Jack dempsey was really a savage

I'd like a picture of Dempsey's face after 10-12 rounds of eating Wlad's jab. Would be brilliant.

 

Dempsey was KO'd only once, and that was earlier in his career, before he was champ. Late in his career he lost twice to Gene Tunney by decision.

As to how good Dempsey was relative to modern guys, I just don't know. I say this for three reasons:

1. the rules under which Dempsey fought differed somewhat from modern rules (particularly concerning knockdowns and neutral corners)

2. because it's hard to judge the quality of his opponents

3. because the quality of his fight films is sketchy, thus making it hard for the viewer to accuratley gauge speed, reflexes, agility of body movement, etc. (all pre-late 1920s fighters are difficult to judge for this reason).

 

lmao. You've been trolling since you came to this site bro.

Dempsey was great for his time, but everytime he would come in, he'd get nulified. Punchers chance **** doesn't work with the Klit's, you actually have to "think" in there.

 

Regardless of that, why people pop boners over that Dempsey-Willard fight is beyond me, thinking shrimp Dempsey would beat Lennox Lewis or something just because he pounded a big washed up middleaged man devoid of skills, with zero defense or footwork, the Willard of that fight is pure garbage and makes David Haye look like Pacquiao prime when it comes to workrate/volume punching. Sure, a little guy beating a behemoth is always a noteworthy feat but these nuthuggers love to blow things out of proportion.

Fixed for you. And yep, there are many ¨boxing historians¨ like that.

 

Dempsey was the Tyson of his time. A scary mother****er. And when he was a boy only like 16 years old,he would fight grown men in bars for pocket change.

 

I agree that Dempsey couldn't have threatened the Klits, Larry Holmes Lennox Lewis, etc. He was only 187 lbs at his peak.

On the other hand, maybe Dempsey was a great cruiserweight. I'm talking about comparing him to history's other sub-200 lbs heavyweight champs. But then again, I don't know for sure, for the reasons I outline in an earlier post.

 

Not doubt about it, at cruiserweight, I'd give him a chance to be competitive and even be a champion in any era 80's-Present. But against heavyweights of the modern era, I just think he's way undersized (not to mention the skill that some of the big men bring to the table).

 

Dempsey KO'd Willard and he was as tall and heavy as either Klitschko so I hope none of these assholes say Jack would be too small.

 

one of the most underated fighters ever....his subtle skills are always overlooked. Dude was an offensive dynamo but was very good at slipping and parrying shots while attacking. if he was blessed with modern day training and science I have no doubt he'd be heavyweight champ today. He has intangibles that you just don't find in any of todays heavy's. he has the ferocity, heart and will to win at all costs that has never been duplicated. a true fighter and legend. Dempsey was the ****ing man

 

Close enough?

[url]His book[/url]

 

When the Dean of boxing, Arcel, calls someone the Greatest u should shut your stupid mouth and take notice

Good comment there HWCP.
Arcel was absolutely right,and he was ROBERTO Durans trainer with 50 years of ring related experience.I get tired of guys who know nothing refuting opninions and polls by people who do boxing as their BUSINESS,and have doing boxing for decades.

The K's wouldn't stand a chance.

 

Dempsey was as tough as they come. He started fighting in bareknuckle smokers in migrant camps when he was just a kid, and it made him someone not to be messed with. I believe there's a story about 2 young guys trying to mug him when he was in his 80's, and he dropped both of them.

 

stop making **** threads u little ******

 

Dempsey had no jab and was easy to outbox. He also avoided all the best men of his era until he faced Tunney who won every round against him over 2 fights bar a KD