Someone school me on Jack Johnson and Jack Dempsey

I seldom agree with you Seamus, me being an old timer, [I probably have the rose tinted glasses on]. However, I do enjoy your posts, they are the grit in the shell that occasionally makes a pearl. Devil's advocate's ,we need.

 

I guess Ludendorf beat him prety easily then.

 

He sent about 20,000 boys to their graves on the first day of the Somme, insisting they wade into Maxim machine guns.

And as we all know Ludendorff was stabbed in the back!

 

he was no match for Haig and Haig...
I'll drink to that...

 

No unfortunately, burt, you are acting unobjective and reverting to lies.

1. Yes and today there are 17 divisions. Greb would most likely have been a smw today whilst jack a cw.

2. The hw division also upped it's minimum limit from 190 to 200 in the interest of safety. I have no doubts louis would eventually flatten any hw in history. If jack was to land enough shots he too could knock them out, I don't think he will land anywhere near enough shots. Likewise lewis, wlad, vitali and bowe could flatten dempsey. In boxing 1 punch can change anything.

3. Because louis has a perfect style for his division. He can overwhelm those his size or smaller. He could stalk for opportunity against those bigger. His weight fluctuated between 195 and 205 so he could easily train to 215. He's giving away maybe 10% to a shw so I don't consider him the same kind of mismatch. Jack was between 180 and 190 a full stone less than louis. He's not even a guy who would be in the same division today.

Burt, I implore you to stop being biased. Accept that I don't believe jack could beat lewis or wlad. Louis, however, I favour over both.

So where's my agenda now burt? I think louis beats the shw greats.

 

"Put this right alongside Sir Douglas Haig's contention from the same era that the machine gun will never be a match to the cavalry in battle. "

But, you know, this argument reminds me of many articles I've read from the first quarter of the 20th century that said the likes of Dempsey and Miske had no chance against the giants like Willard, Carl Morris and Fred Fulton because the latter were just too big and of course we know what happened when they actually fought those guys.

 

I have been consistent in my contention that today's (post Liston) top flight big men are better than eras previous. I don't think Willard or Carnera or Baer or Simon hold a candle to Bowe, Lewis, Foreman, WK, VK...

Now, if Huck KO's Povetkin in a few minutes, I am sure this thread will come to life.

 

luf, let's agree to disagree. Life is too damn short to hold grudges...Cheers.

 

Don't be so quit to retire on your stool as it could be me conceeding somewhat due to ignorance.

For some reason I always had willard pegged as a 6 foot 2 type guy, same as fulton. However, after rechecking my assumptions, it appears both were 6 foot 6 240 pound fighters.

So i'm completely willing to concede my point about size being the issue here (jack is too small to be taken seriously) beating 2 of the top 3 guys of that timeframe both of who were legitimate shw by today's definition should be enough proof that size isn't the obstacle.

That being said, stylistically I see him having little chance against lewis and wlad who were both expert at maintaining range as well as both possessing monstrous power and great jabs.

I could envision jack beating vitali. Combining the trouble vitali had with an elusive pressure fighting byrd with jack's demolitions of fulton and willard could tip the balance here.

Bowe is difficult to call. The two will clash in the middle. Bowe didn't seen to be troubled by holy's speed and combinations on the inside so I think I might favour bowe's blunt force trauma to jack's buzzsaw aggression.

So to clarify burt, I completely concede my argument on size in this instance. Jack is proven against big men. My only argument now is on style. Vitali and bowe would both fail to stop jack coming inside. I think vitali flounders where bowe might not do so.

If this is the end of the debate i'd like to end it on a high note and thank you an intelligent exchange of observation :good