Rocky Marciano vs Jack Dempsey

S,So Dempsey was FLOORED THREE times against Luis Firpo ? Hmmm!
You are entitled to your opinion, but not to your own arithmetic....
Dempsey was almost floored in the first few seconds of the first round, and later hurt near the ropes and pushed out of the ring by the wild charging Firpo,thereby flying backwards thru the ropes on a writer's typewriter.
Three times ,Dempsey was floored? S, your hatred of Dempsey knows no bounds !!!!!
It is called rewriting history to fit an agenda,that is almost clinical. atsch

 

Exactly. Of course Moore isn't going to beat Ali, Holmes, Frazier, Louis, Foreman, etc. These are the top tier ATG HWs. However, he could give the Quarry's, Corbett's, and Baer's a real fight.

 

There is no way any neutral observer could agree with this in my opinion. Maybe I'm a Rocky nuthugger but Walcott was far more credible and superior than Gibbons at the time both Dempsey and Marciano fought them. Walcott would beat Gibbons. I'm sure as hell faded Charles, Moore, and Walcott probably would've beaten Greb too (Whom Gibbons lost to). Whom did Gibbons beat exactly at HW that made him a more credible challenger than Moore and Walcott (Hell, even Charles).

Also, does anyone know what the scoring of Gibbons-Dempsey was?

What exactly did Dempsey prove past his prime? He lost all but one round against Tunney, and was getting the worse against Sharkey until the ball busting knockout. Oh yeah, he dropped Tunney. It makes for a nice moment, but after that he was soundly outdone.

 

The greatest Heavyweight he fought was Marciano and Rocky was one of the true greats but he beat several top Heavyweights while still defending the Light-heavyweight title, as far as Floyd, the fight was made quickly after a brutal beating by Marciano but it was one of Floyd s best wins and Archie was still a battered body but he fought Ali 7 years later

But these are some of the fighters he beat on his 50 fight run to Marciano, #1 contender Bob Baker,#1 contender Nino Valdes, Burt Whitehurst by KO (Burt went 10 with Listen 2 times) Clarence Henry (big Puncher of the day), Jimmy Bivens 2X Jimmy Slade,Embrell Davidson,Alberto Lovell,Abel Cestac,Karel Sys,Bob Satterfield,Hans Kalbfell,Phil Muscato,Joey Maxin,Harold Johnson3X and he beat Willie Besmanoff, Buddy Thrman,Pete Radamaker,Howard King,Alejandro Lavarante, Roger Rischer and others after that....surely Archie was much more proven at heavyweight than Bob Foster,Michael Spinks,even Billy Conn, even Gene Tunney with his 2 wins over Dempsey would fall behind Archie with his Heavyweight resume.....and the only light-heavyweight great to fight a strong Heavyweight career better than Archie would be Ezzard Charles but Ezz had his sights set for the big boys

 

This is actualy one fantasy fight that I am glad didn't happen.

It would have been a Benn McClellan type fight that would have ended badly for sombody and with both fighters loosing.

 

P,It wouldn't hurt you to look up the date July21,1927 in the record book. It say's Jack Dempsey ko's Jack Sharkey, 7th round. Period. It is your distaste of Dempsey as an all-time great that refuses to accept this fact.
I have watched this film time and again,and Dempsey's body punching was borderline at worst near or below the beltline,which was COMMON in those days when BODY PUNCHING was as common as head blows. Today it is a lost art. Sharkey in his very prime at 25 years of age,just beat rubber man Johnny Risko, Harry Wills,kod Mike McTigue,and at this time in his life would give anyone today a tough bout, was being weakened round by round by a slow 32 year old Dempsey with but ONE fight in almost FOUR years [ Tunney], and knew he would have to wear the quicker Sharkey down with body punching. This he was doing in spite of the posters of today trying to rewrite history,claiming Sharkey was hit in the scrotum [balls].B.S.
If he was hit in the nuts directly the first time ,Sharkey not the bravest chap would have been on the canvass holding his groin in severe pain from a direct hit from the heavy handed Dempsey,as Schmeling did,when Sharkey officially lost by a foul to Schmeling ,1930.Sharkey could dish it out, but couldn't take adversity. Another thing P,in a late round AFTER the bell as Dempsey hands at his side was strolling to his corner, Sharkey gave
Dempsey a rap on the side of the head in full view of everyone and what did the real mano mano Dempsey do, he never changed his expression. What about that Pete ? Dempsey in spite of your revisionism, was a great
fighter four or so years before, in spite of your distase for him, and on ESB, you are not alone. Was he a fancy Dan , no but he was as tough a son of a ***** that ever entered a ring,in his time IDOLIZED by great boxing minds that SAW him at his best, and to me ,I'll take their observant opinion, compared to the naysayers on ESB, 85 years after the fact.. Cheers.

