Dempsey Didn't Jab Enough?

I agree. And that's why I think he would have trouble with many skillful boxers with good movement, and not just the absolute top of the bunch either. Tunney's superiorty was partly down to him being closer to his prime, but had more to do with him being a more modern type of fighter IMO.

 

Despite his unusually long reach, Dempsey wasn't really at his best at long range. In his prime, he used his speed and ring generalship to close the gap effectively against slick boxers. I talked with Jack on more than one occasion, when he was older. He said, when he was at his best, he preferred fighting against slick boxers, was very confident in his ability to deal with them, and didn't like fighting against sluggers.

Jack lost his speed in his early 30's, and he was definitely not at his best against Gene Tunney. He had lost interest in boxing, had a long lay off, and did not train right for the 1st Tunney fight, the Sharkey fight, or the 2nd Tunney fight. He was not proud of those facts.

There is little doubt in my mind, with both fighters at their best, that Jack would have prevailed against Gene. He believed it, and so do I.

 

More in line with the thread topic about Jack's lack of jabbing in the Tunney fights: I know that Jack had some painful back problems during that time (and later in life) and it was something he really didn't like to talk about. It was his lower back, I believe. Just a guess here, but maybe jabbing hurt him more than hooking??? To me, he looked stiff in those last 3 fights.

 

I am not sure that jabing would have helped him much in this fight.

A jab can be used as a rangefinder but it also tends to provide a warning of what is about to come.

Perhaps his best bet was to try to catch Tunney completely by surprise as he almost did in the second fight.

 

Yeah. Too bad for Dempsey that Jersey Joe was not the referee in that second fight, with Nat at ringside. Jack would have been champ again, and could have retired on top.

 

Given that Dempsey was somewhat tall (for his time), you'd think he'd have a decent jab. But jabbing didn't fit his style. And his style, on paper, didn't fit his tallness.... on paper. But he made it work.

I've made many critical remarks about Dempsey, but i don't think his lack of a jab is that big a problem. Maybe he would've been better had he used the jab a bit more to get into range (like Tyson), but his style worked fine for him. Frazier didn't use the jab much either, never cost him a fight. Same for Marciano, although he had a bit more variety in his punches.
like
Dempsey's left hook is a killer. I have not seen him hook off the jab Louis, Tyson or Lennox did, but when he landed that hook, you were in big trouble.

 

Dempsey couldnt throw a jab or a 1-2, thats a huge weakness, which is made even worse by his low guard. Its a piece of **** to jab him senseless all night

 

So if any of his oponents had the judgment to use the jab against him they would have beaten him?

 

Tunney had a great fast jab and straight right, none of his other opponents did. Tunney beats any version of Dempey

 

This is completely wrong, firstly Dempsey couldnt land barely any punches, if he had a great jab (he didnt), he could have landed the jab, taken tunneys jab and long rage game away.

Landing a jab doesnt telegraph other punches. It can actually open an opponent up and make it easier to land other punches. A opponent doesnt know if you're going to throw a left hook off the jab to the body or head, or throw a 1-2. So no there is no 'taking away the element of suprise', Dempsey is largely predictable by not having any outside game