Some questions about Jack Dempsey and Lennox Lewis

Lewis, by far. Not to mention Dempsey lost to the best fighter he faced and struggled badly with the second-best fighter, though it should be noted he was past his best against both of them.

Lewis. Too much variety, adaptability, power, size and speed. Dempsey has an early puncher's chance, but i suspect Lewis will tie him up and break him down like he did the older Tyson.

Lewis, again, by far.

Lewis can hardly be held responsible for not facing Bowe when Bowe openly ducked Lewis and threw his WBC title belt in the garbage can during a press conference.


Wills, on the other hand, was happy for meet Dempsey from the late 1910's on, to far in the 20's. Dempsey or Dempsey's management (we'll never know, but it's always easy to hide behind your manager) kept him on a leash and promised him a shot several times, on one instance if he got by Fulton. He did, and of course never received a title shot. Racism is not an argument, either, i've seen several articles and even a drawing in which Wills was put forward as best challenger and THE fight to make. Not to mention that there were black middleweight and lightheavyweight champions during the same time.

As far Greb, there is no racism argument at all, yet he still didn't get his shot. I don't hold much value to the reported sparring session (these are often rumors), but given Greb's excellent record at the time, this is one fight that is missing on Dempsey's resume and i don't really see a good reason for the fight not being made. However, it's not half as bad as Wills who was basically undefeated for 9 years (6 years of which during Dempsey's reign), and who was a real heavyweight.

Lewis, because he fought and faced the best he could face. Even when he was 37 years old, he faced and defeated future champion Vitali Klitschko. This is a stat he shares with Dempsey, who defeated future champ Sharkey.. Louis is the only other champion to achieve this, when he beat Walcott.

To me, Dempsey's behavior as a champion is a disgrace and a big black mark on his legacy. A true champion goes out of his way to fight the best and prove his worth. Dempsey fought less than once a year, sat on the title for three full years (a record in 100 years of history), ducked the consistantly winning #1 challenger for 7 years (another record), and not just lost to the best man he faced, but was completely dominated and outclassed. Sure, he was past his best, but given the fact he won only 1 round out of 20, how well are his chances if he was in his prime? And should Tunney be blamed for the fact that Dempsey was lazy and hadn't fought recently?

Lewis has embarrassing knockout losses by the hands of McCall and Rahman, but he avenged both in spectacular fashion, despite being 35 years of age against Rahman. Dempsey avenged his first round knockout loss to the 37 year old Flynn, but failed to set the record straight against Tunney.

Lennox Lewis showed he could handle every style and has beaten every man he faced. His record of 19-2 against ranked contenders has to bow only for Louis' and Ali's records, and even then, his win/loss ratio is similar to or better than theirs, who have something like 30-5 stats.

Dempsey to me never showed he could handle someone with Tunney's style OR someone as good as Tunney. His early years, even while avoiding Jeannette and Langford, were very impressive, but once he got that title, he lost the edge and didn't prove himself against the best anymore. Lewis fought much better opponents, often huge hitters, while Dempsey wasn't convincing against big punchers. Firpo had him down twice and nearly out, while Willard and Fulton didn't connect much. If he had to face 20 220+lbs men who could punch like Lewis did, would he have retired with only one knockout loss?

I'd rank him somewhere low in the top10, a bit below Tyson. I rank Lewis at #3.


I feel Dempsey often gets ranked too high because everyone remembers his incredibly spectacular destruction of Willard and his great fight with Firpo. While they were in fact great fights to watch, many forget that Willard was 37 years old, inactive for two and a half years, overweight, and a horrible boxer to begin with, whose only reason to win the title was because he out-lasted Johnson; under 15 or 20 round rules he'd have been a footnote as defeated Johnson opponent.

As for Firpo, he looks like he's never boxed before, but because he was a man with extraordinairy size for his time, he makes it to the top and nearly beats Dempsey. Again, a great fight to watch, but not something positive on his resume.
And how many people know the blatant, shameful ducking job he did on Wills? How many people know Wills at all, who could rank as high as Dempsey or even higher? He is remembered as All American hero, and people during his time didn't have as easy accesss to information as we do now. If there'd be an ESB, he'd be thrashed daily for his inactivity and failure to meet the top challengers.

