Stylistically speaking: Speedy slicksters, big skilled boxer/punchers, defensive masters (Johnson for example), heavy hitting brawlers (like Foreman), and tall skilled fighters with an awkard style set would all stand at least a good chance. I could reel off about ten, maybe fifteen fighters who I'd pick to beat Dempsey some heavy faves, others not so. Dempsey is ridiculously overrated head to head. The two Tunney fights are a pointer on how any bigger, modern, natural heavyweight with a similar level of skill would theroetically handle Dempsey (past prime or otherwise).
I guess you'd consider me one of those over-raters. I tend to think a prime Dempsey, at his absolute peak, would beat - or would stand a great chance of beating - almost anyone, ever. Just my opinion.
So is Witherspoon. But why Witherspoon? Dempsey was a real champ for years, and Tim´s best "win" was a SD- L against Holmes, and now everytime I read a matchup which includes Tim I read the same stuff like "This 6´4 big and 230 lbs heavy great athlete would under good conditions...", fact is, Witherspoon´s resume isn´t that impressive to pick him to beat an ATG like Dempsey IMO...
Some people think I rate Dempsey too low, because I take into consideration his not fighting Wills. Some people think I'm crazy for thinking that I would pick a prime Demsey to lose to Tunney. Those people may be happy here. I pick Dempsey by decision, but a stoppage is possible. Dempsey appears to have much better hand speed, and is more to the point with his punches. I think that the fight would look somewhat similar to Frazier and Foreman's rematch. The fight where Frazier shows a bit of an ability to outbox his larger foe. In fact, the hand speed difference pretty much does it for me in my decision.
Dempsay on KO before 7. round... Witherspoon couldn't keep Dempsey away for long... The huge powerpunches form Dempsey(later copied by Tyson) would make Witherspoon fall hard after 15-20 hits....:****off Dempsey was an animal in the ring and super on the inside...:smoke
Not an easy fight. I'll go with Dempsey via Decsion. Withspoon at his best was very good, but I think he lacked the fire and drive to beat Dempsey.
I dont think that Witherspoon would be able to outbox Dempsey and if he could he certainly wouldnt be able to outpunch him. A jab is only usefull against Dempsey if you can move backwards prety quickly while deploying it. Otherwise he will just slip inside it and go to work.
I personally think that if Witherspoon landed one of his patented overhand rights like the one he demolished Frank Bruno with, he'd send Dempsey to Kingdom come. Spoon tested his abilities against some fairly decent sized heavyweights and frankly, I don't see Dempsey at 190 Lbs or less, taking those shots very well. Especially for a man who was knocked out of the ring by Luis Firpo in his prime. Witherspoon was a much better fighter than Firpo, Willard, Smith, Miske, Brennan, Tate or anyone that Dempsey fought except for Tunney who beat him. I also don't buy this argument that Dempsey would just dance circles around him and land big shots wherever and whenever he pleased. Holmes wasn't particlularly succesful at slapping around a green Witherspoon, and I'm not giving Dempsey credit for being better at utilizing the ring than Holmes. Spoon defeated men who were in better shape than the men that Dempsey fought. I also hate to beat the **** out of a dead hoarse, but Chris Pointus has a very good point that Dempsey did not exactly jump for joy at the thought of fighting black men, yet he gave a title shot to a sick and poor streaking fighter in Billy Miske. Of course, politics and not necessarily Dempsey were the deciding factor, but the fact still remained, that he did not test himself against the very best of his era. Witherspoon, for the most part did, and while he did not exactly beat everyone during his prime, he also never truly lost a decisive outcome until he was maybe 39 years old and on the comeback trail for the second time. Dempsey loses early in his career to guys like Willie Meehan, then at age 32 to a lightheavyweight, was knocked through the ropes inbetween by a mediocre fighter, yet his divinity is preserved regardless. No one can make solid predictions in fantasy matchups, but we can either give or deny benefit of doubt. I can't credit Dempsey as being the better fighter head to head than Witherspoon.
Witherspoon outweighs him by a good 25 pounds, he has solid power and superior boxing ability. I would make him the solid favourite to beat dempsey. Holyfield and Spinks werent exactly too keen on fighting him and holmes wouldnt give him a rematch. Hes basically a big risk, small reward fighter.
On what do you base this belief. Dempsey fought a lot of big punchers and nobody ever did anything like that to him. Witherspoon on the other hand.......................
Dempsey did not fight many big punchers at all. In fact, i think his chin is pretty untested vs a good big puncher (for top10 HW standards). There's Willard (who barely landed), Fulton (who didn't land) and Firpo (who knocked him down twice, once out of the ring). Must of his other opponents were lightheavyweights or not hard punching cruiserweights. This fight is hard to call. If Dempsey fought Wills, we'd have a better gauge on it. Witherspoon was an excellent fighter and he fought in an era when there were much more big men in society so that smaller fighters could no longer compete with them (hence the junior heavyweight division). Dempsey never faced a big man like that. This difference is not to be overlooked. That said, an other poster did make a valid point that Witherspoon is a bit like Norton in that he's better against boxers than a fast, forward coming puncher.
