Someone school me on Jack Johnson and Jack Dempsey

Right. That's what I said, or meant to.

If Lamon Brewster can stop Vlad, then so could Dempsey. He won gold in 96. Even if you give him a pass for Puritty, a full 6 years into his pro carrer, he got starched by Sanders, and then a full 7 years into his career he got starched by Brewster. The guy is vulnerable to well conditioned guys with solid punches who have some guts.

 

What's more damning, getting cold cocked by undersized, losing-streaker Jim Flynn or mis-pacing a fight and getting taken out by an iron-chinned, 226 pound power puncher?

For the record, I am not endorsing either as forgivable

 

All of which has comprehensively been proved to be utter buill****, news reports of these fights have been posted many, many times they ALL refute this crap.But you keep spewing it out, its what you are good at ,telling lies.

 

Dempsey turned pro in August 1914, got stopped in Feb. 1917, less than three years into his career against a guy who had nearly 70 fights and had twice fought for the world championship. No shame there. Similar to Johnson getting caught by Choynski early on in his career. Happens.

Like I said, I'm willing to give Vlad a pass on Puritty, but getting stopped 6-7 years into his career,he's had plenty of time to develop, so I'm not convinced.

 

No, you did not ,you posted Jeannette's version of their fight. In ALL the time you have posted on this site, you have NEVER provided a PRIMARY SOURCE to back up your hysterical hatred.

Jeannete was 27 years old when he last fought Johnson 6 months AFTER their fight Jeannette scaled 185lbs for a fight with Sam McVey it is a matter of public record.
NB. Johnson scaled 185lbs, 7 months prior to the Jeannette fight ,when he beat the 156lbs Langford. The weight between Jack & Joe would therefore appear to be negligible .

Taller?atsch Jeannette was 5'10", Johnson 6' 1/4" ,2 1/4" disparity, hardly earth shattering, especially compared to Tom Sharkey conceding 6 inches to Jim Jeffries x2.. Did I mention that Sharkey was conceding 32lbs, Fitz 47lbs ?

 

I think both sides are correct here. The aggressive crowd pleasing wlad was very vulnerable to anyone who could withstand his arsenal.

Against Purrity he showed inexperience by throwing everything but the kitchen sink at a man known for being durable. In a way he made the exact same mistake against lamont. He isn't conditioned physically to go guns blazing and maybe this is a fault with being a superheatyweight, has any superheavy had a successful career as an all action type fighter? I'm not sure.

The sanders fight was different in a way because he got caught by a peach of a counter and never recovered. Which is again a flaw I think could still be seen as a ***** in his armour.

Now he's solved both issues by becoming a safety first fighter at range with great clinching technique on the inside to spoil any attack (very few in history could outmuscle him and release their arms to mount an effective inside attack here)

So the early career wlad (definitely in his prime years, just fighting a poor strategy imo) could certainly lose to most any heavyweight that can avoid his attack for 4 rounds or so.

Late career wlad has an atg jab that can dictate a fight so he never has to expose his vulnerable side.

Someone like louis or liston would patiently stalk from the outside until a mistake was made (maybe a lazy jab or an ambitious 1-2, or poor positioning in the ring) and both have the power and accuracy combined with stamina and poise to take him out for a come from behind knockout.

Ali could dance all night at wlad's pace and soundly outpoint him.

An equally excellent outfighter with the right combination of speed and power could also take him out down the stretch or beat him to the punch round by round such as larry or lewis (50-50 all the way imo).

An atg inside fighter who's of sufficient size and strength has a chance early doors of slipping his jab and taking him out with one shot but the chances fade after the sixth when he'll be well within rhythm such as tyson or frazier (again a toss up).

The smaller infighters like rocky or dempsey won't be able to take the punishment dished out by wlad and won't be strong enough to work inside.

Wlad does have the same weakness and I firmly believe that, but his gameplan is so effective there's only a handful i'd favour over him (liston, louis and ali) plus a handful i'd put even with him (larry, lewis, tyson, frazier). No other hw has the right combination of attributes imo for me to favour them.

 

No luf, Dempsey as you say wouldn't TROUBLE, Bowe, Lewis, Wlad or Vitali. He would flatten them...He LOVED the big boys. He would get under their long arms and make them seem to be in first gear...Get over this "weight" difference. Dempsey was very strongly built. He would have more trouble with a Joe Louis or an early Mike Tyson as their handspeed would somewhat nullify Dempsey's...SPEED KILLS....

 

I can't give a pass on a guy who gets cold-cocked in 1 by a short, cruiserweight who went 3-7 with 3 losses by KO in his previous10 fights. To me it stretches the limits of credulity to applaud someone who for all intents and purposes is KO'd by one of the worst filmed challengers to the title, and is then assisted back into the ring for another shot at retaining his title.

 

No. He'd be giving away 50 pounds against people punching much harder than him.

He'll get chewed up on the way in. Once inside lewis and wlad won't give him any room.

Bowe will happily trade with him in the middle of the ring and I think bowe hits harder.

Vitali is interesting because he's quite slow in comparison. However in his prime he was a huge puncher and threw far too much leather for dempsey to survive over 12.

 

I also don't see how Dempsey could beat the bigger lads. While some say Jack lowd fighting larger men beating Jess Willard doesn't hold much significance in this argument.

I could see him knocking Wlad out tho. But Lewis and Vitali spark him

 

This sums up the confusing perspectives for me on Dempsey.

I anyone was gonna rate Dempsey I thought it would be on a basis of how good he looks, and if he was gonna trouble anyone it would be the big lugs!

Both these statements suggest the exact opposite!

 

Beating willard and firpo does not mean he'd beat wlad, vitali, lewis or bowe.

 

No, but going through them like they were made of wet tissue paper, means that you have to at least entertain the possibility.

At best, they are going to be one slip away from disaster.

 

Good point.:good

 

Burt your a smart guy and objective. I urge you to watch the tapes. Johnson did not beat up on Willard for 25 rounds. Johnson was the better for the first 15, Willard took control before round 20, and hurt Johnson badly with body shots the round before the KO. This can be see on film. The story of the heat I think is exaggerated. We are talking April in here in Caribbean.