The Thing people dont get about Willard vs Dempsey

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by itsa, Jan 7, 2016.


Page 6 of 6
  1. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010
    Burt is a primary source. He has seen with his own eyes legends from the 1940's, and he's telling us that they were just as, if not better than modern fighters.

    doesn't get any better than that.
     
    reznick, Jan 8, 2016
    reznick, Jan 8, 2016
    #76
  2. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Obsessed with Boxing

    19,064
    20,543
    Jul 30, 2014
    Troll alert! Troll alert! Troll alert!
     
    swagdelfadeel, Jan 22, 2016
    swagdelfadeel, Jan 22, 2016
    #77
  3. Bonecrusher

    Bonecrusher Lineal Champion Full Member

    3,428
    1,156
    Jul 19, 2004
    I've seen the Photo, Willard is clearly the bigger, thicker man.
     
    Bonecrusher, Jan 29, 2016
    Bonecrusher, Jan 29, 2016
    #78
  4. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,724
    29,074
    Jun 2, 2006
    I've thought of a way Willard wins this. Dempsey drowns in Jess's blood!:good
     
    mcvey, Jan 29, 2016
    mcvey, Jan 29, 2016
    #79
  5. BCS8

    BCS8 VIP Member

    60,597
    80,847
    Aug 21, 2012
    The gulf in class between Willard and Dempsey was just too large. It wasn't apparent at the time, maybe, but its true. I don't see Willard ever winning that fight. Too slow, not enough footspeed, not enough skill ... you can't win a fight on heart and chin alone, not against Jack, anyway. Dempsey is one of those guys whose actual ability is much better than their resume.
     
    BCS8, Jan 29, 2016
    BCS8, Jan 29, 2016
    #80
Page 6 of 6