Question to those who rank Dempsey high

Crosstrainer and Amsterdam had a great debate several months ago as well, and although went in depth, remained civil and gentleman like. CT and Amsterdam are both great posters. I've also had a few really close ones myself. I don't have a problem with conceding on my views if someone truly points something out that I may not have seen before. There's nothing wrong with taking on a new view of something, if you truly believe it has validity. A lot of guys here unfortunately, refuse to change their opinions due to shear pride and the human drive to save face, and that's just damn frustrating in my opinion.

 

Fair post again.

 

Well while Gibbons was light-hitting he had the slickness to last the distance. And yeah perhaps the comment was somewhat unfair. Foster woul probably last some rounds before losing, then again it's not a great match up or anything since Foster was only great light-heavy, not heavy.

 

Ok, so you consider we both made unfair comments. The good news is mine was a kneejerk rebuttal in jest, whilst his is his long thought out full term view.

Thanking you

:good

 

Remember too Foster gave both Ali and Frazier some real heavy leather before going down. Who knows what might happen if this sort of shrapnel lands on a 20 and 30 pound lighter man.

 

Frankly John, I think both the men in your avator would have a fair chance of taking you know who, regardless of their much lower weight perameters.

 

Well Hagler has that chin of steel and NOBODY is more elusive than Leonard vs the big men. Hagler prolly walks around at 170. If he came out like he did vs Hearns.....

 

Sugar had some great performances against taller men who could really box and bang like no tomarrow. Tommy Hearns of course was one, and lightheavyweight champ Lalonde was another. Ray also pounded Donny when he was past his prime and on the comeback trail. For one to think that a prime Leonard fighting at say 165 could outbox you know who, is not entirely out of the question. Hagler, Hearns, Duran and Lalonde all hit like they were in a weight class higher. Sugar survived their onsloughts, and outclassed them as well. Marvin needless to say was a machine. He had a punch comparable to that of some heavyweights, and a chin to match. Given that so many fighters who weren't indigenous to the heavywieght division frequented it back in the 20's, its not unreasonable to think that a lot of all time great middleweights and lightheavyweights may have ruled the throne. A few weeks ago, you started a thread on Spinks vs you know who. I picked Spinks to dethrone you know who.

 

oh god, i can't belive Leonard and Hagler are given a shot vs Dempsey, this is laughable and quiet sad honestly :-( :-( :-(

 

Perhaps you're right. Given that numerous other middleweights and lightheavyweights, whom you know who fought loads of were unsuccessful at beating him, maybe its a bad suggestion.

 

yeah because he was a giant facing guys 50-60 pounds lighter then him yeah? He fought two fighters during his title reign that were light-heavies, Gibbons who was 15 lbs lighter and Carpeinter who was 18 lbs lighter, those are not middleweights.

 

well now u have seen Hagler and Leonard being given a shot at Dempsey

 

Gibbons was not a light hitter. He was a real knockout artist at light heavyweight. More crucialy he also had an all time chin unlike Foster.

Oh and there is some evidence that Dempsey caried Carpinter.

 

Even on that basis he dose not get a fair write up.

His critics have no apreciation of who the people he beat were and what these wins mean on the ground at the time.

Trial by boxrec tehnds to downgrade a win over a man who was a serious force in the division at the time to a win over an OK fighter. Nobody raves about a win over Johny Risko but there was a time when the general forum would have been fairly equaly divided over whether he or Jack Sharkey was going to inherit Gene Tunnneys throne.

Nobody rates Fred Fulton historicaly but when Dempsey blasted him in 18 seconds he was regarded as the outstanding contender in the world. We have people dismising tommy Gibbons because he was a former light heavyweight or whatever. The guy was the No2 heavyweight contender.

this is the reality of what these wins mean.

 

I do not have any other Arcel's quotes so i can't make that assessement.



Also, i think it's pretty naive to think Foreman needs luck. Make a poll and see how many people think Foreman would win. Dempsey comes right at him, no luck needed there. Foreman is by far bigger, heavier punches. I know you refuse to believe that a 225 lbs man may have an advantage over a skinny 185lbs one, but most people with first-hand experience, including myself, know otherwise.