1919 Jack Dempsey vs 1967 Muhammad Ali

Than you woke up apologizes for your dream.

 

In 1967, Ali very easily gave Ernie Terrell a horrible beating in 15 rounds, that was on Feb 6 1967, in Houston, Texas. Then on March 22 1967, Ali beat Zora Folley, by TKO 7, at Madison Square Garden. He was sharp and had reached his peak, at 25. He had confidence, footwork, speed, and stamina. He also had reflexes and timing. Jack Dempsey was no joke, he took apart Jess Willard, on July 4 1919, in Toledo, Ohio, TKO 3, such a beating. Ali for this fight would dance non stop, no laying on the ropes, to stop an exhausted Dempsey in 11 rounds. He had an off night with George Chuvalo, on March 29 1966, winning a unanimous 15 round verdict, but no one ever knocked Chuvalo off of his feet, not even Foreman or Frazier.

 

Ali by whatever he wants

 

If Jack can't get Ali outta there inside 4 or 5 a serious beating awaits . Ali by stoppage in 13

 

I think Ali would win ,,but this fight for Ali would be as serious as a heart attack, and I believe there'd be some dire moments for Muhammed early, Jack could attack swiftly and viciously with both hands including a sinister left hook. Unless he flattened Ali and broke a jaw or something I'd still see Ali getting up and winning.

 

Jack never faced anyone within a country mile of Ali's abilities, endowments, skill and determination. And I am including the folks that Dempsey lost to.

Jack comes swinging for an early stoppage. Ali clowns him with footwork and speed, countering more as the early rounds continue. Round 4, Ali turns the tide and lands ferocious combos that force a stoppage. Game over.

 

Great Post, I really mean it.

 

Where is Longhhorn?
Hasn't been around for months, hope the old guys OK.

 

Dempsey never fought ANYONE close to the ability of Ali. So how can we say he had fast feet, or was a devastating puncher? What are we basing that on? Sports writers from a 100 yrs ago? The film evidence is dubious to say the least and really doesn't show ANYTHING a fighters of Ali's ability would need to worry about. Or Jerry Quarry to be honest.
Of course Dempsey was great. But that's in his era, he was better than anyone in THAT era ( And to be honest, we don't know this as fact, because of his refusal to fight the best Black American talent of that era. The color line had been reinforced after J.Johnson.Very Similar to the way it was drawn after Obama almost a 100 yrs later, thus we have a Trump)
I'm not knocking Dempsey, anyone that wins the Heavyweight Championship of the World is extraordinary. It is an extraordinary achievement. But to get on this site and to write that he would have defeated ANY Heavyweight Champion from J.Louis to The Klieckoes is pretty much the same as proving Hercules and his 12 labors. The only thing we do know is Dempsey actually existed.

At least we do have film from Ali's era and can say with a very high amount of reason that films shows Ali probably destroys any fighter active today. ( TBH Dempsey could defeat a few of them to if he was close to anything that was said of him) This is a reasonable assumption. Were is the reasonable assumption for Dempsey's being able to defeat Ali? Film, no. Sportswriters or trainers that actually saw Dempsey and Ali? Possible, but very unlikely. And those sportswriters or trainers if they were able too see Ali. How much of their opnion be shaded by their long held prejudices? A very slippery slope to base an opnion on to be honest in my opnion.
Dempsey was the best of his time based on the fighters he was allowed/ wanted to fight. But Ali , prime Ali would pick the rd and successfully end it in that rd.