1973 George Foreman vs 1919 Jack Dempsey

Well I think today they can get more out of a big guy than was ever possible before. For all we know guys that never would have been suitable for boxing because of being too gangly can develop extra strength without hurting their stamina in a way that previously could have hindered them.

I know a giant heavyweight from the late 1970s who trained like a middleweight. As all fighters did back then. He was usually 220lb but says today he would be 250. Why wasn’t he 250 back then? Because there was no way he could have done 10 rounds at a pace of the guys he was fighting back then. So he was gangly for the weight training to keep weight off and burned out really quickly. He wound up losing to a cruiserweight sized guys. And it was not uncommon. Career over by 30 years old.

But guys that size today can carry more weight. It’s more common to carry excess weight. The pace has slowed to suit the biggest guys and more importantly boxers are getting older and older now too.

To answer your question I don’t think a guy like Tyson Fury doing 12 rounds at his size is not something you would see before. Chuck Wepner types got fatigued and lost composure the later a fight went.

A heavily muscled guy like Joshua getting off the floor as he did against Klitschko, looking gassed, finding extra wind in the 11th round to stop Wlad is not something old. Compare him with earlier musclebound hulks?

It’s not so much stamina but composure.

 

of course he shouldn’t have went that far. I wouldn’t wish bad things upon anybody on here. I’m a family guy myself.

Things got out of hand. I agree with Unforgiven on this, you do seem to have a penchant for seeing guys booted though. If you get rid of all the guys who disagree with you who will you have left to talk to?

 

I to think the comment was in bad taste, and not something we'd like to read anywhere. That said, I think we're being a little oversensitive here, and a little hypocritical. I've seen people call others a pedophile or talk about go play on the train tracks. This notion that a police officers life is more valuable than anybody else is not something I can get behind. if you go tell me to get hit by a train, do I also not have a family to go home to just like an officer might? I have respect for police officers, and don't envy their very difficult job, but I'm not seeing the difference here. The later comments are usually just met with a snarky retort or nothing is even said further on it. You mention catching a bullet to a police officer and people go OMFG NO WAY BAN HIM!!!! How about the pedophile comments, what if they've had a bad experience personally or with a loved one... how would that go over. Even something as innocuous as calling someone ugly or lacking reading comprehension could be more sensitive to some more than others.

The thing is Suzie and something you need to remember... when you play in the pig pen, sometimes you're going to get dirty. if you go in there to play, you should know you might not come out smelling like roses. You have called him names and questioned his intelligence in this very thread and others. So it was a back and forth thing which escalated. Now I don't know you or Dago from Adam, but I know this wasn't just a one sided thing and something you should expect when getting into a mudslinging affair. Yet you go there, and when somebody crosses a line you deem too far, you're the first person to call for a ban. I've seen it numerous times, and I think it comes off as a little hypocritical. You engage, escalate things yourself, then go to the ban petition quicker than anybody. Just a thought to consider Suzie.

That is why they supposedly told Drake not to respond to Pusha, after Pusha ethered him on his diss track. Drake did a song to respond but never released it because he was told...if you start down this path, and sling mud back, you always end up dirty, things can escalate past a point you want. So he kept the track under wraps and didn't release it. Point is, this is what can happen when you mess around in the mud, you sometimes get dirty. Doesn't make the comment right, or a good/fair one, but this is where it can go...

 

"All lives matter"?

 

Well played sir, well played

 

Wonderful. Im glad he enjoyed it!

Dempsey is actually a very interesting study because he looks much better and more versatile in sparring than he ever does in an actual fight. This to me points to what many have hinted at stylistically: He didn't really have a lot of self control. Like when he was sparring and was legendary for not being able to pull punches, knocking out sparring partners he outweighed by 70 pounds. Similarly, if he can do all of this stuff in sparring but then reverts to form when the bell rings for an actual fight my belief is he just couldn't help himself. Was he capable of being smarter and more versatile? Yes. But from Willard, to Miske, to Brennan, to Carpentier, to Gibbons, to Firpo, to Tunney he just trudges forward, head down attacking. There is some variation on that, some side to side movement but if we are being honest he is predominantly one dimensional. He goes in and tries to break you down. It buggers belief to believe that hes suddenly going to turn into something he wasn't when he fights Foreman. So yes, my suspicion is that he would go right after Foreman and try to hit him first and hit him hard. Bloody his nose, and see if he has a bully mentality. The problem with that is I cant think of a single fighter who did that and got away with it and some tough guys tried it. Ali boxed him, Young boxed him, Holyfield boxed him, even Morrison, a seek and destroy banger ran and boxed him. I just don't see Dempsey doing that and even if he did I think Foreman's advantages in size and his athleticism make a huge mountain for Dempsey to climb. I just cant envision any way Dempsey beats him fighting as Dempsey fought. If you want to imagine Dempsey being three inches taller, having 6 more inches in reach, weighing 40 pounds more, and boxing like Ali then yeah, Dempsey might win but then we aren't really talking about Dempsey are we?

