Dempsey's best bet is to get on his bicycle more than ever before, up on his toes in and out side to side bobbing and weave, do the little walk a ways like Walcott did. Pick and choose, then wait to pounce on Louis. If he tries to walk right into Louis and take him out, Louis will knock him out. No one can out slug Joe Louis.
Guys that walked into him often had momentary success,granted it was only fleeting but they were not Jack Dempsey. Those that were apprehensive of the murder in his fists, back pedalled away from his power ,to be leisurely stalked, and pounded into submission. Buddy Baer sailed into him and put him out of the ring with a left hook. Slow footed , clumsy , Galento dropped him with the same punch after rocking him in the first. Tami Mauriello rocked him early too . Dempsey's left hook was several grades above Baer's, and Galento's. It would be foolish for anyone to dogmatically state that Louis would not / could not, get Jack out of there ,but the opposite is an equally likely prospect imo.
At least Louis was never floored 3x, knocked out of the ring and saved by a typewriter against one of the crudest fighters ever to fight in the ring...Luis Firpo. Firpo exposed a Dempsey flaw big time. Dempsey was also knocked out old cold for 20 seconds by a left hook and right hand from 38 year old Fireman Flynn.
Do you think Firpo was slower, cruder than Galento? Dempsey had 77 fights over a 13 year career ,and was kod once ,and that is a subject of furious debate up until this day.
Mc,save your breath. as U correctly attest, Dempsey was ko'd only once by Fireman Jim Flynn in 1917,under truly suspicious circumstances, in a total of 80 fights. And Firpo though crude ,was a powerful puncher [think a bigger Rocky Graziano],and at that time considered a threat to anyone. When it comes to the subject of Dempsey Mc, to defend him today on ESB, requires a lot of fortitude. He is derided more so than any prominent fighter in history,on this forum, and the reason why still baffles me...The choice to me at this point is to believe the opinions of boxing experts who saw him at his best and claimed him as a great heavyweight,possibly the greatest,knowing full well his RECORD, or some posters of today who think so LITTLE of him and try to disparage him at every turn, every time. So M, I made my choice to go along with the vast number of sportswriters who called him the best heavyweight in the 1950 and 1960 polls...M, they WERE there,when he fought in his prime days, and I agree with them... Cheers Mc.:good
I think that it would be a matter of who landed first. I would pick louis if it weren't for his c-grade chin. Dempsey could punch really hard and had fast hands and louis would be vurnerable. Louis also had relatively slow feet and if he got hurt this could be a big handicap for him. Dempsey would be just as vurnerable because for all of his speed and power, his aggression caused him to leave himself also. This could easily play into the hands of Louis who threw the most perfect combos of any heavyweight in history. It would be pick-em for me.
Jesus Christ you say the exact same thing, over, and over and over, and over again. Jack Dempsey was not infallable. Why cant his faults or his poor resume or poor title reign or fundamentals or bad performances be picked apart like everybody elses?? Since him there have been many great champions, who were actually true world champions, in the fact that no entire race was forbidden to challenge the champion. Dempsey just doesnt measure up to more recent ATG HW's
You have a point but the biggest trouble w Dempsey here is that he got hit and saw red and that was that ... he seemed unable to fight the sort of fight you described ... I feel his best bet is to hurt JOe fast and early and then it is a different fight ... there is a shot the explosive Dempsey could do that ... a much faster verion of what Galento did in round one ... if Jack does not shake him up bad, early, I see Joe flattening him in three or four rounds ... no one takes too many of those Louis combos ... Jack took a better punch than Joe but no one takes too many from JOe ...
P, here is a perfect example of a Dempsey detractor,that compels me to defend him. I am home now having a mug of java when U yourself spout a falsehood about Jack Dempsey. So Jack Dempsey who fought John Lester Johnson, had numerous black sparring partners, befriended some, is accused of forbidding 'an entire race',because the one viable black fighter of his reign never got a shot at Dempsey's title, though they did sign once for that fight. Harry Wills certainly deserved a shot at Dempsey's crown ,sure did, p, but to say an"entire race" was avoided by Dempsey while he was an ACTIVE title-holder is sheer hyperbole, and if I don't defend this false accusation, who would ? Back to the coffee...Bottoms up.... P.S. P, don't U think I have eyes and some form of integrity. I too watch film of Dempsey that is available, and I have to agree with the 1950 @ 1960s poll. I see a killer in the Jess Willard film,though herky -jerky, I see Dempsey after a long layoff winning most of the rounds against a great defensive safety first Tommy Gibbons, I see Dempsey, though surprised and dropped by a crude ,but powerful Luis Angel Firpo, come back and annihilate Firpo with two punches so fast they hardly can be seen,I see an old Dempsey rusty after a 3 year layoff drop the elusive Gene Tunney with a 5 punch barrage, and I see old Dempsey persevere, and weaken and flatten a young prime Jack Sharkey in 1927, which might be Dempsey's most impressive win,considering he was a shell of his pantherlike prime...Yes I have eyes also, and an enquiring mind P. Have a good day....
Burt someone here actually posted a newspaper article from the first Dempsey/Flynn fight that clearly stated no only was Dempsey stopped but was on the canvas over thirty seconds after the last knockdown. I wish I could find it but maybe someone has it and will repost it .. This was coverage from the fight itself by a reporter that was there ... the article was legit and it stated clearly Dempsey was KO'ed .. not even a quick TKO but out.
I've read the article too HeGrant but I have also read about 6 different articles about the fight - all from people who were there and all of which were 'legit' and all of which gave differing stories about what happened and all of which gave different conatations of the shady feel of the fight - just like I've read numerous reports (all different) about what happened with, say, the Johnson CHoynski bout - point being when you got 10 different stories and all are different then who's to say what's legit?? Fact is from seeing his fights against Langford and Johnson Flynn doesn't look to be able to punch his way out of a wet paper bag?? Yet he flattens one of the toughest fighters ever in the heavyweight division?? I know anything can happen in a boxing ring - and often does - but when a large number of reports suggest sahdy goings on - and someone swears under oath in court that shady things happened etc you have to read between the lines a little bit - Flynn would flat out never have been able to KO Dempsey (let alone in the first round) - the proof is in the pudding of what happened in the rematch Dempsey 1st round KO - that's all I need to know thank you very much :hi:
Yes, but even if that article is 100% legit, the allegation is that the KO was fixed - faked by Dempsey.
