Dempsey--one man's opinion.

I do think Jack Dempsey is an All Time Great fighter, btw. Absolutely. Despite my criticisms of him, I do recognize his talent/dominance/and historical signifigance.

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl

 

Wait..You think Jess Willard could beat Harry Wills? I think the bigger question is would willard even win a round against Wills, or better yet would he make it past 10 rounds without getting the living **** kicked out of him.

 

I think Wills is overatted on this forum.

 

I garuntee Dempsey's power is that of Fraziers.
He was a heavyweight.
That's like saying Ali wasn't a heavyweight because he use to fight below 200 LB...
So is Ric Enis a cruiserweight because he fought below 200 LB?
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptZ8Z_gZ9PA[/ame]
NOPE.

 

I would bet my money on Wills if the fight was going to happen, but it would not be a confident pick in a finish fight.

Either way, Willard is a key oponent in determining who was the #1 guy in this era.

 

If you want to get technical about it, I think Vitally Klitschko had a kickboxing match in which he weighed under the curent cruiserweight limit.

 

Who says Wills isn't no1 for the era? Its a bit arrogant to say Dempsey is no1 when he didn't fight the best or look better against the same opponents. As for not beating Willard, Wills easily beat Firpo past his prime who in turn beat Willard

 

Harry Wills beat a 1914 version of Sam Langford, 1914 Joe Jeannette, and a 1915 Sam McVea...all top contenders and great fighters. These 3 wins really stick out for me. Wills was pretty green at the time too.

 

In boxing, nothing is a given.

However, it should be noted that Greb went in several title eliminators - Dempsey fighting the loser of course. Brennan, Gibbons, etc.

Greb's record against the lightheavies and heavies of his day was excellent and certainly enough to grant him a #3 spot if we look at the time period of Dempsey's reign. Plus, he actually beat Tunney (arguably twice), whereas Dempsey twice got embarrassed.

 

Wills is a fighter who has gone up in my estimation a lot, perhaps more than any other, since I started posting on this board.

I think we would have to credit Dempsey as having better results vs common opponents.

Firpo got Willard when he was well and truly ready for the scrap heap, and Wills victory over Firpo was prety ugly and widely criticised.

Willard was the champion and a prety decisively established champion.

Having said that I do see Wills as a fighter who has been somewhat airbrushed out of history. While he was active, he was seen as a colosus, and he got forgotten verry quickly after he fell from grace.

 

I think that statistic is misleading in some ways.

There were significant periods where the #1 or #2 fighter was sombody other than wills or Greb.

Fred Fulton was prety well established as the outstanding challenger when Dempsey met him and he just ended up as roadkill.

Willard was the champion.

Gibbons was ranked #2.

 

I think Dempsey can get quite underrated these days. Yeah Willard was not a good fighter and he was past his prime but you have to fight whoever is the champion in order to win the title, simple as that.

 

As far as Gibbons is concerned, Dempsey won 12 out of 15 rounds vs him. Every fighter has trouble with some kind of style, and with Dempsey he seemed to have more trouble with small speedy boxers. So he didnt ko gibbons. Big Deal. The fight wasnt close and Dempsey won convincingly.

As far as Miske was concerned, he went on a huge winning streak after losing to jack so i highly doubt he was a broken man.