Jack Johnson Vs Jack Dempsey...?

Sacrilege when I say it but you have book or two out.

Still, who did Johnson fight at heavyweight who had anywhere near the offensive ****nal that Dempsey possessed?

 

a r s e n a l

 

You can't punch in the clinch if you're gripped properly by a man that's as strong as you who knows what he's doing. If he punched well in the clinch it was against LHWs or opponents who didn't know how to clinch.

 

LHWs Like Jess Willard?

 

I think the last statement is an unknown, he may have been better.

For the record they also didn't let Wills fight Johnson due to the political agenda against Johnson.

Langford and Ketchell were smaller but similar, Jeffries bigger but slower

Who did Dempsey fight who was similar to Johnson? Maybe Tunney and Miske and he generally didn't do that well.

 

Extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence to back them up.

You are essentially implying that Jack Dempsey had an inherent fear of black opponents, irrespective of ability.

Go for it.

 

He'd fall into the category of a slow unskilled opponent who couldn't clinch quick enough.

It's boxing 101 really, if someone has your arms locked tight you can't punch.

 

Well he backed out of fights with Jeanette in 1918 (jumping out of the ring pretty much), Langford 1916, Johnson 1919 onwards (according to Johnson) and Wills for a decade.

Fear ofcourse is irrational.

 

Size/strength matters if you know how to use it.

Like I said there's a small window of opportunity to punch before your arms are grabbed when the grapler moves into range. If you get beat to the punch first you lose that opportunity.

Blocking an arm lock or breaking it is very difficult.

 

John Lester Johnson lost to Langford, Jeannette, and Wills. So if John Lester gave Dempsey hell, it stands to reason why Dempsey did not take on the men who were better than JLJ.

 

Lets assume the worst of him here!

Might he simply have ducked these guys because they were dangerous?

Either way, there is no argument that he should have fought any of those guys, apart from Wills.

It is like arguing that Wladamir Klitschko is ducking Briggs and Holyfield!

 

Why would that even be a factor?

He was a rank novice when he fought Johnson, so why would it be a factor in any direction?

 

You seem to be quite confused over the issue of whether size matters!

It seems to matter a great deal, if the person on the wrong end of the dynamic, is a fighter from an earlier era.

If the person on the wrong end of the dynamic is a modern fighter, then his opponent is a skilless oaf, or a circus freak.

 

All of them had more accomplished careers than the men he faced. The proposed Langford fight was when Langford was nearer his prime.

Jumping out of the ring against Jeanette just looks cowardly pretty much.

Johnson as an ATG ex champ is naturally due a title shot. Corbett got one, Jeffries did, Charles did, Patterson did, Ali did, Frazier did, Holmes did, Foreman did, Tyson did and yes Holyfield and even Briggs did. Louis and Marciano had to beat the ex champs. Yet JJ is conveniently ignored while crying out for a shot.