How did 190lb Jack Dempsey DESTROY super-heavyweight 240lb Jess Willard?

Am I saying enhancing power is universally accepted? I really don't understand what you mean. To my knowledge i don't ever recall using the description ".enhancing power" on this thread. As it happens I prefer "effective" right now.

My understanding is that power is generated at one end and the impact is at the other. At the impact end you have levels of effectiveness ranging from not very to extreme.

Enhancing power is not how I describe it. Power is generated into an impact. A maximum connection is timed.

The effectiveness of the blow can be determined by the level of cushioning at the connection end.

As I see it nothing is enhanced apart from cushioning.

 

willard is a very crude fighter. the class gap is huge between the two

 

Just been skimming these posts, but you're an unusually intelligent poster, and had to comment on this one. I've had a similar theory. I don't think Willard and Baer could have been as good as Lennox or the Klitschkos, there are simply more humans now and thus a larger pool of athletes. But I have wondered if modern training and tactics etc would have led them to much better success. Baer knocked Louis out of the ring with rudimentary tactics. I've wondered what would happen if he had been trained by Manny Stewart.

Someone mentioned 6'1 is a preferable height to 6'7, which is really absurd. The leverage, spacing, power, and other benefits height confers is really undeniable from a logical perspective. But that's something that the science of boxing has only been exploring more in the past few decades.

Anyway, the overarching point is all unprovable speculation. Its entirely possible and probably even likely that Joe Lewis would have beat any version of Buddy Baer, and Dempsey any version of Willard (although, I actually think Willard was a bit underrated and was well past it and semi retired when he fought Dempsey, a different result may have been possible had it been "prime v prime"). But I think its certainly a legitimate possibility worth seriously discussing that under modern circumstances Willard could have been remembered as the dominant champ of the era instead of Dempsey, and Baer over Louis.

Beware though, nothing will make the golden oldies howl than suggesting such heresy as that. In their eyes, there's no such thing as "coulda been a contender". All champs were preordained to be champs and inherently the greatest of their era, no matter what.

 

Well if Boilermaker is easier for you to understand so be it. Everything what he says amounts to exactly what I've been saying all along and for a lot longer.

I can only try to understand your confusion over my specific "more effective connection" being your "enhanced power".

Reduction of effective connection makes it even harder for a smaller fighter who is already disadvantaged against a huge foe who can still hurt him even with his reduced effective connection.

 

We will never know of course. So many factors go into creating a great fighter. Temperament etc. But yes I think it is acceptable to employ theories that suggest different sized people within a no weight limit division were more handicapped to succeed during one era compared to another. There is nothing wrong with thinking outside of the box.:good

 

I agree. This is how I see it. Once the bigger gloves came in the bigger fighters became increasingly more successful.