1919 Jack Dempsey vs 1960 Sonny Liston

Nice straw man argument. Crow must taste delicious to you.

 

Point to one thing Ive said thats been wrong.

 

I didn't say you were wrong about anything. In fact, you have good material to back up what you say.

 

It's a fact that the rule was not enforced, you were only able to name 4 fights prior to Dempsey-Firpo where it was.

Not really a strawman. It stands to reason that you would use the same standard of judgment across the board for the same transgression, you just have a hate-boner for Dempsey.

I bid you adieu.

 

Same judgement across what board? You stated the rule didnt exist when Dempsey was boxing. I corrected you OVER and OVER and OVER and yes, he and that ref were criticized by the people of the day. You may not like that FACT but it is indeed a fact. If the rule was never enforced then why would it even be a topic of discussion?? But thats not really the point is it? You didnt like getting corrected and so now you are trying to deflect and make this about something it wasnt. The point was, as Ive said many times and as you seem to be the only one unable to comprehend, that the corner rule was in effect when Dempsey fought so the idea that he would be fighting under a different rule against Liston or vice versa is a non starter. Unless your fantasy matchup between these guys allows for them to either break the rules or fight under your imaginary set of rules? Does Dempsey get to stand over Liston in the off the wall chance that he actually fights him and drops him? Does Liston get to apply linament to his gloves before the fight in order to blind Dempsey? Get the **** out of here with your nonsense. Anyone with half a brain cooking up some pointless mythical matchup would typically have the fighters adhere to the rules and be in their primes or would state otherwise. Only a fool who was caught several times in the same post not knowing what he was talking about and cant be big enough to admit it would try to argue your asinine stance that somehow Dempsey being allowed to break the rules legitimizes either the rules being broken or the idea that the rule essentially didnt exist. The only person using the post as a referendum on anyone is you.

 

Dempsey only stood over him and hit him for one out of the 7 knockdowns.

The referee goes over the instructions before every fight. If he didn't inform the fighters of the rule or didn't enforce the rule when it was broken then its his fault. The clipping you posted said the exact same thing.

The neutral corner rule was routinely ignored stop pretending as though it wasn't. If the corner rule was in effect throughout the time period then why are you unable to name more than 4 fights before Dempsey-Firpo where it was enforced?

The scarcity of fights in which the rule was observed would tell any rational individual that it wasn't in enforced across the board. For example, in the Carpentier v Siki fight the ref didn't tell either man to go back to their corners after a knockdown but made sure to stand in front of them to make sure they didn't attack until the opponent was on his feet.

Unless your fantasy matchup between these guys allows for them to either break the rules or fight under your imaginary set of rules? Does Dempsey get to stand over Liston in the off the wall chance that he actually fights him and drops him? Does Liston get to apply linament to his gloves before the fight in order to blind Dempsey? Get the **** out of here with your nonsense. Anyone with half a brain cooking up some pointless mythical matchup would typically have the fighters adhere to the rules and be in their primes or would state otherwise.

I'm not entirely sure what you're on about there. Are you having a stroke?

Nice talking to you.

 

I agree to an extent but I have to favor Liston here. Stylistically Liston is all wrong for Dempsey especially since Liston does extremely well against guys who have to come in. It'd be basically like the Foreman vs Frazier fight. Dempsey would have to get in and Liston would pound on him until the referee has to step in. Liston wins by ko but Dempsey had heart and grit. He would have never stopped coming.

 

Will be spectacular and short. Dempseys got heart but not the muscle to beat this destroyer.

 

You're right on

 

Exactly. The Sonny uppercuts and downward clubs a la Patterson would catch Jack pronto

 

Henry Clark couldn't punch, wasn't aggressive, wasn't a threat at all. Liston was shot, slow as hell, couldn't deck him despite strength and size advantages. It's a stretch to call Clark a fringe contender at any stage of his career.

Regarding 1919 Dempsey vs. 1960 Liston: I contend that Sonny was always a mystery, that there was little solid evidence of what he would do when pressed by a great and tough fighter like Dempsey. I think we knew Dempsey. We never knew Liston. (We never knew about his heart.) For that reason I would choose Jack until Sonny proved himself against the Manassa Mauler and emerged from the fire.

 

Due to being able to watch film and adapt the sport changed drastically in the 30s. Boxing is still secretive with its tricks it was even more so pre 30s. Fighters were just not complete. Dempsey was an extremely primitive version of later swarmers. He wouldn’t stand a chance. He had all the tools to learn it and be great but as he was he would be knocked out and fast.