Mike Tyson circa 1996 vs 1919 Jack Dempsey

Oh, OK.

"Good enough" Tyson is not, imo, good enough to hang with a prime Dempsey.

The things that make me pick a prime Tyson over Dempsey - the peekaboo, the bobbing, the explosiveness, the total self assurance - are mostly gone. Imho this fight is Dempsey's to lose - and he might, if he thought he'd brawl "good enough" Tyson like he brawled Firpo, because Tyson always hit like a cement truck at full load. Dempsey would have a substantial speed and footwork advantage and he'd be advised to make use of it until a proper opening presented itself instead of trying to force the matter.

 

That old and basically washed up Tyson went left and death with The White Rhino Botha.
He'd be KO'd by Dempsey.

But the young, pre Tokyo, Jacobs managed Tyson makes short work of Jack...KO within 4 rounds for Mike; too strong. Remember, his style was impetuous and his defence was impregnable in those days.

 

Prime Dempsey was one of the best heavies ever at consistently getting the upper hand in fast, close to mid range exchanges. He had a very keen eye for openings and the reflexes, or perhaps the intuition, to take advantage of them. Fighters like Ali or Louis may have been slightly faster but they couldnt keep up that intensity for long. It may have had something to do with Dempsey being 190lb at his fittest.

I feel Tyson is overrated in such close to mid range exchanges. He has great speed, timing and reflexes but he couldnt put it together in the way that Dempsey did. Tyson mainly used his speed, in his hand, foot and head movement, and head slots changes to overwhelm the opponent's defense. When tough fighters gave Tyson problems he had to slow down and think. The 1996 Tyson was even more perceptible to this. Prime Dempsey is always thinking in the ring.

The heavyweights of the 80s will obviously pose different problems than the heavyweights of the 10s and 20s. Many of Dempsey's detractors will point out how many supposed middleweights and lightheavyweights Jack fought, in order to demean him as a fighter. But fighting against these smaller fighters, in competitive 10 rounders or so, also allows a heavyweight to develop more intricate skills. And its not like Dempsey didnt fight big guys.

Of course there are drawbacks to being 190lb. In this case these drawbacks are amplified because Dempsey's chin isn't iron cast and Tyson has crazy power. Dempsey needed to hit people many times to put them away in comparison to Tyson and that would show in a fight. At least Jack is stronger, on paper.

I would pick Dempsey to take it. Tyson throws combos from the outside while Dempsey struggles to slip the punches. Every time Tyson comes inside, which is many times, Dempsey comes alive and softens him up. After the mid rounds Tyson is tired and Dempsey starts footworking around him. TKO in the 10th round with a few scares for Jack the whole way.

 

1) Savarese, Francis, and Etienne completely sucked at that point. And, quite frankly, I believe the Etienne fight was most likely fixed in order to perpetuate the farce that Mike Tyson wasn't completely shot before his fight with Lewis. They wanted and needed that to look like a mega event.

 

I think I would pick Dempsey here. I would likely pick Tyson in a primes matchup. Tyson was still able to be competitive in 96, but he is not close to what he was 8 years prior.

It is a testament to Tyson that 6-8 years removed from his prime that he could still fight at a near elite level.

Give me Dempsey in 8, in this particular fight.

 

I gotta go with Jack.Seeing Tyson from the Berbick ft and the post prison version there is a difference. Being in jail for 3 year s is bound to take a lot from a fighter ,especially one that relied on fast punching combos.
Dempsey on the other hand was in his Best killing machine mode in 1919 ,not a guy to mess with.
Yes ,Tyson still hit hard as hell ,he wasn't crap against Bruno ,but he's meeting a ATG in his glory ,one who wants to KILL .But I do give Tyson the first few rounds against Dempsey ,More than likely hurting Jack early .But give it 4 or 5 rounds and Dempsey digs in and break s him down .

 

That's how I see it to .Jack s going to be hurt ,maybe dropped .Firpo did it ,he was much the bigger man ,but when Dempsey got hurt he'd fire back. And that's where the first cracks appears in Tyson s confidence. A smaller man ,hitting back and with power ..That in my humble opinion is when Dempsey rises .

 

I don't think it gets there, even the faded version who fought Holy was still a monster for 190lb Dempsey to overcome. From what ive seen of Dempsey, I can see him being at a major disadvantage blatantly, in most area's. Theres no way a fighter that tips the scales at 190, no matter how good they are, can beat Mike Tyson. He was 220 in fantastic shape, zero fat, just muscle. From what I've seen prime for prime, Tyson obliterates him bad 96 too !

 

The thread says 1996 Tyson, not the Tyson who fought Botha or Norris or Nielsen or Etienne. 1996 TYSON: who beat Bruno, Seldon and lost to Holyfield. This version beats Dempsey.

 

I cant see Tyson letting him off the hook Ferg when he hurts him, his finishing was savage as we know. Imo both great fighters, but that size difference when they are both great fighters and power advantage is a big big gulf for Dempsey to overcome. Only my opinion though mate

 

Tyson had lost too much of his game at this stage.

 

I've seen tyson workout in person in prime and seen plenty of film of both....I would be surprised if Dempsey could not ko him

 

Should be mentioned that Dempsey has a fine frame to put on weight with modern nutrition/supplementation/weight lifting/HGH/whatever. Still, I pick Tyson all the live-long day.