Jack Dempsey vs rocky marciano

Fair enough, Burt.

Dempsey was a fairly consistent fighter, but the original claim is that he was more consistent than Marciano.

Marciano won every fight. That is the highest level of consistency.

Both Marciano and Dempsey are being trashed by fans of the other guy in this thread, and much of it is picky or simply irrelevant.

One post mentioned that Dempsey started young and worked his way up, and therefore lost early fights. Fair enough. But starting late after several years in the service as Marciano did is not exactly ideal either. You waste good years in the learning stage.

We don't know how Marciano would have done if he started at 19, but we also don't know how Dempsey would have done if he started at 24, (which would be 1919, the year in which he was experienced enough to win the championship). Both men would have had much different careers.

 

Only on ESB 90 years later, JD is the Rodney Dangerfield of
heavyweight boxing. "He get's no respect"...[/QUOTE]

Dempsey is rated 7th greatest heavy of all time on ESB's official rankings.

 

Dempsey is rated 7th greatest heavy of all time on ESB's official rankings.[/quote]

That does seem pretty good,

considering how many great heavyweights have come along in those 90 years.

I think the AP poll at the end of the century rated him 4th--not bad at all.

 

Am I supposed to be impressed by these names?

Compared to Joe Louis' best opponents, these men are mediocre at best.

 

Suze is a patriot and Dempsey was called a slacker.:think

 

I never said that, I questioned the premise that Marciano was more consistant, there is a difference. Like their chins, and power I think their consistency is comparable all things considered.

 

Louis, I thought we were comparing Dempsey with Marciano:huh?

 

Janitor felt Dempsey's resume was comparable to Louis'.


Even comparing Dempsey's victims to Marcianos, Marciano still has the clear edge.

Archie Moore, Ezzard Charles , Jersey Joe Walcott would have beaten any one of Dempsey's victims.

 

The problem with the Dempsey haters is quite simple. They argue today about long ago proven truths. Dempsey is already...for the past 90 years.....considered one of the greatest fighters ever to live. You would be hard pressed to find anyone who watched him fight that thought otherwise.

 

Chins are not comparable. Marciano has about as much an edge in the chin department as dempsey has in speed over marciano.

Maybe if 36 year old Lee Savold knocked Marciano out cold with 1 punch in one round, then there chins would be comparable.

 

No, I said that they built their resumes against much the same kind of opponents.

That is not the same thing.

 

The Jack Sharkey that fought Dempsey would have given all three of them an interesting night's work.

 

Savold knocked Willis Applegate out cold in the first round.
Applegate went the distance with Marciano without being floored.:deal

 

Savold never fought Applegate.

Applegate was an excellent athlete who played in the Negro National League as well as boxing. It lost more often than he won but seems to have been pretty durable and the type who always gave a decent account of himself.

In their 1951 ratings, Ring Magazine classified Applegate as a class A fighter, meaning he was considered in the top fifty in the world.

Beating him w/o knocking him out was perhaps a blemish on Marciano's record, but he was not quite the doormat being made out here.

Off boxrec, he was never counted out, losing three times on TKO's.

 

You're right, I was confusing Applegate with Gino Buonvino who went into the 10th and last round with Marciano .Savold kod him in54 seconds of the first round.
Applegate had lost his previous 5 fights.he was 11.14.2 Marciano was 34-0, not exactly tough matching.

Both Applegate and Buonvino had one thing in common however, both had almost zero power.