Jack Dempsey's Head Movement

^^^^^^^you are a ****ing ******,,, foreman would eat dempsey and firpo in the same round,, those old skool bums couldnt throw two punches properly, and yeh for the question,, dempseys head movement doesent rate at number 1 or 2 those spots are taken by tyson and frazier.

 

The movie footage is really needed to see Dempsey's head movement to best effect. When he set Tunney up for the Long Count KD, he canted his head to the inside of Tunney's jab, and as it went sailing harmlessly past, slammed his right home, from the outside of Tunney's extended arm, to Gene's temple, wobbling him from mid ring to the ropes. In that momentary instant, his weaving reverted to that of his peak years.

One of the first exchanges in Dempsey/Willard shows Jack ducking Willard's jab, then striking up with a counter hook. I suspect Dempsey picked up a lot of his opponents punching cues from their foot positioning.

Jack didn't parry jabs much. Like Jack Johnson, his preferred tactic was to intercept a jab by punching his right into his adversary's left bicep as he started one. The reason this didn't work against Tunney was because of Dempsey's ring rust, and especially diminished reflexes and timing. But at his peak, his speed and quick reflexes would have been more than sufficient to thwart a jab from the outset. (Years later, the day after he refereed Max Baer's loss to Loughran, he famously showed Max how to stop a jab in this way. But Baer didn't quite have the reaction time of a peak Dempsey.)

Frequently, Jack's approach was based on slipping another boxer's shots, and responding with counters as he moved in. Evasive head movement is essential for this. The best example of calculated head movement from Frazier is probably from the second match with Foreman. Generally though, Joe's head movement was indeed more rhythymic and predictable.

 

Dempseys head movement ranks with other good guys like Frazier, Tyson etc On his day it was superior.

 

Not really... I haven't picked up alot on any patterns

Tyson's head movement had some finesse- but he was more predictable at times. Dempsey's movement seemed a little more practical, efficient, and ultimately random.

Yes I believe for head movement they are the HW divisions #1 (Dempsey) and 2 (Tyson).

 

Tyson loses a lot of points from me because he did not regularly bob and weave and certainly went flat footed after 5 rounds. Consistency is an intrinsic element of bobbing and weaving IMO.

It really depends on the situation. However, against guys like Ali & Holmes - Frazier's defense is better than Tyson's. Reflexes alone will not be able to hande that kind of handspeed and that is why Douglas succeeded. Joe Frazier's defense would have proved much superior to Tyson's in Tokyo. When the opponent has such good timing, accuracy, punch output, and speed - you should use Frazier's method. If the figher is someone like George Foreman who throws lesser punches and these are slower haymakers - Tyson's type of defense works better and is more efficient too. Excellent reflexes can handle someone like Foreman or Ruddock as we saw. Dempsey and Tyson were similar (by inspiration) but Dempsey was more consistent. So I rate Dempsey's bob better strictly for that reason. I wouldn't say that Tyson revived his bob and weave for even round 1 against Lewis because an integral part of that "head movement" was his speed and reflexes that were no longer in 2002.

Since whose defense is better i.e Frazier or Dempsey (Dempsey and Tyson are the same type as Tyson was inspired by Dempsey) depends on the opponent, I won't pick a #1 or #2. Additionally, I think you have to take into account chin with the defense. The bob and weave was vulnerable uppercuts - Tyson could get away with being a sucker for uppercuts because he had the best chin of the three IMO.

 

You dont know a thing about Dempsey do you.

 

Frazier's CONSTANT bob and weave was actually quite predicatable which is why early on in fights he would seldom win the first round mostly to adjust his timing on his bob and weave. Its effectiveness didnt lie in that method rather it relied on the consistency of that method to truly work. Consistent pressure followed by perputual motion forced fighters to eventually fight Joe's fight and it made them uncomfortable doing so (to Joe's credit). Joe was never known for his right hand, he was notoriously known for his left hook yet despite this knowledge oppenents were seldom able to stop him. As rounds progressed Joe doesnt necessarily get better or do anything spectacular rather he continues to apply the SAME constant pressure that he's been applying from the start that DOES NOT allow his opponents to rest or change the pace of the fight without getting nailed often which is what eventually breaks down his opponents and see's Joe to victory.


Tyson on the other hand uses his SPORADIC bob and weave which I find more effective because; its economical (he only bobs and weaves when he needs to thereby expending less energy). It always leaves him in a position to punch and to counter (hence the impeccable accuracy which I should add is better than Fraziers) and eliminates the need for a feel out process which is why Mike always started Fast. And Dempsey too for that matter. Most importantly it allows him to create openings rather than to take advantage of them.

The problem with Joe's constant bob and weave is that it takes time depending on the opponent to become very effective. Hobgoblin said that Frazier would have beaten Douglas that night. No there no doubt about that but Tyson didn't lose becuase of a disadvantage in style. He lost because of conditioning and a poor workrate. Tyson was clearly lazier than Joe so at times he'd just wing it. But Tyson's bob and weave matched with his superb reflexes were just far more effective and far more efficient than Frazier's. If it were him facing Ali he'd find openings faster and would have done a better job.

Dempsey has random movement which I appreciated more than Tyson's or Frazier's because he's more difficult to time.

 

If I was Foggy Frog, I'd be really pissed with dildo for trying to upstage me!

 

You've lost McGrain's contempt for your comments to an upstart! (Now, you need to state something REALLY provocative to get that attention back. And you're right, Dempsey does mash Foreman. It would be Toledo all over again. Dempsey had too much speed and mobility for Lurch.)

 

In my opinion yes.

I also think that Dempseys infighting ability is unparaleled at heavyweight and that his footwork is the best of any ofensive heavyweight.

Combine these variables and it is easy to see why Arcel and others rated him so highly.

 

Best Headmovement?

Dempsey, Tyson, Toney

Frazier is a level below those choices