Ray Mercer vs. Jack Dempsey

It is folly to either consider size everything or delude oneself that it never makes a difference, or only in certain style-challenged situations. Mercer is a good candidate to beat Dempsey because at his peak he was very good AND his size. Not thta he would, but has a good chance.

People have gotten bigger & stronger, all athletics progress. The greats might win, but without modern training & nutrition at least the unlimited division would have a relative disadvantage. Dempsey big from the waist up? No way. Holyfield is an exanple of this, & Dempsey had nothing like his musculature. Strong for his era? Sure.

 

Here is the problem as I see it.

It is not that people pick Mercer over Dempsey or Lewis over Louis, it is more that they do it for completely the wrong reasons. They don’t base the prediction on any piece of stylistic information from the real world.

They look at certain simple attributes and tactics that have worked for Mercer/Lewis in their own era, and ignore the fact that they failed, often spectacularly, against Dempsey/Louis when they were tried in reality.

Perhaps these people do Mercer/Lewis an injustice, by implying that they would not think outside the box a bit more, when faced with a challenger such as Dempsey/Louis.

 

That's a mismatch of the highest order. Lennox would blast John Henry out of their lickety splitley. You've gone too far with the bias towards fighters from the past being able to overcome size disadvantages here sir.

 

I meant Ted Kid Lewis!

 

That's a pick I could get behind.

 

Those who want to contend that the division has not advanced over the decades try to frame the argument to this as "size is everything" so that it is easily deflated. However, we are talking about when excellence is combined with greater size/strength, not just size alone. Furthermore, I would contend that the heavy division was just far deeper in the 90's than it was in the teens and twenties.

Also interesting is an anecdote from Bobby Czyz regarding the first time he sparred with a truly world class heavyweight after coming up from light heavy... and that guy was none other than Ray Mercer. He thought he was doing pretty good until Ray swiped him with a right. Bobby thought the roof of the building had caved in. Bobby Czyz, amateur superstar and pro champion, was shocked at the difference in power.

 

What about pace? A modern, bodybuilding heavyweight might retain his speed but have you noticed the tempo? Short explosive burst followed by resting periods in the clinch. It is spurt fighting. One guy rests while the other works. Sometimes you get an exchange. The training is all about interval training too. A steady training workrate (cardio) reduces mass as it burns more calories where as interval training retains more.

 

I was trying to get across the point that size shouldn't be used as a determining factor, but I guess I got a little carried away ... and went well off subject ... and used some pretty bad examples. Of course a 6 inch height disparity is an advantage in most cases, but Dempsey and Mercer are of the same height. On this stylistic match up I guess Mercer outweighing Dempsey by a far bit works in his favour. Just call me captain obvious :nut

 

Like Ike Ibeabuchi threw 900 punches over 12 rounds or when Marciano threw 500 over 13?

 

Dancers' legs with a large torso. In some of the those old pictures Dempsey can look rather slight, especially when the poor quality washes out the definition, but he had good dimensions and opted for whipcord as opposed to built muscle.

Furthermore, Dempsey's effectiveness against larger men was noted long before any rose-tinted opinion.

When Robert Edgren watched a young, relatively unknown Jack Dempsey against Carl Morris in 1918 he noted how his uppercuts "nearly lifted big Carl off the floor” every time Morris leant on him.

If Jack was around today, Wladimir would feel like he was trying to embrace a cactus.

 

You mean heavyweights hit harder than light-heavyweights ?

 

Ted, no one with rational thought would think Dempsey was not a tough , legit force .. the question is one of not just against a big fighter but a seriously good big fighter .. Carl Morris while big for sure, was really how good ?

 

You're not wrong, but it at least highlights how Dempsey handled larger men when they attempted to impose their size upon him.

Lennox Lewis may have beaten Jack, but while he was very good at leaning on fighter's he would probably find it much more difficult against Dempsey who could sift rapid blows through tiny gaps.

There is a strong argument that Dempsey was the best in-fighter at heavyweight.