How does Jack Dempsey do in the 70s?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by MixedMartialLaw, Feb 15, 2025.


  1. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,197
    46,443
    Mar 21, 2007
    :lol: yep, you can make up any background for him you like, it's mad fantasy speculation.

    But the simplest thing to do is imagine him recreating his career as it was fought, turning pro young like the bandit he was and moving through the divisions. But people can imagine whatever they like, I'm not saying otherwise.

    Jack was 181 and 21 years old when he lost to Lester Johnson - i've no idea if it was a coat and shoes job or straight up.
     
    Journeyman92 likes this.
  2. MixedMartialLaw

    MixedMartialLaw Fight sports enthusiast Full Member

    1,516
    2,381
    Jun 30, 2021
    In all fairness, the difference in nutrition between American children who grew up before and after WW2 was pretty massive. It's certainly fair to assume that a kid who grew up around the turn of the 20th century did not have nearly the same access to a stable diet as a white kid growing up in the 1950s, when a '70s boxer Dempsey would have grown up.

    There's a reason the Baby Boom generation was significantly taller on average than their parents. Since that era, I do agree nutrition might have gone down due to an over-abundance of cheap unhealthy food.
     
  3. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,197
    46,443
    Mar 21, 2007
    Children starve to death in America in 1970. Children in 1970s America also received very elite nutrition. You can pitch Dempsey anywhere you like on this spectrum. You can make him have very good nutrition if you want to for some reason; you can make him die in childhood from malnutrition if you want to for some reason. You can also pitch him anywhere in between including the exact nutrition level he had in real life.

    So it's true that people were taller. It's true that the middle classes enjoyed way better nutrition. All true. But all irrelevant in terms of where you pitch Dempsey's fantasy nutrition in this situation :lol: He can grow up just eating peanuts and bananas if people want, that's okay by me. But it's also OK and I would argue preferable for him to have the same nutrition as he did growing up in the real world.

    There is nothing unreasonable or strange about it - , Dempsey was well fed enough to become one of the greatest physical specimens in the history of humanity and could receive exactly that nutrition level again while living a completely normal life, in America, in the 1950s and 60s.
     
    InMemoryofJakeLamotta likes this.
  4. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,197
    46,443
    Mar 21, 2007
    What i'll add, addressed at nobody in particular is this "improved nutrition" argument is almost always pitched by people who want their favourite fighter to be better. "He was nearly starved, he worked with poor nutrition, he'd be bigger in 2005, he'd be stronger in 1994." It's true, but it's also always true that he could have almost exactly the same dietary experience in any year - any year at all. It's also true that being well fed could reduce competitiveness for resources - this is known too. But I've never seen anyone pitch that because "my favourite fighter might have had less killer instinct and ability to absorb suffering" is not an argument anyone ever wants to make.
     
    Journeyman92, META5, Seamus and 2 others like this.
  5. Eddie Ezzard

    Eddie Ezzard Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,459
    5,156
    Jan 19, 2016
    Just about to make the same point. Being well-fed risks taking away hunger; literally and metaphorically. Take Dempsey out of the hobo lifestyle where he may or may not have been eating well and there's a good chance you lose some of the wildcat ferocity that took him so far. You can't rob Peter to pay Paul without Peter being out of pocket.
     
  6. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,197
    46,443
    Mar 21, 2007
    Right, it's very difficult to see what the unintended consequences of adding a chicken salad to Dempsey's diet every lunchtime and having him go to the Olympics might have. Either way, what is simplest is to say he's about the same creature, which is absolutely possible, up to and including hitching from town to town in hot weather. There's nothing he did then that he couldn't do now, or an approximate equivalent - smuggle him a Tracker Bar twice a day and you might have another Corey Sanders on your hands...
     
