I don't want to apear delusional but what exactly dose Briggs have that might cause Dempsey any serious trouble?
"Improvements"? None. However, there have been a lot of big changes. Boxing in Dempsey's era was suited for that era, just like the modern day style is suited for the modern era. You simply cannot deny there is a massive contrast in styles. And it's ridiculous to think boxers could make the transition with ease. A lot more power than anyone who knocked Dempsey down? He was hurt against Gene Tunney. A man who wasn't a heavy hitter. If he could knock Dempsey down, think about what Shannon Briggs would do. He could kill him and that's not an exaggeration either. On achievements, probably about 12. Head to head with the rules of his era, 2-3. Head to head in the modern era, anything from 20-30.
HH, u simply are the most biased poster on the forum. No use arguing with someone who claims Dempsey is at the bottom of the top 100.
:nut :nut :nut :nut coming from a guy who thinks of Roy Jones as an atg heavy, of course u can't expect more
Let's say for the sake of argument that Michael Moorer is equal to Battling Levinski, Georges Carpinter or Tommy Gibbons.
Any one who says dempseys not a top 75 all time great,should leave the board and go back to there beer,FFS i cant believe the **** i read sometimes on here,mostly its a great place to find things out,from guys who know more about boxing then anyone,but seriously at other times its sad as hell. He was a legend then,and was treated like one,we are seriouly failing to think on this rightly so,go back to his day and say he was ****,and you would get probaly killed and rightly so. Also its a pity he never took on the black boxers,but its funny how people knick HIM and his record,but are more then willying to say the black guys were great and could have won,how the hell do you know this?