What rationale is there to rate Dempsey higher than Marciano?

Levinsky, Fulton, , etc were all better then an ageing Louis or Savold. Miske was atleast as good as LaStarza, and actually has a superior resume. Gibbons was better the Layne imo. of course Moore was alot better then Carpeinter but however as good as Charles and Walcott were, neither were at their peaks. Remember Charles was coming off some losses when he met Marciano including one to Valdez

 

Gibbons had an all time great chin and the middleweight he lost to (by decision) was Harry Greb (Who he also beat twice)

 

What fighters had Louis beaten in his last 8 fights that were as good as Langford that Fulton beat?

Dempsey was not always the favourite, infact he was an underdog to Fulton and even Willard.

And so what if Dempsey failed to ko Gibbons? He won most of the rounds , was never in danger of being stopped or outpointed. He was coming off a two year layoff

 

I think in the period of time Marciano held the title he defended against the # 1 contender 5 times and vs the # 2 contender once, Marciano always fought in the best of shape and retired undefeated with at least 3-4 fights left in him. Dempsey was a great but a BIG star back in the 20's and the 1st Modern Heavyweight Champion, he spent times making movies and did not make the Boxing best of his time as Champ, he was not as active as he should have been and could have done better, this was because Jack was such a tremendous star but still it affects his legasy..I rate Marciano# 2 and Dempsey # 4 ATG

 

Miske, Gibbons, Fulton and Levinsky were close to the level of Walcott and Charles and above the likes of LaStraza, and Savold.

 

Gibbons was only ever really beaten by hall of famers. He is not far off Ezard Charles and Archie Moore at all.

 

Monica? Dempsey was dead. It was Clinton that
TKO'ed Levinsky.

 

Marciano shuffles forward and stalks Dempsey like a tractor, taking and giving equally. Surprisingly, as the fight progresses, the clumsy looking plodder is actually rolling well with Dempsey's punches and even making him miss. Marciano rains heavy blows from all angles to the face, head, neck, chest, breast, ribs, shoulders, arms, forearms, kidneys, liver, hip bones, and mid-section of his opponent. Round 7 comes and Dempsey shows signs of fatigue as a result of Marciano sustained attack. Round 8 more of the same, and then in round 9 Suzi Q KOS Dempsey.

Anyone who doubts the Rocks abilities, check out what his good friend Lou Duva said about that computer fight with Ali. If memory serves, they actually got into it a bit and Rocky kept hitting him to the body, Ali had no answer for it, and later revealed Ali having some ugly bruises. That was 1969 about 12 years after Marciano had retired. The guy was a freak and that's what makes him such an intriguing historical boxer. The two heavyweight guys I would never bet against would be Ali and Marciano.

 

As far as I know Marciano hurt an out of shape, unprepared Ali with a body shot. That's about it. I don't doubt Dempsey could have done the same at 46 if he were in that situation. Honestly, I think you need to learn more about Dempsey if you think there fight would be that one sided.

 

Outside of Gibbions, there is no one on Dempsey resume imo, that compares with Charles, Walcott and Moore. And perhaps even Louis. I put Firpo and Layne in the same boat, both great hitters who can hit, and BE hit. I think the Rock prove his chin vs Layne and Walcott 1.

You guys are building Firpo and sick Miske into what they are not. They were never great fighters. Dempsey failed to meet the top contenders of his era. Wills was the rank number 1 for 7 years in a row. Would Marciano had stand for that?? And no beating Gibbions does not exuse this.

 

That's far from the best way to judge how a fighter will perform in the ring when he is prepared. I do think Marciano was a better puncher than Dempsey (his consistent punch output has to count for something) but Dempsey was the more versatile fighter. As a fighter, I rate Dempsey higher. As a puncher - Marciano wins. Interesting enough, head to head, I'd give Marciano the edge by a razor line. Wouldn't put money on it. Even despite those two views, I rate Dempsey as the better fighter strictly on versatility.

 

Many fighters should wish to get as sick as Miske.

He had a much more sound career than most any other hw on the flipside of losing a title challenge. He would go on to beat Renault (twice), Brennan, Weinert, Fulton, GIBBONS, all top ten guys of that era.

Miske is a very, very credible win.

If Wills was out of the picture, the guys that Dempsey would be fighting would be guys that Miske, who Dempsey beat, went on to beat.