A contribution to the Dempsey Wills debate

The fact that we are even discussing the 5ft8",160 pound Greb with Jack Dempsey is a feather in Greb's cap. The guy was a terror with the middleweights and lightheavyweights of his time, and that is good enough for me....No fighter in history blended great hand and foot speed,alongst
sheer toughness and amazing stamina,with great whiskers in one package.No one...
Whether he would have avoided a prime 187 pound Jack Dempsey for 15 rounds,can never be answered, though I doubt it strongly. But with that
"little seven year itch " Greb, who knows.?:good

 

Dempsey also helped out sparring partners Godfrey, and Jamaica Kid financially, there are a few photos of Jack with Wills they got along ok.

 

Here's the question I guess, if in 24 dempsey ko's both greb and wills, how does that improve his legacy?

 

In their last fight ,when Tunney scaled 181lbs,he gave Greb a beating.
Greb is for me, probably the no 1 p4p ever ,but I don't see him survivng 15rds with Dempsey.

 

A lot. That would mean he dominated the HW division for at least five years and put in him the tier below Ali and Louis IMO.

 

yeah an extra active year would be favourable and a win over wills puts him as a guy who cleared out his division. his win over greb apparently removes some criticism over 100 years later.

I think I have him 8 or 9 depending on whether I like Liston's body of work atbthe time i make a list.

I feel the lack of fighting wills hurts him a lot more but it's slightly placated by beating sharkey and signing to face wills himself.

 

Such things have zero bearing in my book. It's about who you beat, not who you signed to fight. Even if Hopkins had signed a deal that later fell through for fighting Jones in 2001, it wouldn't make any difference in my ranking of him. A win over Jones in 2001 on the other hand...

 

I feel he's absolutely comparable to Liston in terms of greatness. I'd probably have Tyson a clear notch ahead, though.

 

no but avoiding a fighter should really be held against you imo.

take bradley/khan now. it gets held against bradley that he so blatantly ducked khan. a fight falling through is one thing, but ducking a fighter is another, in my book.

 

tyson is growing on me atm, I have him sandwiched between holyfield and frazier but I'm beginning to question my placement of him. I think between ali and lewis, tyson was the most dominant champ so I'm considering replacing him.

also considering my ranking of Wlad, I recently moved him above sullivan and jeffries so he was 1 behing smoking joe. I think provided he beats a top 10 opponent next year he'll move level with tyson and holy.

 

I don't go into that. I only look at who you beat, who you lost to and how you did it.

 

fair enough, I like to see a fighter make atleast an attempt to fight the best around, especially a high profile fight like khan/bradley, bowe/lewis etc. ducking is almost as bad as losing imo.

 

Dempsey, Liston and Tyson all smashed through the division in an impressive manner, but Tyson was both arguably more dominant and has a deeper list of wins (he steamrolled a good number of contenders even after losing to Douglas). What hurts him is mainly the losses to Douglas and Holy.

 

I also like that, but that influences my view of him as a person, not a fighter.

 

for me, the loss to holyfield doesn't hinder his legacy at all, just places a ceiling on it. the loss to douglas is pretty bad though and beating tucker and salvarese doesn't quite make up for not avenging and beating douglas himself.