Was Dempsey the only boxer to stand over opponents after knocking them down?

That was ruthless! But not on the level of Dempseys legal assaults.

 

Ali did it often.

 

Never forget as mcvey mentioned...
It worked both ways. ...they could and did stand over dempsey such as firpo
One reason dempsey started quickly

 

Ali did it vs Liston and Bonavena.

 

Foreman came closer to killing Roman than Dempsey did vs Willard.

 

Back then...(1919)...you could stand over your opponent after knocking him down....and then hit him after his gloves left the canvas....

 

The original MoQ rules were pretty broken in respect to what the fighter does when their opponent is down, it would've been legal to stand over an opponent knocked down near a corner. Generally they just agreed they would have to step away from the fighter, and you often see the referee forcing a fighter away from the downed oppnent. I'm not sure if Dempsey just negotiated for more leniant rules, or if they weren't being enforced properly.

 

Its remarkable how ignorant some pontificating here are. It has NEVER, in the gloved era, been legal to stand over a fallen opponent and hit him upon rising. Period. The Marquis of Queensberry Rules state this very clearly and all modern boxing rules derive originally from those and build upon them. The fourth rule of the MoQ rules states:

"If either man falls through weakness or otherwise, he must get up unassisted, 10 seconds to be allowed him to do so, the other man meanwhile to return to his corner, and when the fallen man is on his legs the round is to be resumed and continued until the three minutes have expired. If one man fails to come to the scratch in the 10 seconds allowed, it shall be in the power of the referee to give his award in favour of the other man."

Dempsey never in his life fought in a boxing match where standing over his opponent was legal and then suddenly had the misfortune of having the rules changed on him. There was no magic rule change that suddenly rendered Dempsey at a disadvantage in some imaginary new modern era. Thats pure myth by Dempsey apologists. The Walker law which codified boxing in New York as of 1920 stated very clearly that a fighter had to return to his corner if an opponent was knocked down. The Toledo Boxing Commission rules which were instituted in 1918/1919 under which Dempsey fought Willard deferred to the MoQ on the subject of a fallen fighter. You could go on and on. But the fact of the matter is that standing over a fallen opponent and striking him upon rising has been illegal in the sport since before Dempsey was born.

Another tired apologists trope is that the ref in the Long Count fight delayed the count for Tunney but started counting immediately when Dempsey was down. This is not true. Go watch both knockdowns. The referee is completely consistent in both instances. When Tunney is down he begins counting immediately and even tries to fend Dempsey off with one hand before halting the count to usher Dempsey to a corner which was required by the rules and well publicized in advance. The only difference when Dempsey goes down is that hes up immediately at the count of one so we never got to see if the ref would have had the same issue with ushering Tunney to a corner.

 

good points. But as we have seen, Jack Johnson did the same thing. The rules were not properly enforced for anyone.

 

So youve seen a handful of examples and think thats indicative of all of the thousands of fights for the era. Sounds like solid logic...

 

I could have phrased it better. From what i have seen, it does not appear that the rule was enforced properly. Dempsey himself was knocked down several times by John Lester Johnson. I wonder if the neutral corner rule was being enforced in that fight; i am not sure because i haven't seen any footage.

In any case, we can't blame a fighter if the rule isn't being enforced by the referee.

 

Against Firpo, when Dempsey had knocked him down for the last count, instead of his standing over his opponent he actually went to the neutral corner.

 

I dont think you have to be a Dempsey apologist to want this issue cleared up.
I remember Fleischer stating that after the Firpo fight the rule was clarified " to the furthest neutral corner".
There are many differring statements on this
"The rule changed formally right before the Tunney-Dempsey rematch in 1927.

Before then, under accepted championship rules, a fighter did not have to go to a neutral corner after knocking an opponent down, and could hit him immediately after he rose, (many times a fighter would be nailed literally on the way up). After the 1927 rule change, a fighter had to go to the furthest neutral corner after knocking an opponent down. Delayed counts where an opponent failed to go to a neutral corner, thus delaying the referee counting, are called "long counts."

