Classic Poll : Wlad v.s. Louis ...

Stonehands, Jack Dempsey was a HW, as a trainer what do you think of the technique and strategy he gives in his instruction manual?

 

Well, you are a devoted fan. I don't think there is any chance whatsoever that you'll move one iota away from your beliefs about Wlad.

I recognize the difficulties with facing him -just because I attribute most though not all of his success to his size doesn't mean I "dislike" him or dismiss him.

One thing is for sure: Debating true believers on either side of a question is futile after a certain point.

 

I love it. Dempsey was a student of the game who thought long and hard about what works and what doesn't -especially in terms of punching properly and for maximum effect.

 

But wasn't Dempsey wide open defensively? It seems to me he was hit a lot. In the open ring, Dempsey too often came across as a wild and undisciplined brawler, to me at least.

I agree that on the inside, Dempsey was extraordinary. He really knew how to mix up the punches, could hit like hell, and had uncanny killer instinct. But how often would Dempsey have forced his way inside against the best heavyweights of the past generation?

 

I think Wlad would beat Archie Moore, Bob Baker and Nino Valdes. And they wouldn't land too much on him either.

 

His instruction manual was written years after his retirement and contains much that he himself didn't practice very well when he was active in the ring.

 

A lot of you old timers dont understand the difference in athletes from 80 years ago and now. Modern training techniques and nutrition along with other factors have made an exponential difference. Sure boxing is evolved but you are a fool if you think athleticism is not a major part.

You gentlemen seriously need to appreciate a boxer in context.


Also, anyone who compares Primo to Wlad should consider being institutionalized.


Cheers

 

Yeah, modern nutrition and training is awesome just look at the great athletes amongst the hws. :thumbsup

 

Isn't it amusing that if you argue that boxing is a skill sport before it is an athletic sport and has devolved in terms of skill and you offer specific reasons, then you are assumed to be an "old-timer."

Athleticism is very important. For non-technicians particularly. Modern training techniques have indeed made a difference, though not as you assume. Trainers who know the intricacies of skill and strategy are less in number now than in decades past. What makes Roach great? He learned from Eddie Futch who learned from Holman Williams, et al. during the Golden Era. Are you seeing this yet? He is linked to the past -great boxing almost always linked to the past. At its best, it is based on accumulated knowledge. It isn't all about muscles and fast-twitch fibers.

Not everything evolves. The advice by too many chief seconds between rounds has been reduced to "Come on dog, get this ****in' guy!" 'Modern training techniques' indeed.

Right -Wlad is the **** of the walk. Context? He's strutting through 10 blocks of one-legged chickens.

Well, at least try to be convincing.

 

Wlad has a pretty good trainer himself.

 

To be perfectly honest, Primo and Wlad look pretty alike on film. They use the same tools.

Wlad is better but Primo was a legitimate heavyweight champ that was even bigger than Klitschko. It's fair to compare the two despite people always freaking about it.

 

Who talks **** about Wlad anyway and is visibly frustrated with him in almost all of his recent fights

 

The funny thing about that is that nobody really ever is saying that they're alike in class or anything when they make that comparison either. The truth is that their styles are pretty damn similar all around, it's only because Carnera has this reputation of being a bum or whatever that people get so prickly about it.

 

Carnera was more similar to Vitali's style rather than Wlad's.

 

The past generation? Lewis' era?

Those guys rarely use any sort of head movement, feinting, or trickery to get the job done. Dempsey at his best was pretty good at getting in, IMO.