Marciano vs Dempsey

Thanks that’s much easier to see when colorized. The opening pre fight footage was amazing. More clear then the fight it self.

 

Jack is too hittable. Rocky would hit him with everything he threw. Beats the bean juice out of him.
I think rock had better defence and would be harder to hit clean.

 

Marciano was cut in every major fight he had.How is Dempsey more hittable?

 

Again its time to dump on Nat Fleischer.YAWN!

God, is this boring twaddle or what!

Bottom line, we have two, come forward ,swarming bangers , and we are asked to pick a winner from them.
So there are two choices, Dempsey or Marciano,both have their positives and their negatives.imo
An excellent case can be made for either man imo.
Both have their adherents here and neither pick is wrong.
That's It!
Anything else is just so much self aggrandising BS.
So much ,"look at me and how clever I am in taking this thread in an entirely irrelevant,and illogical direction,mentioning names that have no relevance whatsoever to the subject at hand.

The fact that nobody can see even a tenuous connection in his post to the original subject,is of course entirely their fault and not the fault of the poster,who makes every single post of his into a vanity project a," look at me ,see how erudite,and perceptive I am."
Actually, it's blow hard spin, tailored to fit his own hobby horse ideas.

Nobody asked for or requires a lecture from you about boxing history, what is asked for ,what is wanted, in this particular case , is for each contributor to make his pick between two men and choose which one ,"will emerge victorious." And,if they are so inclined ,give the reasons for their pick.

END OF!

 

Marciano, in very exciting fight.

 

It's very plausible..My pick is Dempsey,but both opinions have much to recommend them.

 

Pretty much this. The reason I pick Marciano is that I find the competition he proved himself against better, especially on film, than that which Dempsey proved himself against. And at some point, it isn't just about styles making fights, but quality making fights.

 

Hi Seamus.
You might be right, but when you say " better competition " but that doesn't mean that Dempsey couldn't beat the competition that Marciano beat, does it, Moore, Walcott, Charles, may well be better fighters than, Willard, Carpentier, Firpo, but I would favour Dempsey over the former, as I would favour Marciano over the latter, so it could be a moot point, no ? as to the winner, I would go with the Rock, he did, and I believe he would here, find a way to win, it wouldnt be easy of course, but his will to win, almost unequalled stamina in HWs, and sheer brute strength would prevail, imo.
stay safe buddy, chat soon.
Mike.

 

The problem here is, by your own admission, Rocky was proven against a higher caliber of fighter. Dempsey was not. And the gap between Moore, Walcott, Charles and Willard, Firpo, Carpentier is immense, even with the former lot being well on in their dotage. I'll take the more proven quantity.

 

Hi Seamus.
Thanks for an incisive and pertinent reply, and I have also gone with the more proven quantity.
stay safe buddy, chat soon.
Mike.

 

Marciano was indomitable..no subduing him. I rate him above Tyson.. mentally, two polar opposites. Mentality is half the game in boxing- I don't know why people forget that.

Gotta go with Rock. Training like a madman.

 

Marciano beat a lot of boxer puncher types that were both past prime and not really big and strong enough to keep the Rock off them for the duration of the fight. Fighting Dempsey is something different, he would meet a freight train head on. A man that could win in the trenches as evidenced in the Brennan bout above, or against big heavies like Firpo. Dempsey is a tough match for Marciano in my opinion, he's a proven bigger puncher, and he's faster - if Rocky lasts he could win by attrition but I wouldn't bet on it.

 

I don't think a conversation on propaganda installing champions (or whatever you said, no offence) however interesting will create much dialogue here, I have noticed many of your posts are very oblique and while I do find them interesting I can't find a way to engage with you man just tone it down a bit? I don't want you gone is all. I read your thread on Rockin in the amateurs and how you've talked for years? I spoke to Rockin my fair share while he was present (and have astronmical amounts of respect for him) but I find it hard to envision you two chatting lol.

 

On a slight side note, what footage of Dempsey best displays his boxing skills?

 

Oh, well, before I went about challenging ideas that go unchallenged I went about chronicling events in boxing history. Mostly focused on champions and the authorities from which the status is granted.


I was much more respected as a chronicler, for sure.


The problem with a chronicle of any sort is it lacks narrative. I don't tell you who the good guys or bad guys are. There are no heroes or villains, there are names, dates, results, etc. Basic facts.


When my basic facts do not align with the narrative presented by consensus the facts are ignored for the story told by story tellers.


Harry Greb never once drew the colorline is still the consensus narrative story told. I proved he did. Beyond any doubt. I wouldn't have had to if the story tellers did their job and based their stories on facts rather than consensus belief. I could have been left to my names, dates, and authorities. However, if I know something is true and the majority think it is untrue then when I speak truth I cause arguments and when I back truth I cause emotions. I was forced into proving Harry Greb drew the colorline or allowing my research to be juxtaposed as false.

Who was false?


Rockin knew me as a simple knower of histories and respected my ability to keep them, including his own, without the need to tell you a story or weave a narrative beyond the facts; a name, a date, a result, who organized, who paid what, etc.


I will return to the chronicles when the average fan no longer tells other fans made up unresearched circle jerk information. When the **** youse guys talk about actually reflects the **** I read in primary sources then I am free to just chat like a normal ass jamook but until then my knowing history in a room filled with marks who think they learned something because they bought books prevents me from speaking freely or like I would have to Rockin.