In regards to your service, I thank you for it. I, like another poster mentioned, don't put anyone on a pedestal. I don't care if you are a cop or soldier. I judge you by you, not your uniform. I dont believe in the blue line or blue wall. There are good cops and good soldiers, and there are abysmal ones as well (Ive known a few of each). But respect the job that those good cops and soldiers do on my behalf. I support them. And I don't think anybody should let the bad actions of the few of any race, color, creed, denomination, or profession sour them on the ones who are out there being good citizens, decent human beings, and trying to help others. Hoping a guy who disagrees with you (correctly I may add) gets shot without provocation is pretty disgusting.

 

Oh no no matter how angry u get it's only boxing. You dont accuse cops of being killers and you dont hope for a cop to get shot. NO EXCUSE FOR THAT ####

 

I think that is the point you're missing and still missed from my post. Who are you to say when something crossed the line or not? You're only going by your sense of morality and ethics that are drawn from your life experiences. Somebody else is drawing from a totally different perspective. What you don't think is crossing a line to you, may very well cross the line for somebody else. You seem to be focused on what YOU think is crossing a line, but missing what led to this. You engage is snarky/derogatory comments with him, and directed that at him, yet you're perplexed how it got here. When you engage in that kind of back and forth, stuff like this occurs. You have responsibility in getting it to this point, and you don't seem to be getting that. Nobody is saying the comment was cool or appropriate. It wasn't. However, I disagree with engaging in derogatory comments, sling some mud yourself, and then when you perceive a line is crossed, you call for a ban. That is the point I'm trying to make. Some people have told others to go play on the train tracks or I hope you go to sleep and don't wake up. Things get heated, yet I don't see you calling for bans all the times something like that has been said. A cops life isn't more important than Joe Schmoe on here. I know that is your profession, and you are deeply invested in it, but it's simply not more valuable than someone else who isn't a cop.

 

I agree with this comment, and believe me, Suzie and I have gone round and round before, but I don't recall him making that assertion. I don't recall him ever saying anything remotely like "a cops life is more valuable than joe schmoe." Correct me if Im wrong, and if Im wrong I'll admit it and denounce him for it because that's a ridiculous, bull**** stance. But I don't think he said anything like that. To me it looked like the instant he said he was a cop Dago saw red and went after him. He obviously had issues with cops in general which is stupid. You don't like bad cops, I get it. Bad cops suck. But not all cops are bad. Most are there to help you and protect you regardless of what some may think. To go after all cops like a rabid dog and then suggest he get killed because he is one is patently ignorant.

 

I agree with most everything you said. I don't think he "said" their lives are more valuable, it's the actions I'm referring to that seem to imply that. If you are one to, across the board, call for bans when most any personal attacks are made, you're at least being fair across the board. When you don't call for bans when you see someone tell someone to go play on the tracks or some other malicious comment, but call for an immediate ban because somebody talks about cops being killed, then those actions seem to imply he views one as worse and more crossing the line. Which is where I disagree, and how I'm perceiving his actions. Not saying I'm right, but one could certainly infer what I have with the actions being shown. It's like this, and we've both done this, sometimes I make derogatory comments to people because I'm baffled how idiotic somebody could be. When I do that, I'm fully aware that I could get something back as bad or worse, and when I have, I don't call for a ban. I look at it like, well, you went there yourself, so don't go crying about it now. I may not like what was said, and it may have crossed some perceived line, but if that's the case I should not have participated in it to begin with. I have some responsibility for it getting there. I've seen you engage in such comments, but haven't seen you call for a ban. Things get heated, things get more heated than they should, and I'm guilty myself at times. But it's like the old saying... You lay with dogs you may end up with fleas. I don't have an issue with Suzie, and we generally get along. I appreciate that he posts like we all do about a sport we love. ****, to be honest I like him better than Dago, and agree with him more. I'm just calling it as I see it.