Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Just because Arcel says something doesn't make it so. Frankly Arcel sounds dillusional or maybe hes just caught a dose of Dempsey hero worship. He makes it seem like Dempsey walks through Louis, Tyson, Foreman, Marciano easily. He didn't even walk through none boxing weight lifter Firpo without tasting the canvas. He didn't have an easy time with light heavyweights not on these guys level.

Dempseys skills are mighty impressive on film. But he has clear weaknesses, such as being open to counters when he leaps in, leaving himself open and against the likes of Louis/Tyson/Foreman spells disaster.

 

Arcel was a close lifelong friend of Dempsey. I think these quotes come
from a HBO video made when Dempsey was well into his eighties and
had suffered several strokes. What would one expect a friend to say?

I agree with the gist of the last paragraph. Dempsey is impressive on
film but also shows weaknesses. It is not obvious he would be too
much for later great champions to handle.

 

all fighters have weaknesses , not just Dempsey.

 

You are right. Just because Arcel say's it dosn't make it so.

However-

He has worked with champions from Benny Leonard to Roberto Duran and is about as informed an observer at you can get.

I am not suggesting that you accept what he says as being litteraly corect, but consider that Dempsey must have been good enough to make what he says plausible to sombody who had seen both him and Robeto Duran in action.

There is no way that you are going to convince yourself that Ricky Hatton is better than Roberto Duran however delusional you are.

 

Not really.

There is a clear prescedent of a fighter with a similar style doing it.

 

I don't need to.

I can defend my position by reasoned argument and I don't want to work in a forum where everybodys views are a carbon copy of my own.

 

This is true, but Hattons a B Class fighter, Durans A Class, Hatton can be a 154lb (fight night) physical beast though and is much bigger than Duran - so maybe Hatton would give Duran some problems.

BTW EVER SEEN ANGELO DUNDEES TOP FIGHTERS LIST - It isn't too great and he has of course worked with the best. We all have biases and I suggest Arcel is biased in Dempseys favour. Not that Dempsey wasn't a fantastic fighter.

 

Our lists are all verry similar because we are confined to using the same sources eg records and film.

Sombody like Dundee who has worked with the fighters can get the kind of insights we never can so he might be able to identify a fighter who was better head to head than his record or film suggests.

He will certainly have biases and errors. Dont acept what he says as gospell but equaly don't dismiss it as worthless.

Just because you don't agree with his rankings dosn't mean you can't learn from them.

 

But these are all individuals, not sock puppets. Yes, yes, you can agree with yourself, support yourself in various guises, and pat yourself on the back. Good lad.

 

Dempsey would beat the crap out of Spinks

 

i am amazed by someone who thinks Spinks is an atg heavy. Realistically Dempsey would beat the crap out of Spinks as would Louis and Marciano, too by the way. A man who wins a gift decision over an old 36 yr old Holmes can NEVER beat Dempsey, Louis or Marciano. I don't care if u belive Holmes is better then those guys but certainly not an old Holmes who at that time was ducking the likes Of Thomas. Spiks does not stand a chance realistically.

 

i bet HH voted for "outside the top 100" :rofl

 

so from the poll u can see that about 60 percent of the voters have him in the top 10 and about 24 further percent have him in the top 15 which is reasonable. The rest idiots voted below that. Still only three losers voted outside the top 100 which is a shame

 

yes but it shows how Michael struggled with an over the hill Holmes in his heavyweight prime dude. Think about it a bit more

 

Watch out Pete Rademacher!