Jack Dempsey Vs. A black 120 pound Crack head who never boxed

This thread is racist.

 

Tyson tried to copy Jack Dempsey and was probably the closest thing to Dempsey...but Dempsey proved he could get off the floor to win Tyson did not...Dempsey was the Heavyweight man of Steel before Zale

 

TRUE, BUT do you really favor this skrawny man -

This content is protected

VS this 'Roided-Animal??

This content is protected

 

^^He wasn't scrawny ya' hater, he was quite muscular.
not sure about that, but Dempsey on 'roids would make Tyson look like a school girl.

Also i'll take the vintage 190lbs Dempsey over that obese, slow-ass, hamburger muncher in your av. any day.:bbb:hey

 

****...me...solid.

Talk about taking things completely out of context. He admired his aggression, and wanted to fight in an aggressive style, watching Dempsey inspired this. But in no way, shape or form did he try to emulate his crude style, poor, dated technique. Tyson was far superior skillwise and also physically

 

Dempsey had the bigger balls and Tyson fought a lot of unskilled guys..I think when it comes down to intangibles...Dempsey was the meaner of the 2

 

Dempsey would destroy Tyson.

 

No, you are not. They're top draw and the best form of analysis I've ever seen.

 

His guard is low because in those days, guys would typically protect the body a lot more and rely more on slipping punches to the head. Which Dempsey did brilliantly. We're talking 80 odd years ago and his bobbing and weaving is still pro.

 

Dempsey's technique was superb. So many subtle skills and feints, and he was fast, agile and powerful.

Too many people here think they are experts but they expose themselves as fools.

CLUE : If Dempsey looks like a wild primitive bar room brawler to you, maybe it's because you're an ignorant simpleton with only a rudimentary grasp of boxing.

I laugh at some of these guys who think an obvious peek-a-boo "high guard" is some hallmark of superior technique.
Philistines.

 

i see your point (a tad harsh!) but measuring technique is a very tough thing and is not a science. there are very few fighters that have nearly flawless technique in an objective sense (finito lopez, srr, harold johnson) and for the rest, there are flaws of varying degrees. for fighters of dempseys era, whose styles were SO different from the modern era it's hard to distinguish what is a result of the era they fought and what is poor technique

 

Dempsey with a "modern" peek-a-boo guard could never have done the damage he did to Tunney's hands. Gene wouldn't possibly have lasted 15 with the battering Dempsey put on his fists, it was his great luck that both fights were only 10 rds. But his hands would not have lasted even that long against a prime Dempsey's face. Hell, it busted Carpentier's thumb already in the first or second round.

 

I don't even seen much difference in styles.

Every fighter has a unique style. Generally though there's the same variety of styles.

Dempsey is a bit like Nigel Benn or something.

And I don't even know what's with the "modern fighters have high guard" stuff anyway. Some do. Some don't. Some switch from high to low, as good pros are supposed to.
Vitali Klitschko probably has the lowest hands I've ever seen, even when his opponent has proven capable of landing on his head. David Haye has low left most of the time. James Toney and Floyd Mayweather are known to use the left shoulder as a guard, as many of the old-timers preffered.
Etc. etc.