Dempsey's greatness.

Every filmed bout does and I've already pointed out the specific moves only a great all time fighter could master.

 

Who cares ? I don't know. :huh ... I thought you did .... Seamus started doing Gibbons quotes, so I did. Then you said something about verify sources, as Clay Moyle did in a book about Billy Miske ... so I thought you cared about who said what.
But maybe not. Good.

Yeah, Dempsey did ok in that fight, methinks. All things considered.

He ranks somewhere in the top 20 on the all-time heavyweight list, I guess.

Dempsey looks excellent on film to me.

 

That's why we do it.

 

Gibbons started as a middleweight and fought mostly MWs and LHWs. It's not as if he had 100 bouts against real heavyweights and was never stopped. Fact is, Dempsey went 15 rounds with a LHW, who could well be a SMW today.

 

How many other champions are there where you can only name one fighter who lasted 15 rounds against them?

 

To be fair janitor Dempsey fought less than 10 fights scheduled for 15. Might as well say that about Khaosai Galaxy or Tommy Hearns.

 

Gibbons was one of boxing best defensive fighters regardless of weight.

 

Gibbons was one hell of a fighter...106 bouts and he only lost five and this includes newspaper decisions.....who beat him? Tunney, Dempsey, Miske and Greb...that's it. Certainly one of the most remarkable records in boxing history.

 

A win is a win is a win...Dempsey won by a wide margin from a great defensive fighter, the wily Tommy Gibbons.I can play that game too R

Joe Louis couldn't ko a LH Bob Pastor in 1937.
Cassius Clay had his hands full with a Doug Jones.... Ray Robinson won two controversial decisions from Marty Servo .
If you or anyone saw a film of Tommy Gibbons flattening Jack Bloomfield in London, a year before Gibbons retired, you would be shocked...There are two films of that bout. I saw both but one of them is so clear filmed from a different angle...
What the hell does Dempsey have to do to give him his due on ESB ?atsch

 

The issue with Tommy Gibbons isn't if he was a good fighter and a decent opponent.

When talking about Dempsey's all time standing, the issue is if Gibbons was a tougher opponent than the Billy Conn of 1941, the Archie Moore of 1955, or the Bob Foster of 1970.

And if Dempsey disposed of Gibbons more impressively than the champions of these other times did with the light heavy champs of their eras.

The answers to me are no and no.

 

Moore had Marciano on the floor.
Conn gave Louis hell for 12 rounds.
I thought Dempsey had Gibbons on the defensive the entire fight, and out-fought him, out-worked him and even out-thought him for the most part of 15 rounds. The only real knock on Dempsey is he didn't score a KO, which was expected of him.

No, it wasn't MORE impressive, but hardly any less, especially considering he was coming off a 2-year lay-off.

But that's just my opinion.

 

I think Conn and Moore were the best out there at their weights, and better than Gibbons.

Gibbons had lost to Greb in 1922.

 

SO WHAT ? Losing to Harry Greb ? In Pittsburgh, Harry Greb is always thought of as the greatest including my boy the charismatic toughie
Billy Conn....
P.S. Nat Fleischer had Tommy Gibbons over Conn and Moore as LH. But of course you know better...cheers