Jack Dempsey vs Jersey Joe Walcott Prime for Prime

Walcott widish decision, good fast technical boxers were Dempsey's foil. Not only Tunney but Prime Miske beat him according to some sources as did Meehan. Breenan who isn't in the class of these men also gave Dempsey problems

Walcott imo is bigger, harder hitting and better than Tunney. Dempsey ofcourse has a punchers chance here

 

Jack Dempsey would knock out Jersey Joe.

 

Walcott would need to be careful in the early going,and counter effectively,then step up the gear later on. I can see Joe winning this.

 

I have no clue .... Walcott fought a much more diversified group of fighters ... I never saw Dempsey fight one great boxer who could hit like Joe .. call me crazy but I see Walcott as a very live under dog ...

 

Even 1952 old Walcott whups Prime Dempsey who was dominated by a lardass ex-flyweight in 1918. Wally by wide decision or late tko. Film shows Walcott had GREAT skills at boxing And brawling, Caveman Dempsey was a crude sloppy slugger.

 

Joe Louis was at the end of his career and would not have another meaningful victory after Joe Walcott. Joe Louis in his prime would have without question knocked out Jersey Joe.

Marciano, while one of my favorite fighters, is not Jack Dempsey. Using those two to gauge who would win is not going to make a solid argument.

Jack Dempsey was regarded as the greatest heavyweight by all who watched him, and this held true into the 80's, while those who watched him fight live were still living. Jack Dempsey was rated in the 50's and 60's by sportswriters as the greatest heavyweight ever, with 10 times the votes of Joe Louis, who was second in voting as the greatest heavy ever.

Jack Dempsey, to me, would have little trouble with Walcott. Dempsey had far better footwork than Marciano, he was harder to hit, and he hit a lot harder and threw way more punches.

Dempsey was devastating in every aspect of the game, truly an ATG and very underrated by many, especially on internet forums from what I have noticed.

 

It is I who am chuckling at a person making an argument for Joe Louis being "blazing fast, great and dangerous" in 1947.

Thanks for the quality entertainment. I suggest you educate yourself on the state of boxing at the time that Dempsey was fighting so that you can better understand that Dempsey did not fight Harry Wills (I'm assuming you mean him when you say he didn't fight "The best of his era") because of bogus racist business politics and nothing else.

If you read up on Dempsey and learn your history you will also have a better understanding of everything you have said in your last paragraph. Looks like you did a quick boxrec check on Jack Dempsey and nothing more - you're not in your element here, you really don't know enough about Jack Dempsey to make the claims you have made and that is clear from what you have written.

 

Carlos is a good guy, but he has no answer for any of this.

 

This is untrue and we've been over it plenty of times my friend. And a word to the wise....you be doing yourself a favor by learning who knows what over hear before making accusations of peoples knowledge. Quarry (sonnyboy) has gotten chewed up and spit out over here because his lies and misinformation do not fly over here. This is a VERY educated section so watch your steps.

 

This is a great match-up...Dempsey to me is a force, he was Tyson 70 years before Tyson was born but Dempsey was meaner and tougher.

Jack got off the floor to win and relished at hitting Willard just as he was about to rise and the killer left hook to the stomach and chin of Sharkey.

Now Walcott fought the best punchers of the heavyweight division and put Louis on the floor 3 times in 2 fights and had Marciano on the floor with a pin-point left hook.

Walcott also managed to KO a very capable and tough Ezz Charles with one of his sneaky trick moves and perfectly timed hook-uppercut.

Joe could drop you with either hand and had great footwork.

Dempsey could hurt you with a tap and had good speed.

This could go either-way...

JJW is a very live underdog and slickster...JD always a force to be reckoned with. pick-em

 

JAB he is making a case against Dempsey and using old washed up Joe Louis as foundation to stand on - not the best way to make a case. I would like to know which part is untrue. You claim that Dempsey ducked Greb and Wills, when Wills was a black fighter fighting in the wrong era.

And Harry Greb? Jack Dempsey would have no reason to duck Harry Greb. Greb was a sparring partner for Dempsey.

JAB you say I have no answer, but what he has stated is all the typical things a person who has no real knowledge of Dempsey says - "Lost to a journeyman in one round." Is there no controversy? Everybody involved at the time says it was a fix, including the man who set it up, who was later busted for fixing fights, and Dempsey's wife who stated that he was offered more money to lose, they needed to money, so he took the dive.

Tunney fought Dempsey when Jack was fat and out of shape after a long layoff and at the end of his career. He was a shell of his former self and he was still able to have his moments including a flurry of punches that knocked Tunney down.

Not sure what you were trying to accomplish with your response Jab, especially the last part, but I guess "Thanks for the warning."