Fight of two Jacks; Jack Johnson Vs. Jack Dempsey

Its a tough call because we don't have any footage of the best Johnson who fought his toughest opposition pre-title while Dempsey stopped being a full time fighter once he won the title and much of his talent was never truly developed ... if I had to pick, best for best I say Johnson chops him up and stops him ... Dempey had magnificent moments but if you see the film he gets rocked by Carpentier, hit hard and often by Brennan, couldn't stop Gibbons, badly rocked by Firpo, diced by Tunney twice and took a hell of a lot of shots from Sharkey ... this is fact ... of course his inactivity was a huge part of all of it but I'm of the school that believes Jack Johnson, while not exciting was a founding member of the group of guys to follow like Hopkins, Byrd, Whitaker, Ward , even Mayweather who were not that fun to watch but terribly gifted and capable of completely shutting guys down ,,, Somewhere along the way too many people who know so little about Johnson's full career base loud opinions on the footage against a tiny Burns and Ketchel and say he fought small guys when in fact he fought very large and talented fighters on the way up ... much much better opposition than Dempsey ever fought, not even comparable ... Dempsey irks me because I believe he had the talent to be a 190 pound Duran or a Paq but he because he was so valuable as a commodity he was protected and a a result never touched his full talent ..

 

Top post . H E!

 

Good stuff!

 

Offering an opinion is one thing, repeating deliberate lies is another.
You're a well documented Johnson hater,
you had 4 or 5 posters on your ass for that and your racism on the other forum,when it got too hot for you ,you retreated to the lounge where you confined yourself to redneck Trump propaganda . and now that's folded you're here plying the same agenda driven ****.
You posted 4 lies about Johnson in your opening post and I highlighted them.3 of those posters you accused of being my alts post here,none or Brits which I am ,2 are Yanks and the other is Australian.

I don't see you having a happy time here, too many posters are heartily sick of that kind of sewage.
You might have noticed, if you weren't so busy,phobically slagging Johnson off , that I said this matchup could go either way,that's what's called being unbiased and objective,we aren't interested in your poison polluting a good thread,a thread that has some excellent contributions from posters,giving perceptive breakdowns of how they think this would go,but you aren't bothered about that are you,you just want to dump on Johnson.
Well ,Ghost Of Dempsey,we don't want that **** here. Now I'm done with you,you pathetic bottom feeder.

 

I think knowing a little about Johnson's back story, having thought about it, he is MORE likely to have encountered fighters like Dempsey than Dempsey is likely to have encountered a fighter like him. Dempsey had that dervish 'hobo' style, as Tyson quipped, he fought like he hadn't eaten in a week. Sadly, that description fits many of the fighters of the time, on the official and unofficial circuits and I'd wager Johnson built his style to combat this type of all out aggression, smothering style, a style much easier to adapt than his combination of smothering, in-fighting and spatial control by using 'modern' jabs etc..

I lean even more towards him having thought about this more deeply. Dempsey would likely have been the most skilled and ferocious exponent of this style JJ has seen, but I think he copes and copes well. At his peak and in context Johnson oftenmakes my ever shifting list of top ten heavies...

 

This is a good post.

Might help Johnson's case if we had better or just footage full stop of some of the bigger men that he did fight.

Were they agile? Did they rely on strength? Did they punch in combination?

Nevertheless, very likely that Dempsey and Johnson give each other problems that the other's not had to routinely deal with at the level that each man could offer it.

My inclination is that it's JJ after 6 rounds if not KO'd - Dempsey would tell me quite a bit about how he might deal with later fighters tbh.

 

Johnson was a defensive genius, and Dempsey revolutionized heavyweight boxing with his dynamic all out attack.
Can Johnson ride out the whirl wind and take over when Dempsey's onslaught slackens off?
Can the fast handed, short punching Mauler,throw such a blizzard of punches that even Johnson can't pick off and block them all ,and he get's nailed with something big?

 

We also are missing the bulk of Dempsey's most dynamic performances, these from 1917-18, from Morris LO6, Smith KO2, Levinsky KO3, Fulton KO1, Brennan KO6, Flynn KO1... Post-Willard he was already falling into the traps of fame, easy living, etc. Still, he made for some unforgettable fights and great, though uneven, performances. And as far as uneven performances go, Johnson had plenty of those, taking his foot off the gas, doing just enough to win, etc.

