Jack Dempsey v Muhammad Ali

1. This is working under the assumption the injury isn't legit. I'm not saying it is or isn't because I'm unsure myself

Byrd fights very differently to Dempsey, he's a southpaw and his first punch is much quicker than Dempsey's. Dempsey's punches are easier to avoid and counter as Tunney proved. Vitali is very much stylistically a bigger slower Tunney. Dempsey has a problem getting past the jab

To Dempsey's credit the punch Vitali has most problems with is the left hook. Although Danny Williams, Sam Peter, Adamek, Arreola couldn't get that punch landing, only the much bigger Lennox Lewis could and to a lesser extent Chisora. Chisora is the most similar in style and Vitali coped with it despite being under pressure. Chisora is a much stronger man than Dempsey

2. Well Vitali has a jab, Dempsey doesn't. In terms of hit and not getting hit Vitali is much more successful against a higher calibre of opposition

 

1. He did get injured, just not as soon as he made out imo.

But jack punches quicker in the combinations and can double up the left hook.

Tunney could match jack for speed and movement, something vitali would fail to do.

Jack comfortably dismantles vitali on the inside.

2. Vitali's defence prowess is not evident at the top end of his resume. His 3 best opponents all managed to consistently tag him.

Vitali is horrible on the inside and he's slow on the outside. Because of his timing and workrate he can compensate against the majority of opponents but he doesn't fight to his strengths that well imo.

 

Indeed. Although it wasnt as though Foreman wasnt back inside the top ten (as compared to when he started his comeback). I'd consider it at least as valid as any of the ATG scalps Marciano put on his mantle. And a desperate far cry from something such as Holmes beating Ali.

 

I'd agree with that order, entirely. It got some wildly unexpected boost in retrospect considering Foreman pulled the impossible three years later. After that however, had little interest in fighting top contenders as champion.

Although I do find it humorous that Tyson wasnt exactly keen on putting Foreman on his record when the opportunity and hype was there. I mean, if thats what it was and all... Was Lotierzo telling the truth? :think

 

There are a quite a number of fighters who were never stopped in their primes.

 

People tend to frame a fighter's prime to however it suits their own agenda or beliefs. It oft times gets taken to a dark place where even undefeated champions are past-prime and the win's no good. It's also likely one of their personal favorites who suffered the anguish of defeat.

 

Foreman and Holyfield are two of my favorite fighters of all-time and both lost while undeniably in their primes: To Muhammad Ali and Riddick Bowe, respectively. On the flip, how many can claim to of beaten an undefeated 29-0 Joe Frazier in such dominant fashion or a 34-0 25-yr-old of Riddick Bowe's physical attributes, skills, ability and size advantage? Both of those wins are discredited for numerous reasons.

Did Holmes or Tyson beat fighters of equal caliber? Did Marciano?

 

That Lotierzo column:

 

...

 

Dempsey

 

So, Tommy Morrison could do handily that which Mike Tyson could only dream of.

Got it.

 

And speed is a non-factor here, being that Tyson was a featherfist and all. :rofl

George would've been severely outlanded in each exchange. I've always figured Tyson stoppage before the mid-rounds.

And by all means, he shouldve done it.

This content is protected