  7. guilalah

    guilalah Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,350
    302
    Jul 30, 2004
    Jack Dempsey's natural endowment, developed in to the milieu and opportunities a later era, in ratio to how he developed in his own era.
    Well, I think Dempsey, Ali, Foreman and Frazier would probably have been a Big Four, with Norton as the outstanding honorable mention. [We're talking prior to the rise of Holmes]. I can't say much more than that, except that I think that if Dempsey was going to beat Foreman it would by getting to him early. I don't see Dempsey avoiding Foreman for several rounds. I think Dempsey would have to blitz and catch Foreman early and keep up the assault while soaking some sick damage along the way. I favor Foreman, though it's possible that Dempsey's speed/power/chin/heart may carry him through. He's probably the only fighter I see having those combined assets to possibly bring off that sort of approach, though I wouldn't favor him. I think Foreman cuts off to well, and Dempsey's whole temper is to get a threat out of there, to expect Dempsey to string Foreman along until George tires.
    No idea how Frazier/Dempsey turns out.
    If Dempsey were to get solid training earlier in his career (than he did back in his day), he could conceivably be as great a threat [edit note: I originally typed "a greater threat". I'm walking that back a bit] to Ali than Frazier. (I tend to the view that Dempsey's pre-Kearns technical development (especially defensively) left a lot to be desired). Just positing '70's Dempsey as developing in ratio to how he was able to develop in his own day, I think he'd be a very challenging opponent for Ali, a live underdog, but not necessarily quite so challenging as Frazier.
    Wouldn't be surprised if 70's Dempsey were about an inch taller, would expect him to be around 200 lb give or take a little.
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2025
  8. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    59,958
    43,440
    Feb 11, 2005
    Somewhere around Bonavena/Bob Foster level.
     
  9. Flash24

    Flash24 Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,337
    9,203
    Oct 22, 2015
    Based on what little film we have on him.
    Which shows he was often off balance and wide open.
    I really don't believe he'd do very well at all
     
    Seamus likes this.
  10. RockyJim

    RockyJim Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,225
    2,402
    Mar 26, 2005
    Not me...
     
  11. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    59,958
    43,440
    Feb 11, 2005
    He was also a hot head in the ring who lost discipline and focus when his Plan A didn't work. That deficiency survived lessor opponents but would not survive even the B tier 70's heavy. He would be closer to Rudi Lubbers than Ken Norton in accomplishment.
     
    Flash24 likes this.
  12. SixesAndSevens

    SixesAndSevens Gator Wrestler Extraordinaire Full Member

    1,201
    1,618
    Aug 28, 2024
    You don't gotta tell me, Jim.
     
  13. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    59,958
    43,440
    Feb 11, 2005
    You been talking to Maxine or Estelle?
     
    Greg Price99 likes this.
  14. guilalah

    guilalah Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,350
    302
    Jul 30, 2004
    "Jack Dempsey's natural endowment,"

    Oh, I've seen the rough draft of a speech President Trump plans to deliver in Manassa Colorado.
    (Unimpeachable source).

    ;-)

    -----------

    btw, I (like President Trump) have my own Arnold Palmer anectdote, though more directly come by.
    When I was a little child (late 1960's) my dad would take me to airports to look around. One summer day were at a fence, looking at some smaller planes. Arnold Palmer was coming back from the Akron, OH Firestone Tournament, saw us, and asked 'Does that boy like planes?' He let us behind the fence, and I got to go inside his Lear jet for a while, which I thought was very kind and generous of him.
    Around 2016 my father was remembering back, and told me "While you were in the plane we talked a bit. Then Palmer said, 'Well, I need to get going -- I have my daytime solo license, but I'm not yet licensed for night flying.' Then he added, 'Now, Jack Nicklaus -- he's learning to fly, but he doesn't have his solo yet.' " ;-)
     
  15. Journeyman92

    Journeyman92 Out For Milk Full Member

    17,097
    19,063
    Sep 22, 2021
    I’m laughing at all the people commenting on Dempseys skills as they seem to have drank the koolaid… in a similar case as Marciano… you realise Dempsey was fundamentally better then Ali, Frazier and Foreman right? LOL those three were some of the most technically whacky, unorthodox heavyweight champions… You’d want Dempsey to teach you how to move your head and punch not any of the above by a LONG shot.
     
    SwarmingSlugger likes this.