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

The ref was in Dempsey pocket! He was not in the lead prior the foul / KO

• Broadcaster Graham McNamee told radio listeners that Dempsey was "groggy" and appeared to be "going" after a Sharkey barrage in the first, the third, and again in the sixth.
• James Dawson of the New York Times reported that Sharkey had "badly outboxed Dempsey," leaving the former champion to "flounder around the ring, flat-footed, bewildered, and staggering like a blind man finding his way."
• Harvey Woodruff of the Chicago Tribune considered Dempsey "finished" in the fourth and a "gory sight."
• Dempsey landed a series of low blows in round seven. Sharkey turned to the referee to protest, and Dempsey knocked him out with a left hook to the chin. "I hit him with one of the last good punches of my life,"

 

As always you cherry pick information in an effort to be “right”. This is typical from you best exemplified by your ridiculous opinion of Johnson vs Flynn.

I posted the actual scoring. Two out of the three officials had Dempsey in the lead by one round after round six.

 

Did you see the full fight? Post your card here. I know the ref allowed Dempsey to get away with low blows. I don't think Dempsey was in the lead prior to the KO on a fair score card.

Sharkey dominated the early rounds. “I thought he was going to knock me out,” Dempsey admitted afterward.

Yes listen the the radio broadcast cast if you must! Broadcaster Graham McNamee told radio listeners that Dempsey was "groggy" and appeared to be "going" after a Sharkey barrage in the first, the third, and again in the sixth. He was in the lead you say after 6 rounds?

Terrible scoring by you. Again did you see the full fight?

Check your flame of pure fire book at the door please. I didn't cherry pick anything.

 

All you do is cherry pick! Are you joking?

Please post the full audio of the original Dempsey Sharkey Broadcast.

Again I posed the actual official scoring after six rounds. Dempsey was in the lead by one round. Aggressiveness was highly favored in those days and Dempsey was the aggressor throughout.

The referee stated the the blows directly preceding the ko blow were not low.

The fight doctor examined Sharkey and found no evidence of any low blows.

The film of the bout was shown at Yankee stadium the day after the fight, the result? “FILMS OF FIGHT SHOW BODY BLOWS WERE LEGAL”

Dempsey stated that in his experience blows to the groin result in the immediate collapse of the fighter receiving them. In the case of this bout it took a ko blow to the chin to deck Sharkey.

 

Here is my original post. This is the actual official scoring by the three officials assigned to the bout:

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

 

You didn't answer my question " Houdni " Did you see the full fight? Or are you just cherry picking the scores to suit your agenda? Don't disappear on the points made, newspapers quotes, or Dempsey words. You did not see the full fight or score it round by round?

A low blow in boxing is a punch that lands below the belt line of your opponent, and does not necessity do damage if it lands high enough or on the hip or leg or the lower abdomen.

Our resident expert on the 1920's Klompton said this

" Dempsey may have won one round in this fight, fouled Sharkey throughout, and Sharkey hitting Dempsey after the bell was in answer to Dempsey hitting him after the bell first. Dempsey landed not one but numerous low blows before Sharkey appealed to the ref. Ill give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the copy you were watching was so god awful you have no idea what you were looking at. - Klopmton
[url]klompton2[/url], [url]Jan 29, 2021[/url] "


And another poster says

"How can you say Dempsey didn't look like he punched after the bell intentionally? He was already walking to his corner when he threw his punch. Sharkey only returned the compliment in kind to show Dempsey he wasn't taking any of his krap.

If you can't see Sharkey grabbing his balls when he's down then you are definitely blind. That fact also shows clearly that it was the punch to the balls which incapacitated him and not the left hook to the head. If he had been kayoed by the head punch, he wouldn't have been writhing on the canvas holding his nuts. He wouldn't have had the presence of mind. To me, Dempsey looked like he was punching as hard as he could from in close. And anyway, how hard does a punch to the balls have to be to leave a person in agony? I don't know about you, but a direct shot doesn't take that much force to cause me exquisite pain. The precursor of the modern-day groin protector, the Taylor No-Foul Protector would not be introduced until after the first Sharkey-Schmeling fight in 1930. "

 

I’ve watch the fight countless times.

