Floyd - Paq proves something about Dempsey ..

I don't think anyone is disputing that Dempsey's an ATG fighter, the author of that ****ysis was merely saying that after watching 7 of his fights on film he felt his ability to cut of the ring wasn't overly great, and that's why he had so much problems with Tunney and other movers. It's certainly a plausible argument and it can be made without diminishing Dempsey's accomplishments, or his status. It's not like it changes the outcome of any one fight, it merely explains why these losses or tough victories may have occurred.

 

The article states one falsehood after another. I wrote several critiques concerning this article. Worst piece of revisionism I have read in a while.

 

I'd like to read them, where are they, they aren't on this thread unless you're referring to post #26.

 

They are within the comment section of the article.

 

V, if Dempsey according to the author you quote had trouble
"cutting off the ring" because the "author" watched SEVEN of his fights prior to the Willard bouts in which the author saw only Tommy Gibbons and the 2 Tunney bouts after his 3 year layoff,
GOING the full distance, that means that whoever else Dempsey fought and ultimately kod SHOWED that Dempsey Did Close the Distance in the majority of his bouts which ended with ko's including 25 1st round knockouts...So with the author's reasoning, Joe Louis had trouble with "movers" such as Bob Pastor and Tommy Farr who somehow avoided being ko'd
by moving away from trouble also...? Dempsey did not and could not ko every man he fought in his prime 1918-23, but his ko average those days compared to any heavyweight with
50 knockouts in his 60 wins. Not a bad ratio I submit...
Somehow I would imagine Dempsey must have had the ability to
"close the gap"...So to speak...

 

I meant the "author saw SEVEN of Dempsey's bouts AFTER the Willard bout...

 

I felt Pacquaio turned in his warrior card after taking a few of those counter right hands.

There comes a time when a swarmer's fire just isn't the same and they just are not willing to " Take 2 to land one ".

If a swarmer losses his legs, or stamina, he's in trouble as his style demands both.

Yes that is true. But none of those guys lost their power. For some reason, Manny did as he hasn't KO'd anyone in years.

 

I think the point the author was making what that Dempsey, like Frazier and Marciano was an aggressive attack type of fighter, which meant if a boxer either came to him, or never moved much, it was game over, but if a boxer, boxed and moved then that posed more problems for him. Of the 25 KO'd he had in the first round, I don't know how many were movers so I'm at a disadvantage in terms of commenting on his ****ysis.

 

Yes, but perhaps that's the next thing to go as you get older. Regardless, good point.

 

Comparing Dempsey to Frazier and Marciano is a huge mistake many make. There is a definite similarity between Frazier and Rocky. Dempsey was very different. His short very quick punching with both hands is more reminiscent of Louis than Marciano or Frazier. As per Tunney... Dempsey was a composite of puncher and boxer. Close observation will tell you Tunney was 100% correct.

 

I don't see Dempsey comparable to joe Louis. At all.

 

Van, respectfully, when we compare Dempsey, Marciano and Frazier in styles they were for the main part similar and yet different...Dempsey was an offensive hitting fighter who didn't expend half of the energy that a Joe frazier did. Dempsey was more patient for the most part, and hit equally hard with both hands..If for example he couldn't connect on a vital part of
a defensive whiz Tommy Gibbons's jaw Dempsey was still able to
adjust his attack and decision Gibbons by a good margin in 15 rounds...Gibbons said after the bout every part of his body hurt
and supposedly spent the next day in bed..Jack Sharkey also opined "wherever Dempsey hit you he broke bones"..
Rocky Marciano was more like Frazier than Dempsey who had an unlimited amount of energy combined with stamina, who threw rocks at his opponent nonstop whether he connected or missed
and hurt his opponent wherever he landed, and as Ruby Goldstein who refereed Marciano's fight with Ezzard Charles, told me at a boxing seminar in New England, every time Marciano hit Charles on his biceps, purple marks appeared on Charles's arms.
Marciano broke blood vessels, so strong and relentless was he...
Three great heavyweights on the attack and yet different in a way...

 

I'm glad someone else shares my view. I watched the fight a couple of days back and couldn't believe how one sided the commentators made it sound!

The only guy trying to fight was Pacquiao but he just can't do it as well as he used to. Even then, Mayweather had to run, hold and stall at every opportunity to win.

 

This I know, but thanks for the clarification in any event. It was in the context of them being swarmer type fighters that I equated them, not in their exact fighting style. I agree of the three I think Dempsey had the best offense. The author's point about Gibbons was that he felt that Dempsey should have been able to cut the ring off and ended the fight, and rightly or wrongly, he attributes this to Dempsey's poor ability to cut off the ring.

Nobody is arguing that Dempsey didn't have two handed power, he had it in spades.

 

yep