Fight of two Jacks; Jack Johnson Vs. Jack Dempsey

Controversially, I find both fighters to be impressive and unimpressive at the same time.

Johnson, for all his defensive prowess was often the bigger, stronger man facing fighters who didn't routinely throw tight 8 punch combos. Yet, I do recognise his skill on the inside, his very good uppercut and ring generalship - for my money, JJ was bigger and significantly stronger than JD.

The main thing for JD with me is Championship Fighting describes fundamental boxing techniques with a clarity that I just don't recognise from the limited fight footage available. I see JD rolling and weaving to levels where he can't possibly see everything being thrown at him, yet, his rhythm, footwork and explosivity is superb. I have to accept that the film diminishes his true actual technical ability and then with that, JJ's, Langfords and everyone else of the time's ability too.

The one thing that makes it hard for me to rate JD killer non compare alike Louis and Tyson is the being allowed to stand over a rising opponent. As impressive as the destruction of Willard is, it's not comparable to what Louis did to Schmelling or Tyson did with Spinks, all factors considered.

I think JD hits too hard and quick for JJ to manhandle him like he did lighter and slower fighters and I don't know if JJ has the footwork and jab jab, tie him up and uppercut game to consistently defuse JD.

This is one of the fights where whilst I may watch, truthfully, I likely wouldn't care who won. It certainly wouldn't help me answer questions as to how they truly stand H2H amongst the greats.

 

194lbs is not185lbs,Langford had 52 fights under his belt when he fought Johnson,who was nearer prime is a matter of opinion.
I would not be surprised if Dempsey stopped Johnson,I just think on balance he would win a scrappy mauling affair.

 

His arm wasn't broken. Just injured and again, it would not have been injured if he boxed Battling Jim instead of trying to wrestle him. He also accepted $1,000 to fight Jim while ducking Jeannette, McVey and Langford for offers of $20K or more.

Klondike was a low level journeyman at best. Stop trying to float his name as an elite level opponent. Reproduce McVey's extra fights, who were his opponents? I'm not interested in Boxrec. They did not source these alleged fights, it only states he was 6-2 before the first fight they recorded. Who were his opponents?

There are no flaws in my post. You are just a Johnson apologist. Your post history contradicts your denial.

 

Dempsey.

 

I actually wouldn't be surprised to see Dempsey get him early. That slow burn, grappling heavy style is a horrible match up against a super explosive, ultra aggressive power puncher who starts very fast. Likely that Dempsey catches Johnson with a huge left hook from a crouch as Johnson lazily outreaches his arms try to grasp the shoulders.

I'll also add that Dempsey had underrated infighting abilities. Dempsey also fights from a crouch which gives him a lower center of gravity. He's not getting ragdolled and manoeuvred easily like some of Johnsons opponents. In any case, nothing I've seen from Johnson on film is overly impressive imo except for his physical ability, which wouldn't be an advantage here as Dempsey excels him physically too.

 

He had a fracture of the radius bone there is a reproduction of the X Ray of it in Pollacks book . What you are not interested in is the truth.Whats the matter homeless now" Scene "has folded? .You've been a Johnson hater all the time you have been on boxing forums.I've corrected you on 4 statements you've made on this thread alone. Ghost Of Dempsey,you are a virus full of vitriol and malice I've zero interest in going over all the past with a closed mind hater,so obsessed and deranged he thinks Johnson ducked Kid Cotton! Why dont you find out where your partner in crime ,Dr Z /Mendoza has skulked off to and join him there! We don't need a reprise of that agenda crap here! At 77 I haven't the time to waste on bigots!

 

Oooh, look who got triggered for being challenged, what else is new? Any time someone puts the heat on you, you resort to personal attacks and accusations. At 77 I would think you'd be a bit more emotionally mature, but not a chance with you. Remember when you insisted Johnson did not "struggle" with Battling Jim and demanded proof? Only to be shown your own posts where you said he did in fact struggle? LOL, you never got over that have you? Wallow in anger and misery, that's been your reputation around here. And stop trying to drag in cross-forum drama, it's petty and childish.

 

A prime Dempsey had trouble with competent boxers like Bill Brennan and Tommy Gibbons who were nowhere near as big, strong or fast as the prime Johnson (1907-10) as demonstrated in his films against Burns, Ketchel, and Jeffries. Under the rule set and refereeing styles of the 1910-20 era I think Johnson would be able to use his superior strength to dominate, tie up, and tire out Dempsey on the inside and jar him with his right uppercut. After a few rounds, Dempsey would become tired and a bit wary of the inside game. That would give Johnson plenty of room to work his jab and catch Dempsey with some power punches as he tried to come inside.

By the time Johnson fought guys like Moran and Jim Johnson, he was ring rusty and not interested in getting himself in prime condition. Prime against prime, I pick Jack Johnson. Post-prime Dempsey who fought Tunney against the post-prime Johnson who defended his title in France, I pick Dempsey. By then, Johnson's skills at 35 or 36 years of age would have deteriorated more than Dempsey's at 30 or 31.

 

I’m undecided. Neither man has ever faced a fighter like the other. Dempsey was fast and ferocious while Johnson had the ability to last all day long and wear out his opponents. Both could punch. Potentially anybody’s fight.

 

You're triggered by two names in threads,Johnson and Dempsey's.I bet you wet yourself when you saw both in the same thread!
No anger or misery in me, I've had a great day after a terrific week end,I just abhor mean spirited, bigoted, pieces of work like you.Your reputation precedes you here,a nasty bit of work!


1.Klondike hadn't lost half his fights.
2.Jeannette had 20 fights under his belt when he last lost to Johnson.
3.Johnson didn't nearly lose to Battling Jim.
4.Johnson had a broken radius bone. That's 4 lies you told .
You couldn't put the heat on me with a flame thrower ,you poor sad sap!

Go find your fellow moron Dr Z ,you're two bigoted clowns together.
You contribute nothing to any forum,just a lot of spite and malevolence, you and he should have been buried with that site.

 

Yes, neither man winning would be a big surprise would it.

 

Hi Buddy.
You have nailed it, at least as far as I am concerned, and any unbiased poster without an agenda, your breakdown of both fighters and their styles, coupled with a keen knowledge of boxing, closes this thread down for Mike Cannon, many thanks.
stay safe KK, chat soon.
Mike.

 

If Dempsey finds a home for his left hook,it could be game over.

 

Agreed, c,mon its way past our bedtime......

 

All I did was offer my opinion and reasoning as to why I think Dempsey would win. You took it personal and lashed out, now you want to play victim. You do this all the time. Your post history is full of beefing and angry outbursts. Check my post history, I post about many other fighters besides Dempsey and Johnson, and I don't resort to angry deflection and emotional outbursts like you.

The only reason you're pushing Klondike is because he won the first fight with Johnson, or else you'd never mention him. He never had a great or even good win.

Johnson did nearly lose to Battling Jim, a draw is as close as it gets to losing without losing.

I haven't lied at all. I contribute my insight and opinions like everyone else. Go start another alt who can cheer you on when you're losing another argument.