And I'm not so convinced of the great gap between their competition. As well noted, the Langford that Johnson fought was a super-welter, the McVea was green as a granny smith, Ancient Fitz, ghost of Jeffries, middling Hart, etc. I realize we can do this with almost any champ, but the observations are not without merit.

And I am certainly in agreement with our last sentence. Dempsey & Co. played safe with their commodity, which was Dempsey the fighter. We saw his full potential in glimpses. And unfortunately, as noted above, the best of those glimpses are lost to time.

 

Look at all these personal attacks, and now you're getting political and personal, all because I said Dempsey would beat Johnson and explained why. You are a psycho. You were banned permanently from the other site for personal attacks and lack of impulse control as Ivich, then came back as Bronson. You're obsessed with Mendoza/Dr. Z who has ruined your life apparently. You've been banned here several times as well. Some people never learn.

Newsflash: this is a boxing forum where posters exchange opinions and knowledge. We are all entitled to a civil exchange without angry curmudgeons like you harassing them and always needing to be right at all costs. Never admitting when they are wrong.

I come to the classic forum to discuss boxing, not your political biases or engaging in mudslinging which is your default reaction any time someone disagrees with you. I've never said one racist thing, but that is a communist tactic you use to silence your opposition. Not surprised coming from someone who praised Fidel Castro while telling an actual Cuban from Cuba he didn't know what he was talking about, the arrogance of you. You can't prove them wrong so you shout false accusations and insults at them like a petulant teenager. What an embarrassment you are.

Do yourself a favor and put me on ignore and stop harassing me. I didn't come on here quoting you or looking for confrontation. Move on.

 

Johnson's best wins were against novices, smaller men, and washed up former greats selling their name for a payday. He gets a lot of glory for being the first black HW champion, but when you break down his best wins none of them were at their best or were smaller men he could wrestle and manhandle. The bigger ones were slow-footed and hyped as the next white hope.

Dempsey's style took boxing to the next level. Watch some compilation videos of Dempsey and Pernell Whitaker's defense and compare them side by side. You'll see they look almost identical in body and head movement, foot movement, feinting, speed, timing, etc. Dempsey was well ahead of his time.

 

Jack Johnson wrestles, stifles, stuffs and shuts Dempsey down. I don't think Dempsey would find the space or the angle he needed to land a wide punch on Johnson. Johnson would bully him on the inside with short uppercuts and spoiling tactics. I believe there is a fundamental difference in the heart category between a man who was ducked and a man who did the ducking. At least Johnson refused rematches, more than matches at all. Dempsey had one of the worst title reigns ever when you consider that it lasted from 1919 to 1926. His best moment in the collective memory at this stage of the game seems to be Bert Sugar waxing poetic on any documentary about the (truthfully) overrated Firpo fight or 30 seconds of him committing what would be fouls now on a hapless Willard. Styles make fights.

 

Dempsey scored a rack of early ko's and Johnson certainly wasn't a fan friendly performer,doing just enough in a many cases to squeek a win.I don't think there is much of a gap between the quality of their opponents at all,and I didn't realize some thought there was?

As champion Johnson signed to rematch Jeannette in NY for $30,000,Mcvey and Langford,inAustralia for $45,000 plus $5,000 plus 4 round trip tickets,plus a% of the fight films. The fact those fights did not happen was respectively the NYAC and the Australian Clergy once Johnson had jumped bail.The promoters of those fights ,[The McMahon Bros ,and Hugh McIntosh,] made public statements explaining why they did not happen,none of them blamed Johnson.
Bert Sugar was an entertaining teller of old rehashed myths.imo

 

I don’t think Johnson is overrated, I have him in my ATG top five, but I have a gut feeling Dempsey wins this for the reasons Shay Sonya cited.

 

Great analysis--I'm with you on how you see this mythical fight developing. I think Johnson was cagey and slick enough to neutralize Dempsey's firepower and he'd use his wide assortment of boxing tools to win a pretty comfortable UD.

 

We saw Dempsey from 24 on ... we didnt see Johnson till north of 30 .. the competition is not debatable if looked at honestly .. Smith was shot, Levinsky a light heavyweight, Flynn was shot, Morris a marginal talent .. the Fulton KO wouod have been fun and dynamic for sure .. I'd do a deeper dive on Johnson because the level of comparison is not even close .. Dempsey to me remains with Jefferies one of the great unknown in heavyweight history because of the matchmaking and the inactivity .. I can say this ; we learned more about him in hanging tough to beat (eh) Sharkey and the Tunney rematch than in any victory about how tough , how game, how dangerous he may have been just if ...