Evander Holyfield - Jack Dempsey

Quarry was quoted as saying he was certain he could beat Marciano.

 

I challenge you to watch dempsey knocking down Willard for the first time and Tunney. Now I would like you to tell me if any of those punches was telegraphed.

Near his prime???? WTF do you think a prime is? He was on his way up and lost. He later redeemed himself. End of story.

1. No, it means he does better than losing to bums like Douglas.

2. WTF does everyone have against firpo? We all know he was wild and unorthodox and lacked great skills. Yet, Oscar Bonavena fought with the EXACT same style and it took 15 rounds for Ali to put him away and Joe Frazier got knocked down twice by him and nearly lost thier first encounter. On top of all this, Bolavena was quite a bit smaller than Firpo (4 inches shorter and 12 pounds lighter). Does this mean Joe Frazier and Ali suck?

No he didn't. The person to whom you are refering is Harry Wills, and Wills got his ass kicked by Jack Sharkey in 1926, had issues beating Big Bill Tate in 1922 and barely beat Firpo in a decision.

Maybe you should learn some develpmental psychology before you open you mouth about how hard living makes a person mentally more willing to fight, ******.

No his points add up to Dempsey wins on a combination of heart, power and unorthodox technique

Go back and read the actual analysis by Demsey supporters. Head movement, power and heart, as well as having a style built around fast movement (circling, etc) and unorthodox and powerful strikes delivered from various angles.

 

Wills kicked Firpo's ass, actually, and was far past his best against Sharkey.

 

And Quarry was a font of intelligence and analytical acumen.

 

But Douglas came in as a whale in that fight.
I spent a few years in India and for some reason Douglas-Holyfield was shown live there.

 

Well more from that article I was quoting from..

'When I (Phil Berger) passed on commment deriding Fleischer's favored fighters to him,The Ring editor refused to budge from his views that those early 20th-century warrior were the best.Prompting Jim Jacobs to say:"I'll tell you what that reminds me of.There was a time when Cus D'Amato was talking boxing and Cus mentioned how great he thought Tony Canzoneri was.So I said,'Let's take a look.I have 10 of his fights on film.'
"Well,I put them all up on the screen.And you know what Cus said,which is typical of his flexibility?
"He said,'You know,Jim.I don't remember him fighting this way.'He said,You know,over the past 40 years I've learned a great deal more about boxing than when I was watching Canzoneri.While I still admire the fury with which he fought,I realize that technically he didn't have the skills which I remembered him to have.'" '

 

Wills got a decision. He couldn't put away Firpo the so called bad fighter. I put 1926 there for a reason, Wills was slated to fight Dempsey in 1925. He wasn't the top competition like Power puncher said.

 

couch13 man u slaughterd on yer post,i new everything u said but im very underskilled on the computer,its good to see someone who actually judges by more than the first 2 rounds of the willard fight,as ive stated dempsey may take some punchs but he ko,s holy inside of 8

 

Wrong. The Wills fight was (rightfully) being called for as early as 1920. But yes, since Dempsey ducked him, they still wanted him to fight Wills five years later, in 1925.

And what is your source for the Wills vs Firpo fight being a close contest? Everything i've read on it always indicated it was a clear victory for Wills, who was not knocked down twice and had to be illegally helped back into the ring by thirds.

 

Make no mistake about Wills. He was a great great fighter.

 

The point was that he was able to get a decision against a supposedly bad fighter. Someone of Wills caliber should have been able to put him away, but he didn't. Therefore, either Firpo was a good figher or Wills was a bad fighter. Take your pick.

BTW, how do you have a contest when no promoter will either follow through on thier finacial obligations or promote a mixed bout?

 

No, I just watched the first round in HD and you know what, he only telegraphed when either throwing from behind Willard or after he landed jarring non-telegraphed punches. A lose in the first fight (with dempsey fat and out of shape) and a controversy in the second. Also, that knockdown in the seventh was very non telegraphed.

2 years is a long time to change and get better. It was a match that Dempsey is recorded to have been starving before. Have you ever fought with out having eaten for days?

His prime was from 1919-1923.

Bull****, Miske and Brennan were both very skilled opponents. Also, Carpentier, Gibbons and Sharkery were all more skilled than Douglas.

Bonavena wasn't crude? Bonavena didn't throw telegraphed punches that still knocked down Frazier twice? Firpos hands weren't slow in the least, rather, they were somewhat fast. The one thing I really see different between the too is that Bonavena jabbed with much more percision (and didn't seem to hit as hard).

Congrats, you are able to realize that a ****ing giant wasn't knocked out of the ring. Look, Wills couldn't put Firpo, the "bad fighter" away. If Wills was the number one, then he should have been able to KO him like he was doing to most the guys he was fighting from 1922 until he lost to Sharkey. Dempsey puts Firpo away in two rounds. Your two choices are a) Firpo is a good fighter with a solid chin and Wills was the number one, which also means Dempsey was a great fighter for putting away Firpo in two rounds, or b) Firpo sucks and Wills wasn't a good enough fighter to put him away meaning Wills isn't a good fighter.

Okay, I'll give you the ability to abosorb punishment won't win it for you if you can't catch your opponent who is then out boxing you.

Its clear you failed English 101. I'll make this really simple for you.

Dempsey: Powerful hitter, excellent at hitting from angles, a better infigher, moves with both speed and skill, and has near equal heart and defense with Holyfield.

Holyfield: A not so powerful hitter, will somewhat better striking skills. Who has been Knocked Out twice.

Here is where the real good analysis comes in from you. The one thing you're wrong on is endurance (and in my opinion skill level being closer than you say). Dempsey while suffering from ring rust (yes, yes we all know he was an idiot for not fighting more often) outpointed Tommy Gibbons for fifteen rounds. Thats why I think Dempsey could win, he could keep up a high energy output for fifteen full rounds.

 

Steroids. Steroids. Steroids.

Please address the elephant in the ****ing room!

Give Dempsey some Winstrol/Stanozol or whatever Holy used for two decades and you would have a fighter more vicious than Tyson or... or Dempsey.

This debate is pointeless without addressing this issue.

 

If you read any reports of the Wills-Firpo fight you'll find it's described as nothing short of a shut-out. He dominated Firpo. Credit Firpo with being able to stay in there for 12 rounds, though, as Wills was an excellent puncher. Makes Jack Dempsey's KO even more impressive to me. Anyway, Wills certainly was the top contender almost throughout Dempsey's entire title run, up until he lost to Sharkey when he was shot.