 

Burt, if you can find me a sentence where I said that Sharkey won the fight then maybe you can validate that text quoted above.

Why is it when anyone has a differing opinion on Dempsey than you that they're essentially a hater? Nobody doesn't acknowledge what the observers of 50-100 years ago said. That doesn't mean we can question that, or them.

 

What do I think?

I think that Dempsey regarded Willard as being genuinely dangerous, but thought that Firpo was a manufactured fighter who he was going to breeze through.

"I sure underestimated Luis"

Jack Dempsey

 

Pete you stated what did the" past prime Dempsey do except for the BALL BUSTING incident with Sharkey ? YOU IMPLY THAY THE DEMPSEY KO WAS
NOT LEGITIMATE, inferring that Dempsey was not the real winner. So if Dempsey was not the real winner, Sharkey was. I ,in my lifetime have seen
hundreds of main events in which so many borderline punches were thrown by the winner or loser. That is part of boxing. But according to you and others,Dempsey invented the borderline body blows,or as Ali did many times ,bending his opponents head down. Golata threw flagrant blows to the nuts,that earned a disqualification,unlike Dempsey's body attack.
I have been around the block many times, I have seen yours, and my favorite Rocky Marciano, ringside. I feel no one, but no one is reviled on this forum as Jack Dempsey is, and my nature to protect his great legacy
when he is attacked UNFAIRLY,so darn often, makes my insides churn to
see that fairness is given to him. Why am I wrong ? My generation,
the so called "greatest generation" has vanished, so it is now up to me to see that the old tough,Manassa Mauler get's a fair shake.
P.S. If someone thinks that Dempsey was not the greatest HW man to man, fine...My man in my lifetime was Joe Louis,and Ray Robinson, and Willie Pep,all who I worshipped as a youngster, but they get a fair shake
today,as opposed to a Jack Dempsey. WHY? The same old sportwriters who voted Dempsey as the best fighter from 1900-1950, were misinformed only about Jack Dempsey,but not the others, according to today's naysayers...?
I think not...See ya....

 

Dempsey might be tempted to use his reach advantage and mobility against Marciano (bizare twist), but Marciano's tactics would surely force a trench war.

A quick fight with Marciano getting bounced off the canvas is not out of the question. In practice, I don't think that he would neutralise Marciano's game to that extent.

I would expect Dempsey to win on ballance, but it would be very messy. The first three rounds likley see Marciano getting the worse, but doing some damage himself.

If I have to call it, then Dempsey win by brutal TKO, and both fighters decline rapidly after the fight.

 

That's some extra curricular interpretation there, Burt. I do think the KO was from a result of a low-blow that was cheap that the ref missed. You seem to think Dempsey didn't hit him low despite Sharkey clearly wincing in pain and grabbing his balls. The left hook was nice but didn't take him from his consciousness. However, there's the age old adage of protect yourselves out all times. Just like the Ortiz-Floyd fight, Dempsey incurred a victory from such a rule (Although the difference is Dempsey, I think actually did hit him low and do something illegal. Point still stands I guess).

I'm not impressed with Dempsey winning a round against Tunney in 2 fights, and then losing the better against Sharkey until the unfortunate, conclusive KO result due to a low punch from Mr. Dempsey. Sorry, Burt.

 

Exactly. Even Tunney claimed Dempsey would wipe away Marciano in a round (He said Dempsey would wipe away all the 50's guys in a matter of 3 rounds, though). That's the mystique and legend. You described a difference between the Williard and Firpo fight. But Janitor clarified the difference because Dempsey was scarred of Williard, and knew of his reputation and the fact that he killed a man in the ring.

I'd imagine, a 24 year old fighting for the title rather than having all the confidence in the world could explain a difference. Dempsey was young, nervous, and not as assure of himself despite all the savagery and viciousness displayed in his attack. I could be over-analyzing here.

Rocky was a man even in his days that was underrated. People didn't buy the hype, they thought he was an Al Weil overprotected fighter. Dempsey thought Layne was the most promising young HW, not Marciano. Surely, Dempsey would probably overlook Marciano if he was up in coming the way the entire world would, if they would ever fought. It wasn't until Marciano beat Layne and Louis that he won over the critics. He was the favorite going in the Walcott fight, but he still had his critics then as well (Walcott being one of his biggest ones. Calling him an amateur).

Dempsey would fight Marciano head on and that would be his undoing.