No, there is no way he could cut to that weight past age 25. He's quite lean for the willard fight in the neighborhood of 190. Odds are he'd do what holyfield did. Plus if he were actually in the late 90s, he probably wouldn't be a hobo, and would have plenty of food to bulk up with in training(the actual food itself being a whole other matter). If you're gonna time travel a fighter forward, they get bigger not smaller.
:deal I'm very impressed with footage I've seen of Dempsey. His tactics are a lost art, and I'm not sure why nobody in the present seems to have the ability to replicate him. This could very well be 50/50.
burt, I agree with the sentiment of your posts entirely. And I don't think you're wrong. But people around here will jump on anything you say if they can, and by saying Dempsey had the upper body of a 210 pounder - which is completely logical if we imagine how much he could weigh if his legs were slightly thicker or if he didin't train himself down so fine - gives ammo to those who want to discredit your arguments ... all they have to say is, "no, he was 190 pounds, and his upper body wasn't freakishly huge". Like I said, it's not that you are wrong, but someone can easily say, "that's not right, burt" because they take the soundbite literally without considering the details of what you are saying. Everything you're say is 100% correct though, when someone wants to understand your argument and explanation. Like you said, and I outlined in a previous post, Dempsey's size (height, weight, reach, chest etc.) was measured. He is what he is. He was 6'1, 185 - 200 pounds in his prime, 77 inch reach, 46 inch chest, 16 1/2 inch neck. He wasn't big for a heavyweight, but as you rightly say, he was around the same size as Joe Louis. And, yes, any man who has a 45 or 46 inch chest at 6'1 is either naturally large or well-developed in the upper body.
He could starve himself to death in theory .... but I don't see why he would "in the mid-90s". He'd be more likely to carry an extra 30 pounds, of mostly flab.
I quite doubt that, honestly, at least looking at Brennan and Willard Dempsey. Ironic that we're talking about Dempsey needing to lose weight in a match against Foreman, clearly the pinnacle of a ripped, advanced, modern fighter with stamina effective over 12 rounds. Give him some HGH like Holyfield and he'd be just fine in terms of mass and BF%.
How much do u think Tarver or Saad Muhammad or Mustaffa Muhammad or Toney or Archie Wright weighed between fights , during their lightheavyweight years ?
I don't know. Some of those guys were plain fat between fights, Moore and Toney for example. Dempsey was often a LEAN 200 pounds just days before his fights.
:good U,I respect your opinions greatly. i am getting tired of defending a man who in my youth was idolised by oldtimers who I looked up to, and who saw Dempsey fight. As a youngster i started to collect OLD boxing magazines and read about Dempsey, his power, speed,his innate toughness,plus his killer instinct second to none.This has been ingrained in me viscerally, and like a lion defending her cubs from attack, I feel it necessary to defend his rightful legacy from some posters who have an agenda to besmirch a man who fought 85 years ago. It galls me no end that these posters care not a whit,what reputable writers, historians, and boxers,wrote about the prime Jack Dempsey, THEY SAW. They couldn't care less. Mark my words, soon the best fighter I ever saw Ray Robinson,will get the same treatment. Was George Foreman a great puncher.? your'e darn right. Was he as fast and MOBILE as a prime Dempsey ? Hell NO. Could Foreman Ko Dempsey ? Of course. But what if the Manassa Mauler, gets inside Foreman and delivers his great short punches on Foreman's chin ? Timberrrrr ! I have said this before, but when two devastating punchers collide, give me the faster hitter,for I have seen this innumerable times. Speed Kills..
I tend to agree, in fact I think right now it approaches being (nearly) inarguable, and I think it would have made him utterly devastating. Again, pro-Dempsey types are only going to see it as attacking him because they see it as undermining him in all important fantasy match-ups. Again, it's not the case. I find some of these notions incredible. I find the reaction to my quite accurate but rather minor correction of Burt rather astonishing, and Unforgiven, I find the idea that Dempsey could weigh in at 210lbs by having "thicker legs" - thicker by about 25lbs apparently - utterly ridiculous. Though, just as he could technicaly starve himself to death, yes, technically he could gain nearly two stone on just his legs and get into a ring.