Does anyone still have Dempsey as a top ten heavy? Top 15?

My main concern with what you are doing her, is that a light heavyweight fight, would typically involve both men having undergone some sort of weight cut, which would make it a very different proposition.

That makes it a totally different ball game, as even back then, most of the top light heavies were fighting in the high 180s at heavyweight.

But OK, let's play it your way.

Since meeting Dempsey, Carpintier had got three years older, and lost to Siki and Gibbons.

Surely this diminishes the value of the win relative to Dempsey's?

Tunney beating Dempsey would be a better accomplishment that Dempsey beating Sharkey, in a strictly head to head sense.

However when you factor in that Dempsey had gone back to whatever extent we respectively think, then Dempsey beating Sharkey migth be the more impressive legacy achievement.

George Foreman beating Joe Ken was a more impressive head to head achievement, then George Foreman beating Michael Moorer.

However the Moorer win might be more impressive given the context.

I am not sure how Wills ended up in this discussion, but it is Christmas, so we won't leave him out in the cold.

Wills was older than Dempsey so he sometimes fought men in his prime, who Dempsey fought when he was green.

His win over Fulton is rightly rated highly, but it was still Dempsey who got Fulton first, and got him at his high water mark.

After that Dempsey had basically given Wills the template for beating Fulton.

Gibbons might have been what I would call a high value opponent for Tunney.

Highly ranked because he was on a winning streak, but ready to be taken.

Again I don't want to **** on Tunney's chips, it was a very good win, but Dempsey and yes Greb got him when it really counted.

As for how far back Dempsey had gone when Tunney met him, that is something that each person must decide for themselves, because it is very hard to constrain.

 

Just recently I found the actual official scoring of the bout. It was very close after six rounds.

 

This was Referee O’Sullivans quote regarding the bouts ending. It’s within the article way to the lower right.

As I wrote earlier newspapers initially used some oddball quote from the ref which described earlier blows…left hook to the solar plexus and a right hand that bounced off Sharkeys elbow and landed on his leg. “Unintentional and did no damage”.

There was a later article I found where the ref laments that he was misquoted initially. This misquote is beyond odd.

https://newspapers.library.in.gov/?a=d&d=IPT19270722.1.16&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-------

 

Just located, once again, the official scoring after six rounds of the Dempsey - Sharkey fight-

Referee 2-1-3 Dempsey
Judge Mathison 3-2-1 Dempsey
Judge Flynn 4-1-1 Sharkey

 

The entire audio of the second Dempsey Tunney fight exists and I posted it on Boxing Scene last year. It’s a very interesting listen. The ringside commentator stated the bout was even after six rounds and that both fighters were unmarked aside from welts on Tunneys body.

 

Interestingly if you compile the round by round official scores of the Dempsey - Sharkey bout this is the scoring after six rounds:

1-1-4

 

"both men undergoing some sort of weight cut"

This might be relevant in some cases, but Levinsky, Carpentier, and Gibbons were all natural light-heavyweights who weighed in or about the light-heavyweight class for Dempsey and were actually slightly heavier, but not significantly, when they fought Tunney. I have repeated often if the weights for the little guys are basically the same the achievement is the same.

"Carpentier had got three years older, and lost to Siki and Gibbons."

Carpentier was 28 when he lost to Siki one year after losing to Dempsey. My take is this loss brings into question how much credit Dempsey should get for handling Carpentier in the first place. In what other fight did Siki show all that much? As for the Gibbons loss, this is circular, as Tunney also beat Gibbons.

"George Foreman beating Joe Ken was a more impressive head to head achievement than Foreman beating Michael Moorer."

???? Who is Joe Ken?

*thinking about it, you must mean Frazier and Norton. I don't see much of an analogy between fights that were over 20 years apart versus Tunney and Dempsey and Sharkey. Sharkey eventually winning the title might be a better comp for Foreman, but he was not so old as to make it remarkable, which is what is impressive about Foreman.

"I am not certain how Wills ended up in the discussion."

The thread is about Dempsey's historical ranking. You think Wills is not relevant to that at all?

"Wills was older than Dempsey so he sometimes fought fighters in his prime, while Dempsey was green."

Dempsey lost a fight to Meehan in 1918. No offense, but Dempsey is always green or past it or whatever in these discussions.

"Dempsey had basically given Wills the template for beating Fulton."

Dempsey hit him on the chin. Wills broke three of his ribs. I don't see much of a template. My take is that Wills was just better than Fulton. And Fulton was on a 36 bout streak in which his only loss was to Wills.

Gibbons "Highly ranked because he was on a winning streak, but ready to be taken."

This is just to give Dempsey a load of credit and Tunney less or none. There is no basis for the position Gibbons was ready to be taken. He was winning all his fights and coming of an impressive KO of Norfolk. Tunney was simply too good for him. Gibbons had "been taken" by Greb a year before he lost to Dempsey, so why wasn't he ready to be taken when he fought Dempsey?

"Dempsey beating Sharkey might be the more impressive legacy achievement."

It is true that champions have not often beaten an "heir" to their throne, but a myriad of contenders have beaten future champions. It is not at all unusual. If Dempsey beating Sharkey is such a great legacy achievement, what about Elmer Ray beating two future champions, Walcott and Charles. Johnny Risko beat two future champions also, Sharkey and Baer. Gains beat Schmeling and Carnera. Is Risko also beating a "prime" Sharkey a greater achievement than Tunney beating a "past it" Dempsey? What about Rex Layne beating Walcott a year before Walcott won the title?