The term is most often associated with the Tunney-Dempsey 1927 heavyweight championship rematch. In the seventh round, Dempsey knocked Tunney down, but did not go to a neutral corner as the new rule required him to. (if you want to see how the rule affected fighters, watch old films of Dempsey prior to 1927, and watch Dempsey standing over opponents and nailing them as they rose)

In the 1927 Tunney-Dempsey fight, when Dempsey hovered over Tunney, forgetting about the new rule, Referee Dave Barry did not start counting over Tunney until he had ushered Dempsey to a neutral corner, wasting several seconds. Tunney rose to his feet, having been on the canvas for around 17 seconds, and went on to win a decision, thus retaining his title. The controversy over the long count assured that the fight went down in history as "The Battle of the Long Count."

The rule today is: "When a boxer is knocked down, the referee shall direct the opponent
to move to the farthest neutral corner of the ring."
I'm not suggesting Dempsey shouldn't have been penalised.
We know Barry began counting over Dempsey as soon as he went down with Tunney standing over him, he did not first usher Tunney towards a neutral corner.Barry did not count over Tunney he jumped in momentarily raised his arm dropped it and directed Dempsey to a neutral corner all perfectly correct, he does not start counting until Dempsey has gone to the corner when five seconds have elapsed Tunney go the extra time because of intial Dempsey's refusal to go to the corner after he scored the knock down Tunney was perfectly entitled to those extra seconds .Dempsey's fault entirely, but Barry did not count over Tunney until Dempsey had gone away.

This content is protected

 

George SIler commented that because the MoQ rules meant that if a fighter was knocked down in their opponents corner, their opponent would then be the rules stand over them, the fighters generally just agreed to alter the rules so they'd stand back if an opponent was down, but not go to the corner.

Do you know the details of what was agreed for Dempsey's fights? Genuine question, because I don't.

 

The rule did not change. Thats nonsense. The rule or some variation of it, was in effect for Willard, Brennan, Firpo etc and for Tunney 2 there was no “change” right before the contest because boxing had just been legalized in Illinois the year before and the rules were not only well publicized but both fighters were well aware of them. And yes, revisionist history to that end is absolutely apologism. Particularly when its ok for Dempsey to stand over his opponents in violation of the rules and strike them upon rising, rabbit punch, low blow, etc and yet when the rules are adhered to its Dempsey who is the victim? This article sums up the holes in that argument:

[url]https://flic.kr/p/2jJUtgg[/url]

Essentially Dempsey fans want one set of rules for Dempsey, or a lack of, and another for his opponents, or when his opponents dont benefit from the same rule breaking that Dempsey chronically employed it was because they werent good enough to. Just like pretending that because Dempsey was a poor sportsman everyone was. A perfect example is that not only did Dempsey stand over his opponents in violation of the rules to strike them while they are rising but watch his fights with Willard, Firpo, and Brennan, he often stood over them AND maneuvered to be behind them when they arose. Trying to spin this behavior as being part of some sort of level playing field is frankly hilarious.
And as stated before it wasnt merely a situation of Dempsey being unfamiliar with the rules (which is a ludicrous assertion) but he was trying to gain an unfair advantage. Period. In every one of these instances Dempsey is seen jockeying for a position BEHIND his fallen opponent so he catch them unawares when they rise.

[url]https://flic.kr/p/2jJNTJx[/url]
[url]https://flic.kr/p/2jJStMj[/url]
[url]https://flic.kr/p/2jJTi1y[/url]
[url]https://flic.kr/p/2jJNTMZ[/url]
[url]https://flic.kr/p/2jJThZr[/url]
[url]https://flic.kr/p/2jJNTM8[/url]

The rules in the various states differed. There was no unified rule encompassing all states beyond the deference to the MoQ rules where they werent superseded by local or state rules/law. With that said every state or city where boxing was legal had some rule in effect protecting a fallen fighter. The only major difference in these rules is that more often than not, rather than specifying a “neutral” corner they often stated that the standing fighter had to return to his corner or the furthest corner.

