Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Bad_Intentions, Jun 17, 2007.


  1. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,235
    26,554
    Feb 15, 2006
    The evidence is that they both dominated an era while Spinks only had a handfull of fights at heavyweight.
     
  2. OLD FOGEY

    OLD FOGEY Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,670
    98
    Feb 18, 2006
    No evidence at all supports that they would beat Spinks and no evidence
    at all supports that Spinks would beat them.

    One might as well debate whether Julius Caesar would have been a
    good pianist.

    What we do know, as Janitor pointed out in a previous post, is that
    Louis and Marciano dominated an era at heavyweight, and Spinks did
    not. This is all history can tell us.
     
  3. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,235
    26,554
    Feb 15, 2006
     
  4. OLD FOGEY

    OLD FOGEY Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,670
    98
    Feb 18, 2006
    What were the odds on Holmes and Spinks? As Spinks won, I assume
    he was favored, by your logic.

    Lincoln is judged by most historians as a success as president because
    he dealt relatively successfully with the challenges of the Civil War.
    Herbert Hoover is judged a failure because he failed to meet the
    challenges of the Great Depression. It does not follow that Lincoln
    could have handled the Depression better than Hoover, or that Hoover
    would have necessarily failed if he had been president during the Civil
    War. No historian can honestly say. What a historian can say is that
    Lincoln was more successful in his day than Hoover was in his.
     
  5. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,235
    26,554
    Feb 15, 2006
     
  6. OLD FOGEY

    OLD FOGEY Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,670
    98
    Feb 18, 2006
    This post does answer one question which arises now and then on this
    forum--who was better, Johnson or Jeffries?
    It is clearly Jeffries as he was the 10-7 favorite in their fight and the
    odds were set by the evidence, as you say.
     
  7. UpWithEvil

    UpWithEvil Active Member Full Member

    678
    34
    Oct 17, 2005
    This content is protected

    "Don't treat your guesses the same as mine. It's insulting."
     
  8. OLD FOGEY

    OLD FOGEY Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,670
    98
    Feb 18, 2006

    Interesting. No rebuttal. One can always tell when an analogy strikes
    home.

    It also allowed you to duck the question about Spinks and Holmes.
     
  9. OLD FOGEY

    OLD FOGEY Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,670
    98
    Feb 18, 2006
    And you should learn that the prosecuting and defense lawyers do not
    also sit on the jury.

    The fact is these two fighters were contempories and the odds were
    still way off. Now think how much more difficult it is when two fighters
    are generations apart, fighting under different rules and with different
    gloves, living in vastly different social settings with different medical
    care, nutrition, etc.
     
  10. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,235
    26,554
    Feb 15, 2006
     
  11. UpWithEvil

    UpWithEvil Active Member Full Member

    678
    34
    Oct 17, 2005
    Actually he's getting the pie right now.
     
  12. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,235
    26,554
    Feb 15, 2006
     
  13. OLD FOGEY

    OLD FOGEY Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,670
    98
    Feb 18, 2006
    Almost aways? I've have never ever been wrong myself and I think
    I am much older than you.

    The people who set odds though have often been wrong, indicating
    I guess human frailities which you are scarcely subject to, and I
    not at all.
     
  14. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    260
    Jul 22, 2004
     
  15. OLD FOGEY

    OLD FOGEY Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,670
    98
    Feb 18, 2006
    Still nothing about Spinks and Holmes.