Where does oscar de la hoya rank?

How do you justify having Dempsey ahead of Frazier, Holyfield and Tyson.

 

Dominance.

 

Excuse me, he had less title fights, and was totally outclassed by former lightheavy the great Gene Tunney.

 

Actually let me correct that, I don't think Dempsey was really any more dominant than the likes of Tyson. He might of had a slightly longer peak, but he wasn't more dominant.

Again, he's at the tail end of my hundred and if you wanted to exchange him for another similar-level heavyweight like a Tyson, I wouldn't consider it a sin.

 

True, I'd take that over an outclassing by Buster Douglas though :good

 

That's a good question. It's not non-pareil, but it arguably should be.

 

would'nt say Dempsey is on a similar level as Tyson, for one he did'nt know how to cut the ring off, his technic was'nt as good and his defense was lesser than Tyson.

Dempsey was great but he is one of the most unjustifiably overrated fighters.

 

I'm waiting for someone to ask a question like where Jimmy Bivins, Freddie Miller, Pascual Perez, Tiger Flowers, Stanley Ketchel, Battling Nelson, Felix Trinidad, Carlos Zarate, Cocoa Kid, Midget Wolgast or Owen Moran are at.

Disappointing that people are (predictably) crying over heavyweights.

 

Why not just answer the question your asked first, I don't care if its a predictable question, I asked it because I'm interested in knowing why.

 

More or less the answer is that a lot of guys are roughly on the same level. Guys like Holyfield, Frazier,Tyson etc. don't have much separating them from the likes of Lewis and Dempsey.

Just so you know, here's how I grade them all on resume (out of 50), dominance (out of 40), longevity (out of 10 ) and character (out of 10 ):


Lewis: 33.25 + 30 + 7 +7.75 = 78

Dempsey: 32.75 + 29 + 7.5 + 8.25 = 77.5

Frazier: 33.75 + 28 + 6.5 + 8.5 = 76.75

Tyson: 33 + 29 + 7 + 7.5 = 76.5

Holyfield: 34.25 + 25.25 + 7.5 + 8.75 = 76.25

Hardly a world of difference there....

 

Dempsey's resume is clearly lesser than Frazier, Holyfield and Tyson.

 

What make's Tyson's for example THAT much better?

 

More title fight in shorter space of time, won title quicker, better competion and better skill set and fighter, would be the main reason's.

 

I was speaking about the "better competition", not the other stuff. Break it down.

 

Spinks was better than Carpentier, and more proven at Heavy and the peformance was more emphatic

Berbick, Smith, Thomas, Tucker, Biggs, Holmes, Tubbs, Bruno, Williams,

is a more better title reign than

Willard, Miske, Brennen, Darcy, Gibbons, Firpo.