When I review the heavyweight champions none stand out as under achiever more than Jack Dempsey ... I feel he had the skill set to be far more than he was in the ring ... he regressed as champ when he could have graduated ... more to come but thoughts welcome ...
We all know why. Doc Brown (not the rapper) went back in time and told him to chill, because he was getting into Bert Sugar's top ten p4p list no matter what he did. Jack didn't have any reason to bother after that. His dreams had been realized to the fullest.
Most likely Dempsey's own choice for this thread. Jack was convinced if Maxie had his head screwed on straight that he coulda licked a thousand Bombers.
My 4 picks are the 4 who could have gone down as the greatest in the divisions history had they fought their peers: Johnson (championship defences against langford, jeannette, mcvey and smith) Dempsey (victories over langford, wills and mcvey) Holmes (unification matches against any of the early wba champs combined with a defence against page to ensure he keeps all 3 belts as well as defences against thomas and berbick at the end of his reign) Bowe (defending against lewis, fights against moorer, lewis, tyson, holmes, foreman, golota and then retiring in 99)
Prety much on the money. If Dempsey had been a more active champion, he could have built a resume which would stand scrutiny alongside the best today.
I don't think he would have gotten a lot of mileage out of beating an aging Wills and outsized and outpowered Greb during the early 1920s, and there wasn't otherwise much of a contender class in the HW division at the time. Yes, the two Harrys should have gotten title shots, but even if Jack had knocked them out impressively, I'm convinced those wins would have been derided for the aforementioned reasons. No, I don't see any way his resume as a champion could have stacked up to Marciano's, Ali's, or that of Louis, no matter who he fought or how often he defended the title.