Jack Dempsey vs Joe Louis

In the current context Jack Dempsey would not even be allowed to COMPETE as a heavyweight. Too light. Lets not forget he begun his professional career as a spindly middleweight.

So why not compare him to cruiserweights?

I think if you're going to compare him against heavyweights you have to assume the advantage of modern training and nutrition, which I think would take him to 210-220lbs of solid muscle. This Dempsey I would fancy to blitz the current heavyweight division, apart from perhaps Klitscho.

 

Which goes to show you their ignorance and God-praising of Dempsey. Firpo, who had no idea how to box, nearly knocked him out for crying out loud. To dismiss Wills would be just to be able to retain views of Dempsey as an almight fighter.

And there were a million people saying that Tyson was going to knock Lewis out easily, that he was back, etc. Would that make my view that Lewis was going to knock out Tyson radical as well?

The people knew **** about boxing in 2002 and they knew even less about it in the 20's when information was a lot harder to come by.

Right.

Tell me what is more reasonable:

Rating Dempsey low in the top10 and saying that having him in the top3 or top5 is overrating him or
Rating Jeffries (who feasted on and had trouble with ancient middleweights and lightheavies) and Dempsey higher than Louis. atsch

The current generation who was so convinced that Tyson was gonna beat Lewis was equally deluded. It always happens. People don't know much about boxing, they idolise spectacular fighters based on a few knockouts, commercials or even movie roles. Dempsey did not lack popularity and the all time ratings of that time reflected that. When that went away and he was judged on his record, his ranking sank like a brick, and rightfully so.

 

Well i judge them exactly as they are or it is too much speculation, so maybe i should take your advice when i do the Cruiserweight list :good

 

I like Dempsey here for several reasons. He was a fast starter who liked to swarmer all over his man. Louis said he was ineffective when swarmed ( films back this up ). I also think Dempsey's chin, footwork, and defensive ability were a bit better than Louis'.

 

Dempsey was a phenomenal fighter. On film he looks a fairly complete package. Reliable testimony from worthy sources back this up. Dempsey had a ton of "natural" ability and mastered the science of applying it.

He beat lots of good fighters.

Inactivity is a mark against him, but I feel it is also somewhat offset by his high level of activity as a leading contender, in 1918.
When a fighter is beating some fellow contenders in a matter of seconds, you have to take notice.

Whereas I think Dempsey beats most of them ...... which goes a long way in explaining why we rate him differently.

There are one or two he wouldn't beat, IMO.
And he wouldn't beat some of the guys the way Dempsey beat them.

Dempsey could have taken Willard 12-18 months earlier too.

Some observers thought Fred Fulton could have outboxed Willard. Dempsey beat the guy in 18 seconds.

I think the opposite.

Those are fair criticisms.

I disagree. He looks absolutely awesome on film to me.

Sportwriters' descriptions and musings are to be taken with a pinch of salt. I dont base my opinion on colourful hyperbolic write-ups, nor on cold overly-critical write-ups.

The great Jimmy Cannon didn't think much of Ali in the 60s, for example. I think that he must have had a "negative head" on, I think he was WAY off the mark.

On the other hand, those articles that come out when a great fighter has a major victory lauding that fighter as unbeatable through all-time are not to be taken as gospel either. In my limited years of watching boxing, writers and "experts" have elevated Tyson, Chavez, RJJ, and now Mayweather (and others at various times) as "Best Ever" and all sorts of things, in the heat of the moment.

So I dont buy into the "Dempsey myth", I genuinely find him one of the most impressive fighters I've seen on film.

 

I think Seamus has a similar line on Sonny Liston.

We are all besotted with the "image" that the writers of the time created of Sonny, "the creature from the black lagoon", the stare that turns you to stone, the scary "bad negro" of indeterminate age, coming out of the back alley to scare the white reporters with fists the size of cannonballs, "old stoneface", the invincible one, the jaibird, mob enforcer .....

Or at least that's Seamus's take on why we rate Liston, as I remember it.

 

Yeah Seamus really had it in for Liston. Me, i just go by his filmed fights and there's oodles, and i have some sort of rare compilation tape of him somewhere. Liston has a lot more filmed fights to go on than Dempsey and the film is much much clearer and indicative.

 

I feel I have enough clear film of Dempsey to form a solid opinion, as I said in an earlier post.

You seem to have formed a solid opinion on him too. Enough to accuse others of sucking up to propaganda and overrating him.

 

My rating goes beyond just footage, the guy did bugger all achievement wise when put beside a Joe Louis. This is just plain fact. He's more a mythical figure than any other heavyweight i know of. Sorry, but i am not going to treat him as the sacred cow. He can stand by what he did and didn't do, and he did an enormous amount less than Joe Louis - i can't see how it can be sanely argued any other way.

:deal

 

Joe Louis was far busier champion, yes. His reign of defences stands alone, above any other heavyweight. That's a very good reason to seperate them, and to rate Louis higher, but it doesn't exclude Dempsey from being on the same short list of ATG heavyweights as Joe Louis.

Dempsey did a lot more than "bugger all" when put beside anyone.

Only if you want him to be. Since neither you nor I buy into the myth, then it's irrelevant.

It's not really a fair argument against him. The same thing is done with Muhammad Ali, it's easy to be sceptical in the face of such idolization of any icon.

Sounds fair to me.

By those standards, maybe all the greats did an enormous amount less than Joe Louis, but it gets lonely for Joe in that panthenon by himself.