"Toledo" Dempsey vs 1994 Foreman

I voted Foreman KO, but then I realized this said 44 year old Foreman. If this had been young Foreman I would take him by brutal KO. However at this stage of their respective careers, Foreman was too slow to keep up with the strong precision punching Mauler.

 

Dream on "Dempsey" jocksniffers........... '94 Foreman at 250 pounds was being beatin' for 7 of the 9 rds by a pop-shooting Mikey Moorer who used speed and some degree of finess........

Dempsey was all aggression and truly not all that skilled... So what, Dempsey bobbed and weaved well and owned good power..?.? WOW! He sill threw shots from left and right field as if he were placing phone calls...... That ain't gonna work with Foreman of 1994.......

Bottom line: Foreman stalks and backs up Dempsey with his size and strength and willingly trades and hits paydirt by rd 10....... Demps. gets stopped....... 'Nuff said.......... FOREMAN!!!
:hatbbb

MR.BILL

 

Let me be clear. the 1990s foreman would get his **** tossed by Jack Dempsey. Foreman is so overrated in the 1990s. He arguabably lost to B level fighters Alex Stewart, Axel Shulz. Axel I thought clearly won, and stewart made meat out of foreman's face. Glass Jaw Morrison easily beat him too. Dempsey was leagues above these men. I think Jack was better than Holyfield too.

Dempsey would be too skilled, too fast, too powerful for foreman. he would take angles on the big very slow man and bombard him with his very artillery before foreman could even think about getting a shot off, with those very slow reflexes. Dempsey has the finishing skills to put an old fighter like foreman away.

Jack by mid round stoppage

 

Even 44 year old Foreman would beat Dempsey.

 

Burt, do you know if this footage available to the public? Dempsey fighting in normal time I mean?

 

Foreman has never been truly beaten by anyone looking to press the issue / attack..... All of Foreman's losses were basically due to being out-boxed by guys who stuck, moved & ran from Big George...... Lateral movement and leg speed is what has licked Foreman in the past........

Jack Dempsey was not really much of a lateral mover... J.D. was an aggressive unit who went on the attack..... No freaking way Dempsey at 188 to 192 pounds is / was strong enough to force George Foreman to fold or back-up......

Now, in a time machine, I can see Dempsey of 1919 (Toledo) being quick of hands and spry enough to stun and surprise '94 (Vegas) Foreman for the early going, but Foreman remains composed and soon gets his aging and slower ass in gear and starts timing Dempsey's rushes with heavy jabs and right crosses aimed downward and through the pike....

Unlike Jesse Willard in Toledo in 1919, George Foreman doesn't fight like a wussy and look gimpish against young and small Jack Dempsey.....

Foreman KO 10 Dempsey........

MR.BILL

 

So despite suffering several broken bones in his face, jaw, eye socket, cheek....and STILL remaining on his feet after 3 rounds, you think he fought like a wussy? I think that was one of the more heroic stands of a champion of all time. Not many men could take punishment like that and still stay on their feet.

 

Willard was merely a hard punching oaf.......... That was not Foreman....... Foreman was indeed a puncher; never an oaf......

MR.BILL

 

Foreman was a handful in the 90's; still very capable with a lasting ability to take a dig but Ted Spoon would have to say that one of the primary sins you can commit in the ring against Dempsey is to lack maneuverability. For a fighter to combine not just the speed, not just the power, but the creativity in attack is the one aspect that will eat away at Foreman as he covers up for extended periods.

Again, when we reference back to the Toledo Dempsey we must remember a couple of things.

It was tremendously hot with one thermometer recording 120 at ringside just shortly before the bout. The atmosphere was very thick and muggy which sapped Dempsey's strength as he plugged away at his big target. Still, the attack continues in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. The only reason Willard managed to make it through that is because he was, for all of the jokes about his ability and shy nature, one of the toughest son-of-a-bitches that has ever gone into a ring. The injuries he sustained would have been suffice to have had the fight stopped well before the end a few years down the line.

Dempsey's stamina was top, and he was greatly destructive puncher. It's not just about poundage; a fighter like Dempsey knew how to arch his body to get every nuance of leverage into his blasts. Put him up there with the very best. Foreman can hurt his man and try to hustle his way along but is will be through lots of blood, lumps while generally being overwhelmed by his better equipped opponent.

Throw the 70's incarnation in there and you've got a much better fight.

