Dempsey vs Toney

1. Well it's assumed Dempsey wasn't at his best in those fights. Willard was a much slower, older, inactive fighter without much of a defense. Nothing like TOney

2. They're still the most similar, open defensively, pressuring, high output types. Toney thrives on these traits. Tunney stylistically is different t Toney, but both are highly skilled technicians, both have good jabs, countering skills, great defensive skills. Dempsey did great against brawlers but not skilled boxers

3. Twist it anyway you want, it wasn't a freak result Meehan won the series, amateur 4rounders also often translate

4. Gibbons managed to neutralise Dempsey's attacks making him miss, Toney is a better defensive fighter and a better counter puncher

5. Dempsey isn't half the boxer Jones is, isn't half as quick with his leads, is far easier to hit and doesn't have a jab. And he never proved himself against the better technical fighters, bar a depleted Miske on his deathbed

I'm not actually pickng Toney to win here, but it's a style that could neutralise Dempsey and possibly cause an upset

 

We assume it for Dempsey but we know it for Toney? Talking about bias.

Sorry but your comparisons here make absolutly no sense. It´s a completly different style. But okay, let´s play your game.
Dempsey is far superior defensivly to them - especially head movment- , he´s got better footwork, is far more mobile, more speed, more power, is the more intelligent fighter, more ruthless and a far superior infighter. Jirov troubled Toney greatly and lost in a close fight. Remember this is seen as one of Toney´s best fights. Dempsey was so far superior to him, no way can you pick Toney to beat Dempsey due to the Jirov fight.
Tunney used footwork to dominate a past prime Dempsey. Toney´s feet are stuck in cement, no way he does the same.

So, I´m twisting it around? A four rounder? Really? If you have to bring up a four rounder to critizise a fighter it just shows how desperate you are. Which absolutly isn´t necessary with Dempsey since there is a lot to critizise about him.
You know as well as me that four rounders mean nothing in professional boxing.

So, now Gibbons is similar to Toney as well? Gibbons used footwork to trouble Dempsey - same as Tunney - that´s not Toney´s game. And Dempsey won nevertheless.

Dempsey would have killed Jones.

True. He never beat Gibbons or Carpentier. Didn´t happen.

As likely as Toney beating Jones.

 

1919 Dempsey over any version of Toney...

 

the willard fight was fought outside in the hot sun. If they werre fighting indoors, it would obviously be less exhausting. And while some newspaper accounts may have said that Dempsey had little ring science, there were others who said he was quite clever.

Dempsey by UD or stoppage

 

Ah, so that´s what this thread about. Okay then, I stay out of it.

 

Can't we just do Toney vs Tua...you know the 2 most overrated guys in history!

 

And yet you have guys like Sam Langford and Ray Arcel saying he was the greatest fighter they had ever seen. And Schmeling. And Tunney. And you have guys like Jim Driscoll praising his left hand operation in the same sentence as Benny Leonard, Wilde and co.

If you're going to make an assault against Dempsey 'word of mouth' type evaluations are a bad place to start, his peers and the people obviously thought he was all that with a few exceptions. You don't win greatest pound for pound ever polls 20 years after you retire if you're suffering from a lack of peer appreciation.

 

You should doubt the credibility of anything printed ever. Some of those old school cutouts are not too far removed in ridiculousness from anything spewed out of the frothy bungholes of a Kevin Iole or Dan Rafael, IMO.

Even if you claim that it is not an assault i see plenty to interpret it as such. Like Dempsey being 'gassed' in the second? Really? Perhaps stifled in activity by a bigger man tying him up, but 'gassed'?

 

I recall Tyson recounting D'Amato's opinion that Dempsey was overly nervous/excited during that particular fight as his first championship bout and fought a fight much wilder than he typically would or should have. Beating down on a man with an absurd weight advantage on you while he's doing his best to smother and put his weight on you will do that. Jess Willard's dimensions and the fight Dempsey took to him are rather inapplicable to a James Toney fight.

I'd say Gibbons or Brennan would be a better fit for a model fight. I think that Toney would attempt to box and counter up close a lot. I don't think that's a great idea against Jack at any stage in his career, who's got short punch KOs on film and seems to be most comfortable exchanging at that distance.

 

1. No it's just Dempsey fans want his fight to be only for 1 fight against a style that suited him perfectly and pretend he was shot when he was only 32 with little mileage on the clock

2. IT has similarities, come forward fighters without jabs and without defense were traits that suit Toney's style the best. Yes Dempsey was superior to Jirov and that's why he has a chance of outworking Toney but at least Jirov had a jab

3. The only time he fought a fighter with the techical ability of TOney, in Tunney he lost. He also avoided the other best boxers of his era Wills/Greb

4. It isn't just the Meehan fights but the Tunney/Miske fights, Sharkey too. Even a B Class fighter like Brennan gave him problems. 4 rounders do have a place in pro boxing, if you can be outboxed for 4 you can be outboxed for longer

5. No Gibbons didn't use much footwork, for the most part both fought on the inside

6. Dempsey's never fought anyone near the level of Jones, Dempsey was knocked out in his prime Jones wasn't

7. Carpentier was proven B Class and tiny, Gibbons is small weak and isn't in Toney's class skill wise, he doesn't have the speed, countering ability or defense

8. Dempsey has never beat anyone as skilled as Toney

Boxers and commentators say all kinds of nice things about other boxers, it doesn't make it so. Lennox Lewis said Audley Harrison was a better in fighter than himself, do you agree with him? Max Kellerman said Judah was Whitaker but with power, agree with that?

His peers did think allot of him but people do usually fall in love with punchers. But were his peers aware that Willard was 37 innactive and unskilled? Were they aware Miske was close to death? That Carpentier was a hype job? That Firpo was more of weight lifter than a boxer? Were they aware Dempsey was protected from Wills and Greb? Were they aware Tunney was by far and away the best boxer he ever faced?