Aggressiveness was scored highly in those days so scoring via modern eyes is a fools game.

The referee stated both fighters were fouling all during the fight but nothing that was deliberate.

The referee stated that the three body blows preceding the ko blow were not low.

The fight doctor examined Sharkeys groin after the bout and found no evidence of a low blow being struck.

The official scoring showed two of the three judges had Dempsey in the lead by one round.

The film of the fight was shown the day after at Yankee Stadium. The headline:

“Film of fight shows body blows were legal”

 

In actuality Sharkey is NOT grabbing for his balls. The Pathe version was taken at a different angle. Sharkey is just struggling to rise. He is not grabbing for anything.

 

Dempsey went low, and you being dishonest if you think otherwise. You are also being dishonest you seen the full film and think Dempsey was in the lead.

Controversy and editing of Dempsey films exist today ( gee I wonder why) and he had a fake fight with Jack Johnson.

Be sure to read the full thread before you go!
[url]https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/jack-dempsey-vs-jack-sharkey.662405[/url]

 

You do realize that you are mentally ill correct?

I posted the official scoring of the Dempsey Sharkey bout. This is as a service to those what are interested in learning something concerning boxing history.

What was posted is not my opinion as to who was leading. As stated no modern opinion would be relevant as the fight occurred nearly 100 years ago. Different times and different scoring criteria.

The referee stated although both men were going low during the bout none were intentional nor did they do damage. The referee stated that the blow preceding the ko blow was not low.

The doctor assigned to the fight examined Sharkeys groin after the bout. No sign of that any low blows were struck.

I strongly suggest that you strive to determine historic truth rather than search desperately for cherry picked items to push your point of view.

Your ongoing rant concerning Johnson Flynn is only one example. You cite 2-3 articles to bolster your claim and ignore the dozen or more that show that the bout was extremely one sided.

 

Indianapolis Times July 27, 1927

Referee O’Sullivan:

“The blow that preceded the ko punch, a left to the jaw, was a fairly delivered one. It was a right uppercut that landed on the waistline but not below. It is true that Dempsey landed several times below the waistline in previous rounds but in no case were the punches injurious or deliberate nor was there any protest made by Sharkey prior to the final round”.

 

I scored it 68-65 through seven. I would consider it competitive, especially in the sixth and obviously the seventh when Dempsey made his big effort. So coming out of the seventh the fight was still sort of up in the air, but then Tunney dominated the last three rounds. Giving either the third (which I scored even) or the sixth (competitive, but I thought Tunney had the edge) to Dempsey would make it closer.

My score in points would be 98 to 92. I did not give Tunney two points for the 8th despite the flash knockdown.

Frankly, why should I listen to a radio broadcast when there is a good and complete film?

Dempsey had explosive KO power, but I was not impressed with his defense. He carried his hands low. He didn't block punches nor slip punches. His defense was ducking or retreating, neither of which allowed him to counter a fighter who was getting off first like Tunney was. Also Dempsey hardly ever jabbed even though his physique on the face of it would have given him a fair shot of holding his own in a jabbing contest with Tunney. His style seemed geared to going against the big and slow guys of the white hope era. It did not translate well to a more modern and classic boxer.

 

Scoring criteria was different 100 years ago. How we score a near 100 year old fight with modern eyes is irrelevant.

Dempsey had a great defense. Far better than Marciano and Frazier whom he is often compared. Dempseys speed of both hand and foot is most always overlooked due to the lack of modern film quality.

Carrying hands low does not mean a fighter is easier to hit. That’s todays mindset being projected upon an era where true boxing skill was emphasized. N

 

"Dempsey stated that in his experience blows to the groin result in the immediate collapse of the fighter receiving them."

I guess he would know. And interesting admission. But Fritzie Zivic, another expert on dirty fighting, wrote once that a low blow should always be followed by a clean one to the chin to confuse the issue. This wouldn't be possible if the collapse is instantaneous. My guess is it depends, like some falling immediately when shot and some taking a few steps before going down.