1915 Jack Johnson Vs. 1927 Jack Dempsey

Maybe, but Willard and Dempsey are about as diametrically opposed in styles as you could possibly get . A Jack Dempsey fight is not going 26 rounds one way or the other with anyone.

 

Fair point. I'd still give Johnson the edge though, if he did survive the early rounds that is.

 

Johnson was a fat, out of shape shell vs Willard, and although Dempsey was way over the hill in 27 he still put Tunney down very hard. He still moved around very well and physically was in shape.

The 27 Dempsey could have been stronger and more powerful than the 1915 Johnson. Prime for prime, no. Obviously Johnson was bigger and stronger. HOWEVER....Dempsey fought at or around 190 and Johnson at 200. Dempsey stayed greyhound thin for speed. Maybe he bulks up to 200 for added strength vs Johnson. Who knows?

 

Yes, it would be very interesting see how the in close fighting played out.

We know Dempsey’s abilities in that regard and also Johnson’s own skills in stifling his opponent via strength, leverage and specific attention to pressure points.

If he could squelch an inside specialist such as Dempsey, it would be very impressive. I’m 50/50 on how successful Johnson might be in that dept. but I do think the longer it goes the much better it goes for Johnson - even the 37 yo version.

As to Johnson’s chin - just imo, it is underrated - and that underrating pivots on the Choynski KO loss and the Ketchel KD.

Vs Choynski, Johnson was a paltry 170 lbs or so. That weight was about right for Choy and his natural build - but not Johnson whose undernourished condition would’ve made him that much weaker - definitely not Johnson’s prime - and he still weighed in the vicinity of 170 lbs for several fights following the Choy match - a virtual Super MW.

As to the Ketchel match, I seriously don’t buy that it was a legit KD - and it was questioned even at the time.

Not to make the argument overly convenient - but IF one takes out those two fights and then examines his record otherwise, Johnson presents as an acceptably tough and durable hombre.

I could definitely see Johnson’s holding tactics giving rise to an escalation in some of the dirty tactics Dempsey employed when the going got real tough.

If they ran a line on it, I would bet huge on at least one full blown punch from Dempsey to Johnson’s nuts - and some might view the Mauler as being half justified in executing same due to Johnson’s holding.

It’s a good, hypothetical match really.

 

Jack Dempsey said he was 180lbs for Willard which is considered his primo performance. Conceding about 20lbs to a fighter in similar or perhaps superior? condition is quite a thing in my opinion.

 

When people think of Johnson's weight, they think of it from he was at his most high profile, i.e. his title reign, not his prime.

I consider his fight vs Burns, 3-months shy of his 31st birthday, pretty old for the time, as being the final fight of his absolute prime. He was 194lbs. His recorded weights from the Langford fight, aged 28, to the Burns fights, were - 185lbs vs Langford, 184lbs vs Felix, 186lbs vs Lang, 185lbs vs Burke, 192lbs vs Jim Flynn, 194lbs vs Burns.

I know I'm in a minority of about 1 here, but I've always considered him, prime for prime, roughly the same size as Dempsey and Schmeling. i.e. 6ft 1ins and about 190lbs.

This post is irrelevant to the Dempsey vs Johnson thread title, it's just always struck me how everyone writes about Johnson as a 200lbs+ fighter (which he was as a champ), whereas he averaged 185-195lbs during his prime years.

 

Was Johnson that list 170 pounds or so? He is listed at 185 pounds a year later Garner fight. That is a long way off from 170. Besides Choynski was the smaller man for sure and was listed in the Walcott fight ( 1900 ) at 163.

Even tough Dempsey and Johnson are out of their primes in this match it would make for an interesting fight.

 

You are right about his weight and Johnson best performances were under 200 pounds. Burns was old at the time he fought Johnson?

 

Agreed, from what I saw it was very slow and one paced, Willard appeared slow and cumbersion, remains one of the poorest HW champs in my mind, strange thing is, when I first saw a pic of Johnson prob around 64/65 he looked a big strong, hard hitting fighter, I imagined him ( on appearance ) to be aggressive, silly really, but I did, it was only years and dozens of articles later, that I realised he was nothing of the sort, far from it in fact, then YT confirmed his rather passive approach, back then I had him as top ten HW , not now, yea so a disappointment all round, much the same as Ketchell.
stay safe buddy.

 

Adams books suggests so - and early photos of Johnson reflect a rather gaunt fighter, below natural weight, including pics with Choynski - also even if he outweighed some opponents in some instances - he still could’ve been at greater disadvantage due to being below his ideal weight.

I don’t know that Johnson’s physical development was so much slow as much it was to do with his being underfed. .

The big jump was 194 lbs in 1908 to 2o5/208 by 1909/1910 (vs Ketchel and Jeffries) with no fat added.

Though already well defined Johnson did appear to muscle up a bit more once he had the title and good $$$ in hand.

Whatever Johnson or anyone else thought of Jeffries chances going in, Johnson himself wasn’t taking any chances himself - he was in perfect condition for Reno - the best condition he could be in.

I agree, as per the conditions set, this does make for an interesting fight to chew over.

 

For those of us who don’t know Jack - which Jack?

 

FD - I’ve gotta ask, who’s the beautiful lady in your profile pic? A model, celeb? Sort of looks familiar but I can’t place her. She’s gorgeous.

Please return back to normal programming.