Is Dempsey the No.1 h2h Heavyweight

Absolutely.

 

Best post I've ever read on this forum

 

I am going to go on record as saying, that I find most of the big men somewhat underwhelming in this argument.

Lewis has the best argument of the group, but he is the only top ten heavyweight to be taken out by a single punch.

I am also going to go on record as saying, that I don't know who the head to had GOAT is, but that it is almost certainly not Lennox Lewis!

 

The obvious counter argument to that, would be that the problematic fighters for the best cruiserweights, tend to be two or three men at heavyweight. For example take away the Klitschko brothers, and the cruisers would have done just fine in a combined division!

His only weird loss, to a clearly inferior fighter, was against a former light heavyweight.

They seem to give him as much trouble as most of the big boys, at every stage of his career!

Take away Lewis and Bowe, and the smaller guys more than held their own!

I doubt both of your positions quite frankly.

Louis clearly struggled a lot more, with smaller guys who could match his speed, than the giants of the division.

The smaller guys probably took a lot more out of him as well.

I really don't see Louis losing to guys like Purity, Sanders, or Brewster.

Unless they have a baseball bat!

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Of course !

 

" hey man, its jack dempsey man "
Oddball from kelleys heores
Or maybe jack sharkey

 

The point that I am making, is that perhaps a small number of those arguments, stack up a little bit better than the others.

Please note that I will never vote yes for anybody.

I assumed, with the benefit of hindsight of course, that he was sliding into oblivion.

He lost to a former middleweight, and a future light heavyweight in the same timeframe, so I doubt that the size of Ruiz and Donald was the key factor!

Carnera was ranked.

I think that Baer Jr, and Abe Simon were ranked both times.

Correct me if I am wrong on the last point.

These men were not as good as Lewis et al, but they were not exactly stumblebums either!

If big heavyweights were problematic for Louis, shouldn't they have done at least as well as his smaller opponents?

 

No. He wasn't even a natural cruiserweight by today's standards.

Plus his punch technique frequently sucked.

 

It probably is a focused committed Lewis. He is a monster of head-to-head competition.

 

Not in my opinion but a man who can punch like that could theoretically upset anyone

 

Let us examine this point.

Is the idea that fighting bigger men, will result in more attrition, and more losses, supported by evidence?

Take Manny Pacquiao for example, or any number of other fighters who stepped up.

The argument might bear more fruit, if the bigger men that Louis fought, were taking something out of him.

Were they hitting him a lot, or tiering him out in the clinches?

No.

It is perhaps questionable how Louis would do against Lewis, but I am fairly confident about how he would do against men on the level of Rahman, and the rest of that era!