Ike Ibeabuchi vs Jack Dempsey

It's two fights: Tua and Byrd.

Tua proved Ike could take a punch and fight at a high pace for twelve rounds, Byrd proved Ike could get the knockout against a fast, elusive opponent.

Those two things are enough.

 

Let's be clear a moment: Are you suggesting that Dempsey knocks out Ibeabuchi where Tua couldn't?

 

Not necessarily no. Maybe Dempsey could, maybe he dosnt. It dosnt really matter. It’s about being proven as that level of fighter. Dempsey was and Ike was not.

Maybe there was nothing more to come from Ike? We can’t use what never happened. What he showed was not enough.

since we are talking about the best handfull of fighters in the whole history of boxing Ike wasn’t in that league. So Tua and Bryd are not enough. Not by a long chalk.

Neither one of them represented the elite at that time or displayed future dominance. To put Ike into that echelon is a total shot in the dark. It’s going out on a limb.

But I know you disagree on this. Perhaps we shall have to agree to disagree.

 

John Ruiz was completely unconscious for several minutes after less than twenty seconds in the ring with Tua. Ruiz had a great chin.

Did he actually break shoulders and dislocate hips? That'd be impressive.

Sharkey clearly felt the blows, but he's just one man fighting against other men of his era. His input has no relation to how hard men like Tua or Ibeabuchi hit.

Neither was Dempsey. Neither was any fighter who stepped through the ropes.

Tua has several knockouts over world ranked fighters that verge on the superhuman though.

You could come away thinking that. Or you could come away believing that both men had world class chins, and facial toughness. Tua proved as much in numerous subsequent fights, as well as one of the most brutal left hooks ever seen in the HW division.

Tua was absolutely a top rank puncher in terms of power. Up there with anyone in history. And he proved to have one of the all time great chins as well. Getting knocked out when he was a seventeen year old kid, and knocked down at the tail end of his career shouldn't count against him unless you want to literally prove that Tua could never at any stage of his life be physically hurt, but that's a pretty pointless statement to want to make.

I don't claim that either man could walk through anyone's punches without getting hurt, but I will make the claim that they could walk through Dempsey's punches for twelve rounds, considering they already did so against each other.

 

Dempsey being proven against men of his own time does not automatically translate to that same level of success in a subsequent era. And Dempsey avoided several tough challengers during his tenure as champion, so I'm not even sure you can make that claim.

Once more I ask: what does that matter? Are we discussing Ike's potential career, or his chances in a one off fight?

You're getting into that murky territory of "greatness" that I talked about earlier. Let's keep things focused on the tangible and observable shall we?

Tua, Byrd and Ike didn't need to prove themselves the best of their respective era to have a chance against fighters from an earlier era. They just needed to display the right types of attributes that would match up well with what we've seen on film.

Whether or not any of them were elite (and Byrd at any rate certainly proved to be) is neither here nor there.

 

Very good points.

 

Willard wasn't completely unconcious and fought for 2 more rounds without being knocked down. The guy was a trooper.

I'm sure he did somewhere down the line.

Sharkey's testimony has nothing to do with Tua or Ibeabuchi. For the most part how hard Tua, Ibeabuchi, and Dempsey hit is irrelevant because they all could spark anyone if they landed clean.

That's exactly the point I'm making. Thanks for agreeing with me.

No he doesn't. Stop making a god out of Tua.

You could believe that. But that doesn't make it any less far fetched. My conclusion on the other hand is the much more plausible explanation.

Nobody is denying this. What is being denied is this imaginary spectre called David Tua that was indestructible.

Miscellaneous falsehood mean't to mislead. Tua wasn't 17. He wasn't inexperienced either. He was good enough to fight in the World Championships.

Then why are you replying to my post? It was addressed to people who hold those beliefs.

I'll tell you why you replied. You know that you think off Tua as this nearly unbeatable tank who was immune to pain, couldn't be knocked out, and beats anyone he fights with the first punch.The only guys you think would beat him are the ones that actually did.

Then you're a moron. There isn't a single fighter in history that could just walk through any top heavyweight punchers punches for 12 rounds. Again, my post wasn't even directed at you it was clearly directed at fanboys who have unrealistic ideas of Tua's STRENGTHS and weaknesses.

 

Do you call that an exceptional chin?

This content is protected

Dempsey EASILIY hurt by Sharkey. Is Sharkey in the league of Tua and Ibeabuchi?

 

No Tua and Ike are in a lower league than Sharkey because at least Sharkey was once regarded the best in the world. He had more going for him than two impressive wins at prospect level too.

 

Ooooookay!
Roberto Duran was once regarded the best in the world too. Does he have an edge over Ibeabuchi?
What about GGG?

What about my post? You didn´t understand anything, simpleton? Ignoring it the second time now.
Still believe the little gazelles of yesterday put their boxing giants into place, that we´ve never seen them

 

The Byrd win is very impressive, but it was still a meeting between two fighters who were not quite the finished article, as was the Tua fight.

That I would definitely dispute.

Tua built his reputation by destroying B grade opposition.

When he came up against somebody ranked in the top ten, he seemed to fall short with mechanical certainty.

I have no doubt that he was a tremendous hitter, but I do not think that he was the wrecking machine that his advocates make him out to be.

I am really not convinced.

Tua failed to stop heavyweights who were not particularly big, heavyweights who were not particularly durable, and heavyweights who were not particularly good defensively.

You did not have to be a particular type of fighter to beat him, you just seemed to have to be a good one!

 

Then when they both hit legitimately world class opposition, Ruiz became champion, while Tua came up short!

I am a little bit surprised that Tua was not more successful than he was, but I have to deal with what I see.

 

I am surprised that this is even debated!

 

Precisely. Ike was a only a “good one”. How can that be enough to be a certainty over a “great one”?

 

Your post? Yes I wholeheartedly understood it thank you. However, I found There was nothing more to add other than what Sting like a bean wrote:

As bean says let’s hear you contribute some substance on the matter rather than waste electricity. but thanks for calling me a simpleton all the same. Such a touch of class that was.

big men with skill, Yada yada yada... has it ever occurred to you to notice big men with skill turned up when lots of big men learned to fight other big men? Big guys tend to look more skilful against other big men. Chasing little guys around a ring tends to make even the most gifted look oafish. I am sure even Ezzard Charles would look oafish against Willie pep. And this is without raising the PED influence on thin armed long necked farm boys who always used to be unsuitable for boxing.