 

:nut

Erm Lewis was actually amazingly athletic and quick for his size. Far lesser talented fighters lasted longer with a peak Tyson, why couldn't Lewis? A peak version would more than hold is own you can be sure of that.

 

Was hard done by upon being stopped in the first McCall fight, he convincingly avenged both defeats. McCall and Rahman were no journeymen they were legit contenders better than at least some of Dempseys opp.

 

As for the suspect chin malarky, well it held up very well against Tyson, Tua, Grant, Briggs, Ruddock, Bruno, etc, etc. All could hit.

 

Dempsey was the 1st megastar million dollor gate fighter he could draw live crowds and made money no matter who he fought, he is being judged very harshly but had a deeper record than a lot of the title holders before him. With the proper time adjustments which reflect weight differences mostly due to weight training in modern times...This would be a tough fight , Both men could hit...Lewis was stopped by lesser men and Dempsey could nail you on the other hand Dempsey fought Bigger men but not a better man than Lewis.....Early explosion that the strong will survive, unless Lewis does what he did vs Tua and wins a UD but he must get past Jack's dangerous power as well.........Toss-up

 

Just a quick comment...Lewis faced many hard punchers obviously, but that doesn't neccessarily mean they all hit him with their sunday punches. Had they, and it's doubtful Lewis would have had only two losses on his record.

Yes he took some hard punches, but the nature of his losses (dropped by single punches early in the fight) does lead to some question marks about his ability to take a big punch. At least in my eyes.

 

Can you expand on that a bit?

 

Yeah, Dempsey had his flaws no doubt, but keep in mind nobody ever fought like that before him, not at heavyweight anyway. He was an extremely explosive and exciting fighter for his era and I think we should take that into account.

I agree having an aura does not (and should not) give someone a free pass to any top 10 list, but that aura does not develop or come about on it's own. It's usually earned.

This is what I'm trying to say: For HIS time, for HIS era, Dempsey was a phenomenon. Maybe not the greatest or even the best even back then, but he had a style, a savagery, that captured people's imaginations.
He came around at the right time, because people craved excitement and got it with him. He gave them some of the most exciting fights of all time, and was involved in a couple of boxing firsts, like the afore-mentioned million dollar gate. (Which wasn't actually a million dollars but was close enough. Tunney made up a cheque for the difference.) In any event, Dempsey was a pioneer in many respects.

That alone doesn't make him great, but I think it certainly helps. Maybe if we were around back then we could relate to him a whole lot better.
Of course, being heavyweight champion carried more prestige than now, and again that certainly helped in the popularity stakes. (As it did with Louis and later Marciano.)
That's unfair to modern boxers I know, but such is life.

On a side note, I don't think Dempsey ducked Greb. Greb's legend is getting a bit overblown for me lately. I'm sure we can all relate stories of so-and-so kicking so-and-so around in a sparring session, but it's a strong leap to suggest the same could be done in a real fight.

What were the circumstances surrounding these sparring sessions? Were both guys on top form? How serious was the sparring session? Did one of them try and prove a point?
There are too many fuzzy variables for me to take these gym stories with anything more than a pinch of salt.

 

That's a peach of a post.

 

Very fair post. I disagree a bit about Greb's legend being overrated: his record speaks for itself, at least in my book. We all can't agree on everything though, hence the reason to have forums in the first place. If we were all the same life would be dull.

 

Up until Tunney it was normal for champs to not defend. They might have a spree of defences and then would go ona vaudeville tour. In Dempsey's case he had Hollywood. I think you have to look at what they did in a different light.

No doubt Lennox has a better record and reign...

I think a fight between them would be a classic. Dempsey was an elite puncher and Lennox was the best of the giants. Dempsey would never have met a fighter like Lewis... I look at the Lewis-Briggs fight for some kind of yardstick. Lewis got tagged more than once by Briggs' left hook and was very messy. Dempsey could take him. I'd back Lewis but it would be a real hum-dinger.

 

1. Lewis faced the bigger, stronger men.
3. Lewis, of course.
4. Bowe ducked Lewis. A credit to Lewis. Greb was a middleweight; I don't hold it against Dempsey that he never faced him. And let us deal with the fact that it was the prejudiced thinking of society at the time rather than a yellow streak in Dempsey that robbed us of Dempsey vs. Wills.
5...and 2: Jack Dempsey.

