Wlad v Dempsey

Moot point. This is a fight. Round by round. Lenght of defenses plays no signifance.

Reality is a hard taskmaker yeah? Can we see the fight where Wlad demolished a guy in the first round like he would have to do against Dempsey?

We seen Dempsey come out like a savage with all intents of a first round KO.
Was Wlad not 1 round banged out by a gunz blazing Sanders.

You would have to favour the guy who looks to end it early over the slow starter who can't take a punch.

 

Wlad best win and title reign came from beating a non punching light heavy.

 

Dempsey in a time-machine wouldn't be able to to beat today's LHW champion. Let alone a modern-day SHW ATG. These are all mismatches.

 

That was not the reason his dominance was brought up. Someone was comparing Wlad to Fulton. Read the context and stop looking for hot buttons to satisfy your neurotic vendetta against a person you have never met.

Give Wlad Dempsey's list of stumblebum opponents and I am sure we would see highlight reel devastations. As it remains. Wlad still holds an 80% KO ratio against his opponents while Dempsey ended up at 58%.

If you have ever spent 30 seconds in the ring and under a trainer you would know that "coming out like a savage" is about the last thing you want to do. Control is the name of the game. If you flail like a man overboard you will drown. If you can control your emotions you can succeed. This **** is not pro wrestling. It is real. Cartoonish mannerisms do not win the day against elite competition.

 

True. You learn from the boxing rule book. Not the Jack Dempsey rule book.

But Jacks style was his style and thats the way he got things done.

A trainer will teach you to throw a jab from the chin and bring it back to the chin. Throwing a jab from an already half extended out arm position is the last thing you would want to do but that doesn't stop Wlad doing it.
It my belief any great fighter , if Wlad had fought any , would take that jab out of the picture completley. Much like Haye did rather easily.

A slow starter susceptible to first round blowouts should be the underdog aganist a great punching fast starter.

Jack would know he'd have to get this guy out early and would attempt to mangle him from the opening bell. Wlad can't take a punch and he'd be backing up taking to much firepower.

 

:rofl

Your a ****ing ******. So now Wlad is a slow started susceptible to first round blowouts :rofl

Tell me which of the two fighters actually mentioned have actually been KO'd in 1. And it isn't the man you stalk.

 

Sanders done him in the first round. He was saved by the bell.

Even the sight and wind of the Sanders punch was enough to put him down in the second.

 

He was stopped in the second no matter how you want to try to spin it.

Dempsey on the other hand was stopped in 25secs.

Now again going off your theory who is the fighter who you would consider susceptible to being stopped in the first?

 

Who here has seen Fulton throw a single punch much less spar or fight?

I have and its absolutely ludicrous that some of you who clearly have no idea what you are talking about but wish to make Dempsey look better than he was want to draw that comparison between Fulton and Wlad, or even Willard (who weve all seen) and Wlad. Its so stupid it cant even be taken seriously. The Willard that fought Dempsey was rangy? Really? He stood straight up in the air and walked forward with his chin up throwing uppercuts from the outside. Thats not only the antithesis of being rangy its just purely bad form and begging to get knocked out. Nevermind that his training camp was a joke, he came into the ring fat and out of shape, hadnt fought in three years, and was nearly 40. Thats who you want to compare with Wlad? Ridiculous. Fred Fulton was tall but he was not rangy, despite what some of you might think. He fought in a very archaic style, pumping his fists in a circular motion in an attempt to feint. He was all knees and elbows and believe it or not took his height advantage away by crouching or bending down. Then take into account that his manager Mike Collins claimed he was the most gutless fighter he ever worked with and you can see where Im going with this. The bottom line is that Dempsey literally never fought anyone with combination of skill and physical tools that Wlad had. Not even close. Indeed the closest we have to that comparison (Wills) Dempsey went out of his way to avoid fighting.

 

63 of these people are incredible.

 

What do you know about that fight?

Apparently Jack fought that fight when he was a hobo and couldn't afford food.

He later bombed that guy out in the first when better nourished.

Wlad was had the best training and preparation known to man when he lost and ran from the rematch.

 

Im not making out like your a spastic Im pointing out that you are comparing apples and oranges. Its like saying that Tarver would do well against Mike Tyson because both Tyson and Roy Jones are 5' 11". The similarities end there. Fulton fought literally nothing like Wlad. Nothing. Same with Willard. Maybe, MAYBE the Willard that fought Johnson, the best Willard we ever saw and probably the best he ever was, might have given us a slight clue (never mind that this version of Willard fought nothing like Wlad either) as to how Dempsey would do but Dempsey didnt fight that Willard. I would reject that comparison just as readily as I would reject that Klitchko's fight with Mormeck is a clue to how he would handle Dempsey.

 

Why is that Klomp?

He fought Mormeck like he does every other opponent. What you see it what you get.
His procedure never deviates.