As in top 10? 20 ?hardest hitters at heavy Does he hit harder than tyson? Foreman ?shavers?? Jack Dempsey was just brutal the way he beat on Willard who was way bigger than he was. And he even caught tunney right on the chin and could of won .
Definitely in the top 10-15, I wouldn't say he hit harder than Tyson, Foreman or Shavers, but I'd put him a notch below them
As Stephen A Smith once said, This content is protected Interchangeable with "Are you on drugs?" No way you're gonna tell me a champion with 81% of his wins coming by ko and 25 in the first round, broke Willard's bones and even in his old age floored Tunney isn't a top 100 hardest puncher. That's just blatant disrespect
Dempsey was able to hurt fighters that had significant weight on him. Some of these boxers weighed 220lbs, some 240lbs. That is uncommon. His power is not in question. Some of those opponents may not have been the most skilled or polished boxers but Dempsey hurt everyone he hit. On a scale of 1 to 10 Dempsey's power would be at least a 12. I dont rank Jack in the top 10 heavyweights. He is overrated overall but his punching power power is as real as it gets.
A 180lb weakling isn't hitting as hard as fully fledged 250lb SHWs on steroids who can shift their weight effectively. He doesn't hit anywhere near as hard as Tua, Ibeabuchi, Morrison, Briggs, McCall, Cleveland Williams, Cooney, Dokes, Witherspoon, James Smith, Lyle, Shavers, Rahman, Bruno, Haye, Wilder, Joshua off the top of my head before we get into any ATGs. If you think otherwise you're delusional.
In terms of raw hitting power yeah you could argue that some of those guys hit harder than Dempsey but he's a far better finisher and has better killer instinct than many of them. A lot of those guys let their opponents off the hook. Also, being 50 lbs heavier than your opponent while abusing steroids isn't as impressive as being 50 lbs lighter and having to rely on superior punching mechanics/timing/leverage etc. Dempsey was impressive because of how much smaller he was than some of the heavy opponents he faced. You expect a huge guy like Lennox or Wladmir to get the KO.
Stopped reading when you called one of the most devastating fighters of all time a weakling. Of course, his strength doesn't compare to that of an arm chair warrior such as yourself. Now stop ducking my question. Please list those 100 fighters who hit harder than Dempsey. I'm waiting.
ESPN's Hardest hitters of all time: 1. Tyson 2. Liston 3. Louis 4. Foreman 5. Marciano 6. Shavers 7. Dempsey 8. Frazier, 9. Lewis 10. Baer Ring Magazine had him as the 7th best puncher P4P of all time second only to Joe Louis in heavyweight. This was all based on a poll consisting of numerous historians, experts, and people close to the game. Inexplicably, our armchair warrior Mr. Burley, was not asked to participate.
The other thing to remember is Dempsey wore 5oz gloves and soaked his bandages in water making them heavier/tighter, where as modern HWs use 10oz gloves. You do a shedload more damage with a 5oz glove. It's similar to loading the glove Look at Mercer in MMA - he scores 1 punch KOs with 4oz gloves - in boxing with 10oz gloves I don't remember any 1 punch kos Do a little experiment - punch yourself with a pillow, then punch yourself with your fist. Note the difference. Comparative to modern HWs Dempsey is weak, he'd be a lightheavyweight today. I've listed 17, you can obviously add Foreman, Tyson, Riddick Bowe, Lennox, Wlad, Liston, Louis, Marciano, Frazier, Baer. Add in Corrie Sanders, Mercer, Sam Peter, Dillian Whyte and Andy Ruiz. Moorer was more explosive but tended not to load up and swing from the fences. Fury when he sits on his punches has more power. Holyfield probably has more 1 punch power, given he took a SHW Douglas out with a single punch wearing 10oz gloves.
Not even going to comment on your laughable MMA and boxing Comparisons. Because we know they're so similar. Many of these fighters you listed were quite simply laughable and have no spectacular KOs of note. And where is this proof that Louis, Marciano, and Frazier "obviously" hit harder. The consensus is that Dempsey is the hardest puncher of all 4. Louis and Dempsey's only common opponent, Jack Sharkey who fought a young Louis, and on old Dempsey who'd seen better days said Louis couldn't even compare. Even so you're missing about 64 names. Keen to hear the rest of them. Lastly, your comment that Dempsey was weak compared to Modern Heavyweights, here is a thread comparing Dempsey's power to the modern division https://www.boxingforum24.com/threa...ility-compared-to-todays-heavyweights.588083/ An overwhelming majority considered his power above average irrespective of your opinion that he was "weak."
Ok well even in terms of power your list has some questionable names. Witherspoon had decent power but I think you'd have a hard time convincing anyone he hit harder than Dempsey. James Smith could crack but there are an awful lot of people who went the distance with him and absorbed his power. Joe Frazier had a nasty hook and brutal body shots but he was more of a wear you down guy. The worst on the list is Michael Dokes who was more of a sharp/fast puncher and Idk what alternate universe you're from if you think Dokes hit harder than Dempsey. That is a very strange claim to make. Dempsey is also far more explosive with a rare combination of speed and power none of the above fighters had. He also had more early brutal knockouts/knockdowns.
