Lennox Lewis vs Jack Dempsey

exactly. Most , infact nearly every hostorian from the time thought Willard was unskilled, hardly Dempseys fault. He just came to win the title

 

and secondly people knew about Willards age, and that he had been inactive for years through newspaper reports.

 

The point I have made is that the best finishers of all time have tended to be short if not necisarily light for heavyweights. Often both.

Now you have to ask why.

 

Jenny Lewis

 

... of Rilo Kiley fame? Very nice indeed, good band too. :good



Ps: As I'm in work at the mo have got avatars hiden btw.

 

That's the girl

Damn, hidden avatars! That means you can't see McGrain's rare pic of Greb-Tunney, or janitors GIF of SRR-Gavilan

:yikes

 

Yeah I know, it's not that though. Everytime my boss (a lady) passed my desk I'd have a heart attack if the pics of scantily clad or nude female lovelies were in full view, if ya get my point (as nice as those pics are).

 

Yeah, i helped Ezzard a bit back finding the avatar option for the same reasons

 

Nope, the hardest punchers in history as i showed were almost all over 200 pounds, and you know just as well as i do that that's not a statistical anomoly.

 

Dempsey's a great finisher, after six knockdowns. But that seventh time.....ooh, there's never been anybody better.

 

While tall stand up guys were Dempseys meat. I think Lewis's jab is the key here, not his size. Dempsey can not win if he can't get around Lewis's jab. If he can slip it, roll under it he will KO Lewis as soon as he can put a few hard shots together. If not, he will get beat down and probably stopped late in the fight.

 

The hardest punchers yes but not necisarily the best finishers.

Why are the best finishers in history typicaly under 6' 1''?

why are the best punching packages generaly not big heavyweights?

You have to ask these questions.

 

Firstly, Not true Lennox Lewis, Wlad Klitchko and Foreman, were super heavies and 3 of the most deadly finnishers in the last 30-40years

But in answer to your question:

Big HWs don't need to go for the KO to win, they can win a fight from the outside without taking risks because of their height and reach advantage. Small HWs need to go for the KO because.

Also Big HWs are rarer, there are more 6'0 men than 6'5 men so it is more likely a 6'0 man will be a bigger

 

Before we ask anything let's start by defining "best finishers" Is someone like Tyson who hurts a fighter than goes after him to finish the job (this is only an example, to make a point, I realize Tyson could often take a fighter out with one punch also), a better finisher than Wlad who simply KO's his fighter often with one punch? Or Foreman who took Moorer out with one punch? What's your defination of a finishers? How about Vitali's KO record, is he a finisher? He seems to get the job done if nothing else. Lewis seems plenty able to finish Grant, Golota, Rahman, Ruddock and several others when he landed.

So in this context who is and isn't a finisher? What about Holyfield?, he seems to fall into your arbitary height limit of what a finisher is suppose to be, was he a finisher in your eyes? What about a fighter who's a hit and miss type of finisher..ie Sanders, is he a finisher?

And after the definition of a finishers has been answered, you'd have to find away to put who is a finisher in some kind of context.

For example if there have been 500 heavyweights over 6' 1" and 10 rank as great finishers that's 2%, now how many fighters have been under 6'1" say 5000 and maybe 15 are finishers, well that's about .3%.

So in this example, statistically those over 6'1" would be better finishers, even if less of them are deemed finishers in your eyes.