Your statement that “a champion” could stand over an opponent and strike him during Dempseys era and that the rules changed simply does not jive with ANY rules in force at the time whether they be the MoQ, the Walker Law, or the rules in force at any other locale where Dempsey fought. I can quote those rules. Quote me the rule allowing champions to stand over a fallen opponent. You cant because that rule didnt exist, quite the contrary! The rules for Dempsey-Tunney 2 were clear and not only were they well publicized BEFORE the contest but they were circulated with programs of the fight and gone over with both fighters prior to the contest. In fact there was a big meeting between the commission and both fighters and their representatives regarding the rules in Illinois before hand. The exact verbiage of the Illinois Boxing Commission rulebook was: "When a knockdown occurs the timekeeper shall immediately arise and announce the seconds audibly as they elapse. The referee shall first see that the opponent retires to the farthest corner and then turning to the timekeeper, shall pick up the count in unison with the timekeeper, announcing the seconds to the boxer on the floor. SHOULD THE BOXER ON HIS FEET FAIL TO STAY IN THE CORNER, THE REFEREE AND TIMEKEEPER SHALL CEASE COUNTING UNTIL HE HAS SO RETIRED." Nothing unclear about that at all. Note the date of this article and its outline of the rules in relation to the Dempsey-Tunney 2 fight:

[url]https://flic.kr/p/2jJTo4i[/url]

When Dempsey fought Willard in Toledo the Toledo Boxing Commission rules were in effect which deferred to the MoQ on the subject of knockdowns: "If either man falls through weakness or otherwise, he must get up unassisted, 10 seconds to be allowed him to do so, the other man meanwhile to return to his corner, and when the fallen man is on his legs the round is to be resumed and continued until the three minutes have expired. If one man fails to come to the scratch in the 10 seconds allowed, it shall be in the power of the referee to give his award in favour of the other man." These rules had been in effect since January of 1918.

When Dempsey fought Carpentier in New Jersey the New Jersey rules deferred to the MoQ on the subject of knockdowns: "If either man falls through weakness or otherwise, he must get up unassisted, 10 seconds to be allowed him to do so, the other man meanwhile to return to his corner, and when the fallen man is on his legs the round is to be resumed and continued until the three minutes have expired. If one man fails to come to the scratch in the 10 seconds allowed, it shall be in the power of the referee to give his award in favour of the other man." The New Jersey rules had been in effect since April of 1918.

When Dempsey fought Firpo and Brennan the rules in effect in New York under the Walker Law state: "If a contestant is down, his opponent shall retire to the farthest corner of the ring and remain there until the count is completed. Should he fail to do so the referee may cease counting until he has so retired." These rules had been in effect since September 1920 and were heavily publicized.

Now, please show me where it was codified that a champion could stand over a fallen fighter and strike him upon rising and please give me a specific date for every single one of these venues when that rule was changed. You cant because it never happened. Attempts to spin all of these scenarios fly in the face of the facts. For instance, your insistence that Barry didnt begin the count over Tunney immediately despite the fact that he very clearly did. Period, its there on film all day long and as stated the only difference in his behavior was due to the fact that when Tunney was down Dempsey interrupted the count as Barry was implementing it and continued to do so prompting Barry to halt the count and usher Dempsey away which was exactly what the rules required. When Dempsey was down Barry counted “one” as he rushed BETWEEN Dempsey and Tunney but Dempsey rose immediately so we never got to see whether Barry would have been forced to halt the count. Pretending that he did something different or would have takes quite a lot of imagination. What is being missed here by looking at a silent film is that in both instances when the fighters were down the TIMEKEEPER began the count. Barrys job in both instances is to pick up the count which he did. However, the referee was given the power to halt and/or resume the count if the standing fighter did not return to a corner which Barry did in Dempsey's case, and rightly so, because Dempsey hovered over Tunney in violation of the rule. Somehow Barry has been crucified for following the rules while guys like Ollie Pecord, Johnny Haukop, and Johnny Gallagher get a pass for not enforcing the rules.