I rank fighters head-to-head, unless I am specifically discussing their legacy.

Had Dempsey not destroyed the Lewis-size Willard, and had Larry Holmes not defeated Ray Mercer, I would deem it foolhardy to pick little Jack Dempsey over the giant Lewis.

First, the Holmes-Mercer reference: as of Holyfield, today's fighters have uncanny power and bulk compliments of steroids. It's a whole new ballgame. Seeing Mercer destroy Morrison in such savage, merciless fashion would seem to bode very badly for a faded, old-school stylist like Holmes, yet, Holmes, an acknowledged all-time great, decisively schooled Mercer. Point?

Any guy who has been considered an all-time great for nearly 100 years cannot simply be dismissed when pitted against any contemporary young lion, under any circumstance. The pressure is on the young lion's entourage to prove he is more than simply better than his peers. I think most would agree it would be foolish to say Bill Clinton was great enough, technically and knowledge-wise, to merit his knocking someone over on Mount Rushmore.

From film it is clear Jack Dempsey was leagues ahead of his time, able to handle any style from Firpo to Gibbons, with polished accurate and varied powerpunching, an evasive defense, great stamina, heart, and ability to take a punch. It is no accident he has been an inspiration to generations. He has earned it on the strength of once-in-a-century ability. Lewis will never transcend so. Because, no matter how you slice it, Lewis was the best of a generation of powerful fighters who yet were quite lacking in this or that key department when compared to the very best in history. Exhibits: Holmes vs. Mercer. Holmes vs. McCall. Foreman vs. Moorer. Holmes vs. Holyfield. Duran vs. Barkley. Robinson vs. Graziano.

Reasons I like Dempsey:

Against Willard, Dempsey showed he can get around a lazy jab with an explosive shot to a giant's chin for a one-punch knockdown. He showed he can negotiate a smothering clinching tactic by simply moving along and not wasting energy.

Pardoning the pun, Dempsey is a true pugilism specialist, adept at offense and defense thanks to a properly balanced, center-of-gravity position and certainly faster overall than Lewis. This thus affords him the ability to anticipate potentially killer missiles the Rahmans and Grants never saw and capitalize on Lewis' sleepy moments.

Dempsey has a better chin, greater toughness and killer instinct than the cerebral Lewis. These factors could weigh at any given moment in the fight.

Lewis will be at an advantage early with the jab. But I don't see the Lewis who couldn't knock down Holyfield in 24 rounds blasting out Jack. Sooner than later, Dempsey will narrow the gap and in workmanlike fashion begin to pound the huge target of Lewis' body, always seeking to go upstairs. A determined Holy had Lewis on his heels in the prophecy.

Can the bulky Lewis keep up his handiwork for 15 rounds? Dempsey was no mindless brawler. He could be a patient pressure stalker, piling up the points if need be.

Lewis could very well break down towards the end of the fight and lose by TKO. And who would have guessed little Joe Frazier could decision Ali?

The size difference here is immense. It could prove decisive for Lewis. But Dempsey's mindset, his comfort zone, was that of a giant slayer. He would be in his element here. Lewis would be up against a combination of heart, power and skill that was a cut above.

 

1. Lewis. Fighters from the '90s were generally bigger and better than heavies from the '10s and '20s.

2. Lewis. Too big and too good for the smallish Dempsey, who was really an all-time great cruiser, not a superheavy. Dempsey was also easy to hit, which is always a death sentence against a big, fluid bomber like Lewis.


3. Lewis (see #2 above).

4. No. Lewis and Dempsey were both lions who would have fought anyone if given the choice. They didn't always get the best opposition because of politics and promotional problems.

5. Lewis, because I regard him as the superior, more dominant fighter. Arguably, though, Dempsey contributed more to boxing overall, because he was the champion who raised boxing's status and prestige. Without Dempsey, boxing might have remained a back alley kind of attraction as opposed to becoming a mainstream, big-time sport with the international sporting public.

 

Lewis did sort of avoid Wladimir Klitschko, who was the #1 contender from 2000 to mid 2003 when Sanders thrashed him. This is the lone man that he could've fought but didn't, though it should be noted that Lennox losing the title to Rahman delayed things a bit, and the Tyson fight was much bigger.