Another problem with your viewpoint is that Dempsey did so much better against Sharkey. Houdini posted the scores which indicate Dempsey was ahead on points going into the 7th. It is very hard for me to believe after watching HD films at proper speed of the Tunney-Dempsey fights that Dempsey was ever in a points lead against Tunney. He was completely out-boxed. No matter how much one wants to argue Dempsey went back, he was still better than Sharkey. But not Tunney. So Tunney definitely deserves more legacy credit for beating Dempsey than Dempsey does for beating Sharkey.

One other thing. I adhere to the take of a former prominent NFL coach, Bill Parcells. He is quoted as saying "you are what your record is." And Dempsey's record is just not up to Tunney's.

And I don't cut anyone slack for laying off, or not training, or chasing skirts, or any other excuse. If you get in the ring and lose, you are what your record is. I don't penalize a fighter for being dedicated to his craft, nor reward a fighter for not showing such dedication.

 

Dempseys win over Sharkey is one of the great comeback wins in heavyweight boxing history. Sharkey here is in his prime and soon to be heavyweight champion. Dempsey knocked him out with a single blow in a bout where he was rocked and cut up prior to the KO.

I just posted radio broadcasts of old fights including Dempsey Tunney. The ringside commentator states at the beginning of round seven that both fighters are unmarked. Round six he calls the bout even. One point to consider potentially is that criteria used to score a fight in those days differs from today.

 

An even fight is not how I remember it. There is an excellent hd film. I will re-watch it tonight if it is still up on you tube.

"Sharkey here is in his prime"

And he wasn't as good as Dempsey, while Tunney was better. Seems a no brainer to me.

 

The point is that downplaying Dempseys performance here vs Sharkey is a mistake. Most predicted a Sharkey win prior to the fight. We had a young prime challenger against an old former champion at career end. Typically a match like this favors the prime fighter.

I’ve watched that film. In those days aggressiveness was given a priority when it came to scoring a fight. Different from today as one should expect. (thus the official scoring of Dempsey Sharkey). The point I am trying to make is Dempsey Tunney 2 was not the terribly one sided affair that it has been known as. Neither fighter was marked after six rounds. I believe in round eight the announcer states neither fighter was marked except welts on Tunneys body. Dempseys facial damage had to occur over the final two rounds.

 

I just watched Tunney-Dempsey 2 and here is my take. Really good and clear except for the second round and seems to be the proper speed.

Round one--Tunney--Dempsey starts cautiously. He doesn't land a punch and throws few. Tunney commands the middle of the ring, Dempsey circling. Tunney gets off first with several left-right combos and jabs.

Round two--Tunney--The camera is much further away in this round. Appears to be basically the same as the first. Tunney continues to get off first with right-left combos. What stands out is how effectively and easily Tunney ties up Dempsey in close, which Sharkey didn't, or couldn't, do.

Round three--Even--Harder round to judge as Dempsey gets his hand free in close to rabbit punch. Tunney continues scoring with left-right combos which Dempsey tries to duck. Dempsey is becoming more aggressive, moving forward rather than circling.

Round four--Tunney--Big round for Tunney. He turned very aggressive and had Dempsey backing up with overhand right after overhand right. He seemed to have Dempsey in trouble, and appeared to buckle his knees with a right late in the round.

Round five--Tunney--Tunney continues to dominate with left-rights. Dempsey does not seem to have a jab and carries his hands low. His only defense is ducking which is not working that well, and makes it impossible for him to counter.

Round six--Tunney--Dempsey throws caution to the wind and goes on an all out attack. He lands some heavy body punches, but Tunney keeps working him over with the right cross and also does some good body work of his own. Competitive, but I give the edge to Tunney.

Round seven--Dempsey--The big knockdown. What differs is that Tunney sticks out the jab but does not throw the right. Dempsey having to duck that right made it impossible to counterpunch. With only a jab he crosses his right and then explodes when he has Tunney on the ropes. It looked to me that Tunney was coming around at about two. Could he have gotten up. Possible. Whatever, when he did get up he was easily able to stay away and Dempsey did scant damage for the rest of the round. Two point round if scoring on points.

Round eight--Tunney--Dempsey throws some vicious left hooks but misses. Tunney continues to potshot Dempsey with jabs and right crosses. Now Tunney is also throwing more left hooks. Dempsey is bleeding about the right eye. Tunney scores a flash knockdown with a right cross.

Round nine--Tunney--Tunney works Dempsey over through the whole round with left hooks, jabs, and right crosses. Dempsey looks tired and doesn't land an effective punch. Dempsey is now bleeding from both eyes.

Round ten--Tunney--Dempsey misses by a mile the few times he throws punches. He seems out of gas. Tunney works him over relentlessly. By the end Dempsey is a bloody mess.

*I don't think Dempsey could have gone much further if the fight had been scheduled for fifteen rounds.

**I scored it 8-1-1 for Tunney, or 98-92 on points.

I don't accept that Dempsey was necessarily more aggressive. He forced the fight at times but at other times was circling, looking for an opening I guess. It was clear that Dempsey respected Tunney's right. Tunney was often forcing the fight.

I don't know what the guy on the radio said, but I think the film is the best evidence.

 

"downplaying Dempsey's performance here vs Sharkey is a mistake"

Not as big a mistake as downplaying Tunney's performance against Dempsey.

Many contenders and quite a few champions have beaten future champions. Dempsey beat Sharkey which makes him the better man. Tunney beat the better man.

 

The point is if you listen to the live broadcast of Dempsey Tunney 2 you walk away with the distinct impression of a competitive bout over the first seven rounds.

Dempsey koed the leading contender for the heavyweight title with one punch.

 

I posted the live radio broadcast. Listen to it.