What is the general consensus on Jack Dempsey in 1926-27?

Could be.
And still Brennan got KTFO both times.

 

Definitely a sign the apocalypse is coming!...

 

They debuted one year apart. How does this make them from two completely different eras? Different weight classes, yes. Eras, no.

During the 20's Dempsey had been fighting whenever and whoever he wished, complete with a support system that was revolutionary for the sport. Meanwhile, Tunney was put in the hospital for a week by Greb, fought Greb an additional 4 times, fought Loughran, Jeff Smith, Carpentier… all in an attempt to rise through the ranks and later get a shot at the heavy title.

One could say Dempsey was soft but not shot. Tunney had a much better argument for being on the downside.

 

Witty. Now, impress us all and come up with an original thought.

 

Er, no.

 

Every fighter is different. But basically they were the same age, same number of fights, tho Tunney was far more active over the preceding half a dozen years, taking more punishment. Tunney was done after one more fight, just as was Jack

Again, you can argue that Jack was softened and had gone stale (tho he seemed pretty revived by the second fight) but I don't think he was shot.

 

Dempsey was universally acclaimed during his prime? Have you ever read anything but your precious magazine articles published decades after Dempsey retired? I could post pages and pages and pages of criticism from sportswriters, fellow boxers, promoters, managers, private citizens, clubs, etc etc etc about Dempsey all during his career. Even Dempsey himself admitted that without the long count controversy (which was no controversy at all in reality) his reputation wouldnt have been what it was AFTERWARDS. But hey, lets not let the truth shatter our fantasy that Dempsey was the greatest thing since sliced bread even during his own reign. I used to drink that Kool Aide too. He used to be my favorite fighter also... when I didnt know anything about him.

 

H. G. Wells here. Watch it Burt, if you defend the great Dempsey, you are a slave to the past. But, this GREAT hysterical historian 90 years later knows more about the man than any who saw his rise and championship reign. I HAVE worked in journalism for 30 years and often see writers become toxic when their views are questioned. Klompton is a hack, who because he wrote a flawed, yet overall good book, believes he knows more than those that were there at the time of what is being discussed.

 

Im still waiting for someone, anyone, to post me what they see so differently in his performance against Brennan in 1920 to his fights with Tunney. Im also waiting to hear what rounds you guys gave Dempsey against Tunney in his first and second fights.

"Could be.
And still Brennan got KTFO both times."

As you would hope considering he had been dominated by a middleweight four times over the previous year, lost to Bob Roper who had maybe a dozen professional fights by that point, drew with Bartley Madden and failed to register a win against the ailing Billy Miske (who Dempsey had just obliterated) in two fights. In fact go look at Brennan's record and you will note that when he got earmarked very early in Dempsey's reign for a title defense he stopped fighting anyone with a pulse and waited for that title shot. He was supposed to be an easy, record padding defense just like Billy Miske. The problem was that Brennan got great sparring partners and came to fight and nearly upset Dempsey. Dempsey's showing in this fight, against a hand picked opponent, was universally panned and his inability to get Brennan out of there easily as expected led to the reports that he had used loaded gloves against Willard based on an interview with Dempsey's former trainer Jimmy Deforrest. You can spin it how you like but it was a bad and dissappointing performance by Dempsey and really showed the blueprint for how to beat him that Tunney used effectively in both of their fights: Break up his rhythm with jabs, drop the right on him when he gets passed the jab, and tie him up when he gets passed the right. Side step him, clinch, and make him move on the inside to tire him. Brennan was not a good enough fighter to do this for 15 rounds and didnt have the stamina for that type of gameplan anyway. But consider that had the fight gone to a decision in the 10th as the Tunney fights did Brennan may have copped the decision.

 

Like I said you great journalist. Use your great journalistic experience and enlighten us as to the criticism you aimed at my book. You accused me of falsifying information, lying, etc. Im waiting. Now you are back tracking to just calling it "flawed." Lets see where my flaws are and in the meantime maybe you can show us some of your work.

Just keep in mind that cleaning toilets at your local school of journalism for the past 30 years doesnt make you a journalist. Besides, what journalist doesnt have his own computer? Let me guess, you sitting at home with a tinfoil hat on that has a little "press" card stuck in the band while banging away on a fisher price typewriter.

God, lying pissants like you and Burt who claim to a be an 80 something year old man and a 30 year journalism vet in order to gain instant credibility are pathetic, especially when it becomes so clear that neither of you know what you are talking about and get tripped up in your own lies based on reading nothing more than old magazine articles on a regular basis.

 

You don"t read right. Settle down Francis.

 

How did we get tripped up, Ken Kesey?: :hat ANNNDDDD, I never said I was a BOXING journalist. Did I? But I have been in journalism for 30 and have seen sensitive, hysterical hacks like you lose it when their opinions are questioned. Any kid in kiddergarten has. I don't believe you and you youthful sidekick Flay Man are some pugilistic gurus like the rest of these guys. I wonder why they don"t ask you to answer my question and see what you think of Greb vs. Rocky, Muhhammad, Smokin' Joe, Sonny, The Brown Bomber, The ol'Mongoose, The Bronx Bull, Big George, Larry, Saad, King Carlos, Sugar Ray 1, etc, also. It would be interesting to all I believe. But you will not. I believe some of us have experiences of actually going to fights the last 40 years or so and know a lot more than you two YOUTUBE DARLINGS. Evereytime either of you gets told you may be wrong, Flay Man resorts to infintile namecalling (he must be at the most 17) and you go off your rocker.

 

Hurry up and get some more trolling posts in. The library will be closing soon and you will have to go back under your bridge.

 

Dempsey's legs were gone by 26-27. That's the big difference and his style relied on good bounce. Move around outside and then quickly Explode inside on men and bang them out fast.

As for his bout with Sharkey I think it's a great win for Dempsey. He survived a brutal first round assault and after being beaten to the punch by a much fresher quality fighter in the first several rounds his dogged determination begins to turn the fight before the foul. Was he winning the fight no. Was I happy with where the trajectory of that fight seemed to be heading yes.

 

Oh! Now that is the mature answer I was looking for ducker. BTW are you Flay Man's dad:hi::hi: