Does Dempsey have a chance against Tyson?

Both had good head/torso and foot movement.

 

People on this forum are like Barney Stinson from How I Met Your Mother "New is always better" smh

 

What about "bigger, faster, stronger, more powerful, and more skilled is better"?

 

Excellent post.

 

I voted "live underdog". Give Dempsey the "training and nutrition" that transformed Holyfield's physique and it might be 50-50.

 

No that's an entirely different scenario. The difference between 1919 and 1986 is much greater than 1966 and 2016. Obviously

 

You think Tyson Fury is faster and more skilled than Ali?
More powerful and Stronger than Foreman?

atschatschatschatsch

I think I've officially lost my mind.

 

Dempsey was a vicious brawler but I doubt he takes it. Live underdog if he can put on some weight. I think Jack Johnson would have a better chance, more skilled.

 

Tyson was a natural heavyweight Dempsey wasn't a even a heavyweight.

 

I said Tyson would beat any heavyweight from Dempseys era. I did not make a blanket statement that newer is always better. I'm strictly talking about Tyson vs pre 1930s heavyweights

 

Didn't say that Tyson didn't have skill or talent. Tyson had good coaching early in his career, not so much later on.

Are you talking the 1st of 2nd Flynn fight? Lots of evidence to support that a young, broke Dempsey took a dive in their first fight. Even his wife stated that he got paid more to lose than he would've got to win.

 

Dempsey fought in hobo and mining camps when he was younger to survive...
Tyson robbed and beat up old ladies in Brooklyn...Tyson was a bully...he backs down when prime Dempsey doesn't fold up the first time he gets hit...Dempsey by KO...

 

I think DQ. Tyson gets frustrated when he can't knock the guy out in the first half and that's what happened with Holyfield-Tyson II.