Most overrated old-timer?

I'd more or less agree. I'd make Ali, Lewis, Foreman, Holmes, Tyson, Louis and Liston all clear cut faves head-to-head. Holyfield and Frazier might be slightly less clear cut however I'd still expect 'em both to prevail more often than not. I give Dempsey a good chance against Marciano (stylistically), however he'd have to knock him down early and keep him there.

You can't rule out Dempseys power, but most of the fighters listed are on the same level punching-wise as well as holding a size, skill and strength edge over him. :good

 

You under estimate Dempsey greatly.

Holmes, Holyfield and Frazier for example wouldnt have much chance against him.

The rest would be somwhere around even money or less.

 

So what odds would you guess that Holmes, Frazier and Holyfield would be then?

 

I would offer 3/1 against these live underdogs. Perhaps 2/1 in Holmses case.

Holmes is neither crunchy nor chewy. He is not mobile enough to keep avay from Dempsey or powerfull enough to go toe to toe.

Frazier is going toe to toe with Dempsey and getting smoked before he gets going.

Holyfield dosnt really have any advantage over Dempsey that I can think of.

 

3-1? Get real. Carpentier and Firpo were 3-1 weren't they? Both of these would have been about 20-1 vs Louis, Ali or Tyson.

 

It's called reality, you could do with a dose and stop harping on to the belief that boxing skills eroded from the 1920s onwards. Like i've told you before, the next time a 185 Lb heavyweight dominates the division I'll eat your undies. :good

 

Dempsey looked useless against Tunney, that fight is a true barometer of how a more modern day skilled fighter would handle him. I don't think you could have paid him to look any worse. Equally he apparently looked just as bad when nearer his peak vs Wille Meehan. If he was Brazilian or German or whatever and he had exactly the same title reign, he'd be nowhere near rated as high as he is. Which, fortunately, is going down year by year. Dempsey is a very famous name and a very popular champion. His talent nowhere near reaches this.

 

Re: the 'dive' vs Flynn. I read the article that I was pointed to by DMT/Janitor and, what a surprise, ALL the dive claims came AFTER Dempsey had won the title, become a megastar and had various hagiography written about him. Every newspaper report of the day, when it wasn't that much more than Fighter A vs Fighter B said it was on the level. Which it obviously was. Of course, in books that are entitled something like: "Jack Dempsey: A Pole Smoker's Evaluation", you'll read differently.


ps. There are numerous examples throughout heavyweight history of this sort of revisionism, one that springs to mind was the terrible decision that took place in the Bowe-Tubbs fight. This was known in the trade as a stinker, yet was passed off as a myth when Bowe mashed Holyfield. A case of 'hey, no way, that could have happened'.

 

Surprise, surprise.

 

Marciano gets at least as much.

 

Dixon never " officially " beat a hall of fame guy. I think a hall of fame fighter should have at lest one win over another hall of fame fighter especially if he meets a few of them. While Dixon was a top fighter in his era, some today consider him a top 5 guy at bantam or fly. I think top 5 for him is a bit over rated.

 

Not nearly, not from what I've seen anyway. Anytime Dempsey is brought up someone jumps in to try to rip him apart. Point out some threads where Marciano has come under attack, maybe I just missed them.

 

I think the legend of Jack Johnson just doesn't stand up to the test of film, careful study of the records, and news paper reads.

I don’t know how to put in into context. The best thing I can come up with is a highly anticipated movie that disappoints.