 

So Dempsey threw wild punches.Open your eyes and get rid of your biuas and observe dempsey flattening Firpo in the 2nd round in close with a two punch combo ,so fast and powerful...Watch the old 32 year Dempsey
hitting Gene Tunney with five left and rights so fast,even in slow motion..
But you Dempsey haters know better than all that saw him in his prime,
and raved about his tremendous power in close...His reputation will survive your revisionism, of that I'm certain...Hatred doesn't trump history...

 

Good post, while Dempsey shows lateral movement it's important to note he doesn't back up or look to box while doing so. Against Williard his lateral movement is just a mechanism to keep Williard a bit off-balance so Dempsey can spring in to attack like a lion. Dempsey will attack, not box, and this is the most important aspect in analyzing this matchup. I don't really care how Foreman did against Schultz or Stewart... unless you think Dempsey is going to try replicating a Tommy Morrison. I don't see it, and I think it's totally against his nature.

 

"Dempsey-Firpo" of '23 is generally regarded as a thriller of a fight, but also a sloppy as hell one, as well........ Since I've only read and seen reinactments of the fabled affair, I gotta assume more brawn than brains was used in that bout......... Not a whole lot of skill was applied in that encounter.......

Neither Jess Willard or Louie Firpo are even remotley close to being in the class as a George Foreman........ To claim that is an insult to Foreman and his fans.......

So a 31 / 32 year old Dempsey managed to win about 2 or 3 rds outta the 20 rds fought with Gene Tunney, who was only two yrs younger than Jack was...... Well, I am over-whelmed with passion.......

NOW! In George Foreman's youth, he really was only truly beaten by Ali in Zaire... The affair with James Young in Puerto Rico was of bizarre circumstances.... Several things were odd there.... 1.) The Heat and Humidity.... 2.) Foreman's attitude by 1977 was in the crapper...... 3.) Foreman being dropped by Young was more of a push and being off balance than a solid knockdown...... WORD!!

Foreman of the 1990s was beaten by a spry and very fast of hands Holy in 1991... Foreman made a point by going 12 rds with Holy, but Holy won on points.........

Tommy Morrison trained his ass off for Foreman in 1993 and fought / boxed the most disciplined fight of his life in winning a 12 rounder over a hulking but slow as a snail Foreman.....

Shannon Briggs got the Christmas gift of a lifetime in 1997 when the three blind mice handed him the "lineal" title from a 48 year old Foreman...... FACTUAL!!!

Notes:

And yes, who can ever forget Foreman's bloodbath with Al Stewart in 1992 when the supposed "Destroyer" boxed from the outside with lateral movement looking to pop-shot Foreman from long range....... The hell happened to Stewart's "Destroyer" reputation in 1992????

Foreman has never lost to a bully or brawler who uses pressure and aggression to secure the deal.....

And, going by way of films and other forms of malarkey, I don't think Jack Dempsey's noted body movement, bob and weave, or his punches would be precise, powerful and accurate enough to fluster and hinder George Foreman's own attack..... NO!!!

Foreman KO 10 Dempsey........

MR.BILL

 

I think its to say that I have often pointed out George's flaws as a youthful and old fighter.....

A young Foreman was wild and crazy with his punches and way too unsettled to pace himself for a distance fight.... Also, too arrogant to listen closely to instructions...

Old Foreman threw straighter punches and owned better concentration and stamina..... Old Foreman was also slower than before, but also stronger......... The 1991 version of a 257 pound Foreman could lift and bench more weight than the '73 version of Foreman....

I actually preferred if Foreman had maintained that 243 to 245 pound range like he was in 1987 and '88 for "Sekorski & Trane." I felt Foreman looked lean and mean there........

MR.BILL

 

People I have talked with who saw Jack in his prime, said he was not simply a brawling swarmer. My Dad and Uncle described him as a fighter who could brawl or box when he needed to. My Dad said he saw him in a fight where he displayed a pretty decent left jab to go with his obvious brawling capabilities. I think Jack was a more complete fighter than many today believe.

 

I didn't like seeing, from a tech's side of the coin, Dempsey launching widely telegraphed haymakers' from left and right field in his title fight with Jess Willard....... Many of Jack's punches were very amateurish / rookie like..... Seasoned pro's with skill and finess don't throw crazy shots like that.......
:-bart
But "Baer & Foreman" were also guilty of them type of crimes too.....:deal

MR.BILL:hat