I think people overstate the Dempsey Firpo fight

He said he was hurt, so I got to believe he was hurt. The issue isn't so much, how bad he was hurt, but more, who he was hurt by. Which is to say, sure Firpo had power, but that doesn't mean you should be able to land said power with such horrible technique and telegraphing. Which speaks to flaws in Dempsey that others might be able to expose if Firpo could. That sorta thing.

 

Why that was such a great fight was because of the aggressivenes both fighters showed, dempsey got knocked down at the opening bell and knocked out the ring, and firpo hit the canvas how many times? That's quality entertinment

 

Firpo was a contrived challenger, a con man promoter's dream (is that redundant?), a hint of the exotic, legendary (tho actual?) power, a spotless record (based almost exclusively on pushovers with losing records)... Dempsey, a truly great fighter, goes out and knocks him around and gets sloppy for a moment and ends up out of the ring (shove or punch?)... Then, Dempsey resumes his beating.

Who wins? A guy named Rickard.

 

Dempsey was there to be hit. Carpentier landed easily in round one and some say stung the Mauler in round two.

Sharkey and Tunney out boxed Dempsey. Firpo wasn't much of a boxer, like you said and he landed.

Dempsey when he wanted to could slip and duck, I think he was too focused on offense.

 

I think that he was definitely hurt, and it was a lapse on his part.

It kind of underlines the fact that Dempsey's style involved working to fine margins of safety.

Despite this interlude, the fight was otherwise a one sided domination.

Sometimes great fighters show their greatness in the fights where they screw up!

 

I would dispute your statement that Firpo was a contrived challenger.

He was carefully managed for sure, but by the time he was matched with Dempsey, it was pretty obvious that he was the real deal.

 

But it was exciting to watch ,what ever the ins and outs. Its part of the Dempsey story .Certainly more interesting than most of wlads
"" fight s "" .

 

The real deal... The real deal in what way, and which fights gave you this impression?

 

I'm not sure who you're referring to in regards to Louis, but I for one do consider the Louis knockdowns when I picture him against the best. It's something that has to be considered. Sometimes he was just too easily hit and predictable with his movement.

 

He was the only man ever to put Jess Willard for the count of ten.

Now you will obviously respond that Willard was past his best, but only a few months previously he had beaten Floyd Johnson, who was himself seen as being a potential challenger for Dempsey before Willard poleaxed him.

After this I submit that Firpo was a very legitimate challenger!

 

Of course I will respond with he was past his best, well, because he was well past his best by that point. It was his last fight for Christ's sake. If that doesn't speak to him being long in the tooth and done, then I'm not sure what does. But further, and more importantly, Willard simply wasn't that good to begin with. He had one epic performance where he went above and beyond against Johnson. He was clearly hyper motivated, but that level was never seen again, and he proceeded to go relatively inactive until getting destroyed by Dempsey. However, that doesn't change his spotty record previous to Johnson, and never really beating anybody of significance besides an old Johnson. Sure, that was the only time he was KO'd, but he was TKO'd by Joe Cox, the 2-3 Joe Cox at the time. So suffice to say, if Joe Cox can put him in danger, than many years later, when you're even older and more vulnerable, somebody else could turn the trick... turned out to be Firpo. So no, that win doesn't make him a legit contender at all.

 

If you have finished with the ant Willard rant, perhaps we can look at the facts of the matter?

It doesn't matter how little you personally think of Willard, or who beat him a decade earlier, or even how far he was past his best.

What matters is Willard's value as a win, in the heavyweight division, at the time that Firpo beat him.

Willard was a former lineal champion, coming off a win over an up and coming contender, and Firpo was the only person ever to put him down for the count.

By any reasonable measure, that would make Firpo a legitimate contender, for whoever was champion at the time!

 

See, this is my problem some of your arguments about certain issues, I believe you're being blatantly disingenuous on this topic. It doesn't matter if you happen to put in a good performance, while you are past your best, that doesn't change the reality of...... YOU'RE PAST YOUR BEST. We aren't discussing this in a vacuum of time in which the fight took place, and only look at why he might have been a possible contender. We don't have to be in that vacuum, we can be in there, and look at the overall context of what was going on. The second part you seem unable to do, and thus where the disingenuous comment comes from. We aren't talking about where Willard was hypothetical ranked in a ring magazine setting and thus why the Firpo win was thus so great. We have the advantage of knowing MUCH more facts. Like how Willard, frankly wasn't that good sans one fight. We know it was his last fight, in the vacuum we wouldn't know that. We know that Willard also became inactive before Dempsey and was starting to lose interest in the sport. Frankly, by his own admission he didn't have much interest anyways. We know that your chin gets worse the more and more it's cracked as you get older. The Dempsey beating surely made some fissures. We also know what Firpo when on to become and who he was before fighting an old Willard. We know all this, and yet you still want to act like it was a good win in this vacuum, and that I simply can't get behind. As Denny Green says "They are who we thought they were"