Compare Rocky Marciano and Jack Dempsey?

Also Charles was not lt heavyweight champion. He would have been rated as a heavyweight not as a lt heavy. Name one historian during that time period that rated Charles all time as a lt heavy.

The issue is not that Langford stated Dempsey was the best he had ever seen. This was the vast opinion of most every noted trainer and historian for many decades. Great boxers such as Leonard, Tunney also felt the same. This is expert eye witness testimony.

Fleischer who saw them all live from ringside stated the following....you cannot compare Rocky to Dempsey except as a puncher. When you read that statement and couple it with all the other expert opinion only one conclusion can be reached. Unless you believe every one of these experts, far more knowledgable than you are I, are wrong. I do not have the vivid imagination it would take to believe this was true.

 

Oh, the irony, lad !

Did you SEE my last post ?

Did you even read the post, burt ?

Did you see the part where I pointed out that Seamus never used the word WHITEY ?

Again, Seamus post was:

Will you quit banging on about the word "whitey."

You're the only one who sees "Whitey" where Seamus posted "Whiteness"

And probably in reference to the noted documentary UNFORGIVEABLE BLACKNESS on the life of Jack Johnson.




http://www.pbs.org/unforgivableblackness/





You are embarrassing yourself here, burt, by arguing against something Seamus never wrote while failing to grasp the relevance of what he DID write.

Click on the link and then tell me if "blackness" was used there in a derogatory sense.


http://www.pbs.org/unforgivableblackness/

 

H,What an ego it requires to disregard the vast consensus of boxing people who saw Dempsey and Marciano fight ringside, and completely disregard their vast boxing background, in favor of his biased opinion
NINETY years later...Why then read history if not to learn from it...cheers H.
P.S. this worthy detractor of Dempsey should read the biography of Max Schmeling written in Germany with English translation. A great read. He should read what Der Mox has to say about Jack Dempsey...Schmeling
when young sparred with Dempsey in Germany several times. Schmeling wrote this book and called Dempsey BY FAR the best heavyweight he had ever seen ...Great read H...:good

 

What in tarnation is meant, "both displayed WHITENESS " ? What trait is
"whiteness".? Would your worthy client have written from out of context,
both displayed "blackness " ?. You sir know in your heart the answer...
I know S, and I like him for the most part , but to try to win points by slipping in racial innuendos INFLAME the true race baiters...Good night !

 

For the love of the agonizing Jesus, burt, and all that's sacred under the stars, and above them too, would you please click on the link I provided.

Then, hopefully, everything will become clear to you as to what Seamus was referring to:



http://www.pbs.org/unforgivableblackness/

 

It is in reference to the Ken Burns documentary on the life and struggles of Jack Johnson which was entitled UNFORGIVEABLE BLACKNESS.

If you watch the documentary, you will see that it details the struggle Johnson had to overcome the prejudices of the White American population of his day who viewed his principal trait as BLACKNESS. They sought long and hard for a GREAT WHITE HOPE to dethrone Johnson, who they felt was unsuitable to be champion on account of his colour.

Seamus was probably taking a swipe at the white racist attitudes of the Johnson/Dempsey era and to a lesser extent, the Marciano era.

 

H, you're just repeating yourself here. You mentioned this in your last post and I addressed it.

Charles has as much standing in a LHW list as Langford has in a HW list, and Nat had Sam on his HW list.

Sam never held a HW title, yet we consider him as one, and also as a good many other weights as well.



But leaving that aside, why would the venerable Nat leave Archie Moore of his LHW list as of the 1970's ?

I also addressed this, H.

(see previous post on this topic).

And Tunney ?

It would be a bit self serving for Gene to describe JD in such manner.

H, I'm aware of that quote, I even quoted it !

What I'm saying here is that Nat's take is not infallible.

He had Sam as one of the top ten HWs of all-time, which he patently wasn't even in Nat's day. A great, great p4p fighter, but certainly not to ranked ahead of Marciano as a HW. Nor Schmeling, for that matter.

This, and his omission of Moore from he LHW list IMO, renders his judgment questionable at best, and biased towards earlier eras at worst.

 

Your missing the point....it's not just Fleischer or Langford or Tunney it's experts from many decades long time period that pretty much all concur. You cannot wish away expert eyewitness testimony that all concur with one another.

You have not addressed any points. Once again name me one boxing historian from the 60s or 70s that lists Charles as an all time great lt heavy? This is a more recent idea even though Charles won and defended the worlds hwt championship. No one was ranking Charles as a lt heavyweight while Nat was living. Nat as I also feel did not believe Charles was good enough to displace any other that was on his all time hwt list.

Langford as you should know was a unique case....probably the greatest fighter ever to live yet He never won a title. His career was predominately fighting hwts and as a hwt most rank him. Nat ranked him quite highly. You need to study up concerning Langford. His career far outshines Marciano or Schmeling.

Once again you can question Fleischer judgement but he was there watching these men from ringside...you were not. His expert opinion far far outshines yours.

 

I'd love Clay or one of the serious Langford historians to verify this "quote" by Sam about Dempsey being the best he ever saw like how much he was being paid to say it. All kidding aside

 

Sam Langford, when asked how Harry Wills (whom he fought 18 times in his career) would do against Jack Dempsey, said in the June 5, 1922, Atlanta Constitution "Well if he ever fights Dempsey my money will be on the present champion. Dempsey is the greatest fighter I have ever seen. He hits twice as hard as Jim Jeffries and is as fast in the ring as James J. Corbett."

 

Hey, Burt, I would enter this fray further (and the general preoccupation of this board with undersized caucasoid heavies) but I have to go read my favorite chapter of Melville's classic Moby Dick... The Whitey of the Whale....

 

I'd like to hear anyone who believes Ali's comment on Louis Monaco..., I mean, Marciano (they aren't the same guy?) when Ali was kicked out of the sport and trying to appease The (White) Man and placate his good graces to get readmitted to the opportunity to earn his leaving with fists and feints.

Cuz I got a bridge for sale.

 

His all time rankings were so absurdly biased in favour of the boxers from his youth, that it's hard to take anything the man said seriously!

 

Ali made the statement regarding Marciano on the same program where he had Little good to say about any Other white champion. he degraded Dempsey and Tunney although while watching the second Dempsey Tunney bout he seemed amazed that Tunney was sticking and moving like he did. He stated that Rocky was better than Joe Frazier in that same interview. Ali was hwt champion again when he made these statements...Circa 1975.....he had no reason to get back in the good graces of anyone at that stage of his career.

 

Who's going to tell Whitey Bulger his name is verboten?