How much credit should Dempsey get for his controversial victory over Jack Sharkey?

S, who on ESB, myself included DIDN'T think that Sharkey was not ahead leading to the 7th rd ko ? No one. But I and others could detect Sharkey who was a notorious in and out fighter was weakening from the body blows of a 32 year old rusty edition of the prime swift Jack Dempsey of yore. Indeed after the bout Sharkey said "that everywhere on the body Dempsey hit you he broke bones". Dempsey was a very powerful man from the waist up. For example... Whenever he stopped an opponent Dempsey had a habit of putting his arms under his fallen opponent's
armpits and lifting them up off the floor and on their groggy feet...Not an easy thing to do for a 187 pound man with gloves on...In any record book it shows the final result of a contest, NOT who was leading by points up to the knockout...As with a Joe Louis , who was behind Billy Conn until Billy got fresh in the fatal thirteenth rd. Why is not Dempsey treated as well ?

 

I found the Chicago Tribune coverage on July 22, 1927,

and Dempsey had this to say about the final punches.

"I did not foul him. I hit hard rights on the belt line and when his guard dropped brought over a heavy left to the jaw which finished the job."

Clearly Dempsey is admitting "belt line" punches and does not consider them fouls.
------------------------------------------------------
Referee Jock O'Sullivan was quoted,

"The punch Sharkey claimed was low, was not low as I viewed it. I naturally overruled Sharkey's protest and ordered the men to go on with the fight. Dempsey then landed the left to Sharkey's chin."
---------------------------------------------------------

It is mentioned that William Walker of the New York State Athletic Commission examined Sharkey, and Walker's examination

"gave no evidence a foul had been committed."
----------------------------------------------------------

Tribune sportswriter Harvey Woodruff was at ringside and wrote of the key moment

"Then Dempsey . . . drew back his right and catapulted it into the pit of Sharkey's stomach. Down came Sharkey's guard."
------------------------------------------------------------

I have been critical of Dempsey for not fighting Wills and posted often on that, and I think it drops his historical rating,

but the Sharkey fight was a fair KO and Dempsey deserves full credit.

 

Another point that needs to be made is.....having the heart and determination to come from behind against top opposition to win is something boxing historians look for in fighters they call All time great.

 

All punchers can be out boxed especially by another all time great in Tunney.

There is no doubt that Dempsey was an all time great fighter as there is no doubt about Louis, Ali, Holmes, Marciano etc. this is only debated among recent generations so far removed from the Dempsey era. One day a generation will be toying with the idea that Ali was not an ATG. Fighters such as all these men come along rarely. Skills and physical and mental attributes that far exceed the ordinary.

 

This is interesting, because when Schmeling was examined after his first fight with Sharkey, his testicles were said to be "swollen like a g****fruit".

This lends weight to the idea that the blows did not go low.

 

Very true. The Schmeling low blow vs Sharkey was indeed low. That was a definite punch to the b....s.

 

Cards on the table. Dempsey is my favourite fighter.
BUT, bottom line, Sharkey had his back to the camera, no one viewing this fight can be positive that Dempsey fouled him,and the one man who was not an interested party ie Dempsey or Sharkey but had the only other first class view of the punches was the referee and he said he did not think the punches were fouls.I'm going to take his word because that appears the most reasonable course to take
.Dempsey said he knew Sharkey's weakness was body punches and his corner told him to keep pounding his body.
If a punch strayed low Sharkey was entitled to protest what he was not entitled to do was turn his attention away from his opponent, focus on the referee and expect Dempsey to hold his fire while he did so.

Sharkey surely was familiar with this , he was involved in enough foul controversies ,both before this fight and after..

PROTECT YOURSELF AT ALL TIMES

 

I don't disagree that he should've been protecting himself at all times. Agree totally. My problem is with people labeling this a great KO... what pinpoint accuracy... the timing and power were amazing. If somebody isn't looking, none of the adjectives are true. That is my issue with some of the comments in the thread

 

Excellent Mc.:good

 

K, you can label the left hook ko punch however you wish, but the shortness of that left hook was truly devastating...Just like that lefthook Dempsey exploded on the 6ft 6" Willard that Dempsey had to shoot upwards to reach his target and floor big Jess for the first time in his life...Just think of the torque and power required to reach over your head to reach Willard's jaw
and create so much power ? And what about that one-two combo Dempsey exploded on the brawny Firpo, delivered so short and fast, we can hardly see it in slow motion....Ending the fight.
What irks me is SOME posters reluctance to admit today mainly on ESB, what the contemporaries of Dempsey witnessed and were in awe of, that he was as great and violent a puncher that the heavyweights ever produced along with my man Joe Louis and a very early version of Mike Tyson, but with more mental toughness...

 

Just a correction. The first two body blows can be clearly seen and are not low. Only the third Dempseys back is to the camera. However he does not dip his shoulder to indicate a lower blow was thrown. Looks like three consecutive punches to the same spot.

 

That's is another issue and everyone must make their own minds up on it.

 

That left hook is one of the most perfectly thrown blows in hwt history. Watch and learn.