Jack Dempsey vs rocky Marciano

Well, this has gone like every Marciano / Dempsey thread that I've ever seen here.

 

The argument about chins is an interesting case of arguing both sides of the fence.

Dempsey being knocked down or staggered points to his great recuperative powers.

In contrast, it is argued that Marciano being knocked down or "hurt" points to how susceptible he was to punches, which puts his chin in question compared to Dempsey. How awful that he was knocked down by the man who scored more knockouts than anyone in the history of boxing, or by a man who had won the heavyweight championship with a one-punch KO.

I would think that being knocked down or "hurt" in the ring points equally to Marciano's excellent recuperative powers. After all, he always came back to win.

Dempsey didn't always, though. He was simply KO'd by Flynn. He got up against Tunney and lasted until the final bell, but was not competitive the rest of the fight.

 

When you are dealing with a man who ALWAYS rebounded to win like Marciano, how exactly can one credit anyone else at all with having a better recovery ability?

What the records show is that Dempsey got up against Tunney and then lost all the remaining rounds. He didn't get up against Flynn.

Make no mistake, Dempsey had a good chin and good recuperative powers, but I don't see any factual basis to give him any edge over Marciano. Results point the other way.

 

Marciano "hurt" by Lowry, Reynolds, Vingo

He always came back to win. Seems to point to excellent recuperative powers.

"He was also fortunate that he was facing older past prime men in his 6 most important fights."
"Louis, Charles x 2, Walcott x 2, Moore"

Interesting that 3 of these men are in the IBRO top 15 p4p all time list. Louis was the longest reigning heavyweight champion of the 20th century. Moore the longest reigning light-heavyweight champion. The AP poll at the end of the century had Louis the #2 heavyweight. Moore and Charles the top two light-heavies. The issue will always be if it is harder to defeat a great fighter past-prime, or a lesser fighter in his prime.

And one can only beat the best that are out there which Marciano did. Dempsey fails that test.

 

Wonder how a Marciano who had a 3 years hiatus and was living the high life would have done against a prime Tunney? For my money there isn't anything to choose between them regarding chins.

 

"Firpo hit like a monster"

A 35 year old Wills went 12 rounds with him without being down or apparently hurt.

Which fight proves Firpo as a "monster" puncher. Willard? But he was pushing 42 and was in only his third fight in 7 years. Firpo got him in 8.
The rest? Brennan. Weinert. Spalla. Impressive enough for a contender, but hardly a list comparing to those KO'd by Walcott, Charles, or Moore in quality or depth.

 

I don't think there is any doubt how hard Firpo hit but he lacked timing and technique which accounts for his failure to get guys out quicker.

 

"Wonder how a Marciano who had a 3 years hiatus and was living the high life would have done against a prime Tunney?"

Am I supposed to give Dempsey some sort of credit for frittering away his talent? And am I supposed to dock Marciano for attending to his business?

The argument that so and so WOULD HAVE BEEN the greatest is he hadn't wasted his opportunities by doing this or that (for most doing drugs) doesn't wash with me.

What it comes down to is a man amounts to what he can make of the hand that was dealt him. Marciano made the most of his chances. Dempsey didn't and speculation doesn't make him great in my book.

 

"he lacked timing and technique"

Assets few accuse Moore or Walcott of lacking.

 

Neither you're supposed to have sense enough to know that the Dempsey who lost to Tunney wasnt the same man who wrecked Willard. Similarly I take into account that Marciano meeting a younger Walcott and Charles might have resulted in a different ending.No one mentioned anything about anyone being the greatest or any such like I really don't give a good f*ck what your opinion is of Jack Dempsey .Hows that?

 

That's because they possessed them! WTF is your problem?

 

"For my money there isn't anything to choose between them regarding chins."

For my money there is. Marciano was never KO'd. Dempsey was by Flynn. Marciano never was knocked down and then went on to lose the fight. Dempsey did against Tunney. No matter how it is sliced, Marciano comes out ahead. The age of 28 has been mentioned. I think Marciano had 12 fights after reaching that age. He was down twice. Dempsey had 5 fights after reaching that age. He was down at least three times, once getting knocked out of the ring.

 

"your problem"

I have no problem. I am just pointing out that Moore and Walcott had technique and timing which is why they were superior punchers to Firpo.

 

"I really don't give a good f*ck what your opinion is of Jack Dempsey. Hows that?"

Anyone's opinion of Dempsey or Marciano is not important. This should be a fun board exactly because the issues discussed don't matter that much in the big scheme of things.

Also, different opinions are what this board is about. Posture if you prefer about not caring about others' opinions, but no one else does either. Each has his own point of view and generally holds to it.