Did anyone stop him in his prime , ie before he was 33 years old, and had not fought in 2 years? Do you know how hard Johnny Sudenberg hit, how much have you seen of him? Absolutely nothing. The Flynn fight is highly dubious. Firpo was crude ,[ probably no cruder than either Maher or Sharkey,] but a terrific puncher. Fitzsimmons was floored by Corbett,it isnt that simple. Dempsey has a total of ONE ko defeat,[ which may or may not have been kosher ,] on his record
Dempsey would have to be very careful. The manner in which Fitzsimmon's set you up for a knockout blow gives him more than your average "punchers' chance". Ultimately, Dempsey's inside game and power should abuse that fair complexion before knocking Ruby silly, but at that crucial moment when the Mauler dashes in, he'd have to be super alert. Perhaps Jack has to dust himself of before finding his feet and repaying the favour. I have the sneaky suspicion that Fitzsimmon's may have had the potential to spark out any heavyweight around the 200lbs region.
I feel that people are right to favour Dempsey, but that they should do so thinking that there is a wildcard in this fight.
Whether or not Fitz has the power to stop Dempsey is debateable. I think the old adage that styles make fights isn't and Dempsey has the style to beat Fitz. He was fast on his feet, had fast hands, protected his chin behind his shoulder and let his hands fly when he had the range. Plus Fitz was smaller than Jack. People bring up the Firpo fight as a barometer for a Fight with Fitz but Firpo was a lot bigger than Bob and fought differently too. He didn't wait to set traps but came charging out of his corner looking to tear your head off. At 6'3" and 215-230lbs he presented a different set of obstacles to overcome. I think Dempsey has the style to take advantage of Bob's stand up straight/hands by his waist stance and run him over...if he can avoid a big bomb going in which he probably could...Dempsey by KO.
EXCUSES! As I said, Dempsey was down and out vs a lesser class if hitters. Nothing you write will change that.
The only thing dubious about the loss to Flynn is the fact that YEARS later when Dempsey was a champion and the hype machine was in full swing the excuses started to roll out. At the time the fight was covered exactly how one would expect, a young guy getting cold ****ed by a veteran. It can happen to anybody its just that some people cant accept that Dempsey was human. That being said a lot goes into getting knocked out beyond just ones durability. Dempsey clearly improved from 1917 to 1919 and if we are being fair and matching the two fighters prime for prime thats the Dempsey that should meet Fitz. Not a version of the fighter that was still struggling to find his way in the sport.
I've no problem with the result either way, Dempsey returned the compliment a year later. I 've never read anywhere that Dempsey disputed it was a legitimate ko, neither in quotes ,two autobiographies ,or three bios of him. In the light of what he subsequently achieved, and the fact that he was never kod again the fight was re-examined .That seems reasonable to me. Fitzsimmons was dropped by comparatively light hitting Corbett, does that mean Dempsey kos him with the first left hook he lands? Of course not. Fitz was dropped and badly shaken by Sharkey and Choynski, if they could land on him Dempsey could. Likewise Dempsey was dropped by wild swinging Firpo. Fitz was entirely capable of koing Dempsey and vice versa. I hapen to think it is more likely the Mauler prevails.
Details please. What fighters in the Louis era had better skills/technique than. Gibbons Loughran Norfolk Tunney Slattery Sharkey Delaney Walker Villa Brown Berg Chocolate Genaro Leonard Tendler Weinert McLarnin Canzoneri Harvey Mandell . And a few hundred more ?
Theres no known footage of Weinert, although he was considered a master boxer. He was filmed a few times but no fights have survived that we know of.
