People are sometimes unrealistic in discounting some progress & increases in size & strength. But Seamus your bias is also showing. When you name call "runt like Dempsey". When you give extreme unsupported opinions that most MWs could beat him. When you refer to increased skill sets with little or no specificity. Dempsey literally wrote a book about boxing. Tua had some remarkable physical capacities-chin, power/power late, endurance... But also many flaws. And when you say Tua was faster, a much bigger fighter not known for his speed... The evidence of your knee-jerk conclusions is as obvious as those who believe Dempsey could take on anybody at 187 lbs. & win!
Exactly. Dempsey would respect the bulk and power of Tua and use his fast feet to circle and zig-zag around the plodding Tua, tearing in with fast hooks and combos and getting out again. Even against the huge open target Willard, Dempsey started off running around him, looking for a line of attack, he boxed. He wasn't just some stupid brawler. Tua has a puncher's chance. I'd also pick a 188 pound version of Holyfield to do something similar. Even Ezzard Charles should beat the plodding Tua.
Tua never lost to any fighter under 6'2" or less than 75" reach. This is a case where brawn beats brains. Tua by KO and early. Dempsey doesn't have the power or length to keep Tua at range to coast to a UD like Lewis did.
Also the poll names are degrading. A caveman? Really? Tua is an Olympic medalist and in his prime boxed superbly with great timing. Caveman should be reserved for the bum fights on YouTube.
And Tua never lost to anyone under 6'2" with less than 75" reach. And he was never phased by anyone less than 190lb in his whole professional career let alone his prime.
Ok forget the weight. Modern nutrition could bring Dempsey upto 205-215lb. No problem. Have any words for Tua not losing to anyone under 6'2" or with less than 75" reach?
I mean, he lost to Chris Byrd who was 6'2 with 75" reach and Byrd was much weaker puncher than Dempsey. Ike was 6'2 with 77" reach, so again close measurements to Dempsey.
Just a joke sheesh man, It is referring to the fact boxers are meant to be more cute these days and that Tua's violence is viewed as quite unscientific I love David man.
Dempsey was 72" reach. 3" shorter than Byrd and 5" shorter than Ike. And the Tua that lost to Byrd was past prime. Also the Ike fight, many have Tua winning that fight. I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I think Dempsey has given a lot to boxing. A true pioneer and innovator of the sport. Also I'm getting way too emotional as I'm a huge Tua fan heh. I'll chill out and try to understand where the otherside is coming from.
So Dempsey would stick & move on his back foot to outbox Tua? Isn´t that a 180 degree turn in therm of style ? Talking about 70sFan "pushing logic & common sense to its limit" some minutes ago, just to find another "BINGO" again
He still has advantage over Tua in reach. My point was that you don't need to be large to beat Tua. He wasn't past prime, maybe he wasn't at his absolute best but he was still in his prime. It shows that you can fight on even terms with Tua without being large, that's it. I wouldn't be surprised if Tua knocked Dempsey out. He was bigger after all and he had very powerful punch. I'm just saying that you don't need to be much bigger to fight on even terms with Tua. You don't even need the power to outpoint him and Dempsey definitely had the power necessary to earn Tua's respect.