good fighters at some point and had some amazing performances.
When people start assuming they're a different class or level of fighter, things get confused.

I don't think it's polarised if I have Dempsey, for example, as my number 4 heavyweight, and someone else has him number 15.

It becomes polarised when people start saying in a serious tone, as if it actually matters and as if there are absolute truths and correct thinking on these matters, things like :
"There's NO WAY you can have Dempsey so high ?"
"Dempsey doesn't belong even in the same sentence as X, Y and Z"
"Both were all-time greats, but X is on a whole another level to Y !"

That's when it becomes silly, and the thing becomes polarised, and they become raised to almost ideological struggles

And I'm probably as guilty of it as the next man.

For me, Jack Dempsey was one of the greatest fighters, pound-for-pound, of all-time.
And many many others are too.

 

First off you make solid, broad based points ... there is however , if we are going to be honest, a disproportionate amount of latitude given , especially on this Board by many, to Dempsey and Marciano, two fighters with huge question marks on their careers. There are no other heavyweights with such glaring question marks that are blindly pushed to the top of the all time rankings by their "hardcore" fans. In addition, the fun part is seeing how the fanatics attempt to go on the attack at anyone who dares to bring their romances down to earth ...notice how any Dempsey or Marciano thread is double digit pages long ? It's almost tribal .. in addition a huge part of the reason is so obvious ... Dempsey and Marciano were white .. this is not racism, this is a fact. In the 20th Century the heavyweight division was dominated by black champions and Dempsey (who did not fight his number one contender his entire reign who happened to be black) and Rocky are the two islands of respect and identification for a ton of white fans ... this is sociology , plain and simple .. of course not every Dempsey and/or Marciano fan, of course both fighters were true champions, ect ... however, this does explain in many cases the blind devotion .. really not much different than home town fans going nuts for their home town teams they grew up loving ... not so uch hating the other guy but loving what you identify with ... it's human nature ..

 

You're underrating Lennox allot, he's a class above Foreman, beat everyone he faced taking on the highest ranked contenders/champs he could face over a 10year period.

 

Our criteria are different.
I take "pound-for-pound" quite literally, so wins over men much bigger count for a lot. Hence why I think several heavyweights are underrated in the pound-for-pound stakes.

It depends entirely on where you rate them.
Someone could certainly present an argument for Foreman's greatness being on a par with Ali's or Louis's - he did something neither of them did, or could have done. It's an amazing thing he did. He did the impossible.

As for Lennox Lewis - he won 14 world title fights, so people keep telling me. And he beat every man he faced, and ducked no one.
You know I don't rate him high (I don't rate Foreman high either), but CLEARLY there are arguments being put forward that have him stack up well against ANYONE.
To me, the people who rate him at #1 or #2 are talking the exact same language as those who have him #3 or #4.

All of which suggests I should shut the **** up about people "overrating" Lewis. :deal
(Still, McCall and Rahman sucked big time, and thus Lewis fails within my own personal criteria)

I suppose I just have a completely different outlook.
I think there are ALL-TIME GREAT fighters, and fighters who are not great, and loads of cases who may be borderline (or, in other words, I don't feel comfortable or knowledgeable on about making the judgment call).

But to insist on strict stratification within the "ATG class" of fighter is not something I'm down with.

Yes, he is. Undoubtedly.

And, to me at least, you've really killed your own argument with that particular analogy.

 

Your view is your own and you are entitled to it ... no argument there .

 

who's better, McCall and Rahman, or Willie Meehan and Fireman Jim Flynn?