Wlad v Dempsey

ff, I, though outnumbered on this thread, never lose sleep over this thread, ,though to be honest, it annoys me no end that some posters on this site have so little regard of Dempsey today[90 years later], irregardless of the
high esteem JD was held by a vast majority of his peers such as Sam
Langford, Mickey Walker, Gene Tunney,Jack Sharkey, Max Schmeling who
in his bio declared Jack Dempsey as a cut above any heavyweight he had ever seen, and Schmeling as a young fighter sparred with Dempsey in Germany whilst Dempsey was champion. And to repeat once more ,
veteran sportswriters in a poll by a large majority voted JD, the best
heavyweight they had ever seen. So ff, were all these boxing veterans who saw Jack Dempsey ringside WRONG and todays detractors correct 90 years later ? My money is on the former...cheers.:good

 

Talk about looking at things through rose colored glasses... Burt so much of what you post is based on pure hero worship. Let start with Toledo: You say it was 105 degrees. It wasnt. Temperatures have been recorded in Toledo since 1873 and the highest ever recorded temperature in Toledo was 105 degrees. This temperature was taken in the 1936. In fact the hottest temperature on that day recorded in the entire country was 100 degrees. In fact the high temperature for July 3 in Toledo was 94 and 90 on July 4 at noon which means if it went up at all it was likely still a good 10 degrees lower than the hyperbole that Dempsey fans always spout. It was hot to be sure, and most fighters today would wilt under such conditions but it wasnt 105 degrees. The way this temperature always gets blown out of proportion is kind of like the earlier claim on here that Dempsey was fighting grown men as a starving 8 year old. Second, no other referee would have stopped the contest as you allege because the heavyweight championship had never changed hands to that point since the time of Sullivan on what would essentially be a referee's decision (TKO). Indeed Pecord, an excellent referee and the most respected referee in Ohio, was lauded for his performance and restraint after the fight. Dont take this fight out of context by applying 21st century norms to an early 20th century fight.

Its pretty ridiculous to claim that people who actually want to look at Dempsey in light of the facts and not through hero worship and mythologizing, get accused of character assassination and revision when revision is exactly what has helped Dempsey's reputation for so long.

 

Yes, Im saying that Fulton fought absolutely nothing like Wlad. Im basing this on the film I have of Fulton. You know, having actually seen him with my own eyes. You are basing your opinion on Fulton's style based on having never seen him and using the description from Clay's book of Fulton fighting a guy who was 34 years old and stood six inches shorter than Dempsey.

 

The newspaper reports for that fight also describe Fulton having a bad left hand necessitating a doctors treatment before the fight which could explain why he was jabbing with it and fighting what was described as an uncharacteristically cautious fight for him. So you have several factors that are potentially skewing your opinion of a fighter youve never seen and you are taking it as gospel.

 

Kl, I do not worship Jack Dempsey. But I take heed of the multitudes of
boxing people who saw Dempsey fight and described him as a great fighter
with whatever faults he might have had. Pray tell show me one fighter in
history who at some moments in his career could not be picked apart by
critics ? There are none ! But today Jack Dempsey more than any fighter ever is scrutinized, more so only on this forum, to the point of revising
his true ability in the ring that people who saw him fight, would feel
revulsion today...If Dempsey was so damn lousy as ESB's critics contend
were all his admirers among the boxing writers and fighters,and trainers
somehow LESS informed than today's nitpickers 90, years or so later ?
With all my heart, I think NOT ...

 

How?

He'd be facing a stronger, bigger, heavier punching more athletic fighter who would have the better technique and footwork.

Yet Dempsey kills Wlad ?

Are you and Dinovelvet the same pair of tits?

 

Mc, I have read numerous accounts of it being 105% in the hot Toledo sun.
But why nitpick on this question of whether it was 105% or 100% degrees
that hot afternoon in 1919 ? Suffice it to say it was HOT...cheers...

 

I never said Fulton didnt use a jab. Indeed his style was based on it. I said he fought nothing like Wlad and I stand by that. Not every fighter who works off a jab fights exactly like Wlad. For every article you dig up where he fought at a distance you can find 2 where he was aggressive and walked his man down. There are also plenty of references to his lack of defense (something most wouldnt accuse Wlad of), his awkwardness (Wlad is constantly lauded for his athleticism and coordination), etc. Furthermore, Fulton was never championship material. Period. He just could never rise to that level. Wlad is and is clearly a class or two at least ahead of Fulton. So when you take a guy and try to draw comparisons between him and Wlad simply because they had similar height and reach is folly as Ive said numerous times.

This is Fulton in his prime just before facing Dempsey. He really looks like Wlad here:

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z335/klompton/vlcsnap-2014-07-21-11h50m20s62_zps9de513c0.png

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z335/klompton/vlcsnap-2014-07-21-11h56m10s236_zps2ab73e4d.png

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z335/klompton/vlcsnap-2014-07-21-11h55m49s34_zps19acd5d6.png

http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z335/klompton/vlcsnap-2014-07-21-11h50m00s133_zps9150b10a.png

:-(

In addition to the fact that they fought nothing alike Fulton was significantly more slender, had less heart, weaker whiskers, was a lower pedigree of boxer, etc etc. I just dont see how this is a comparison. If you want to say that the similar height gives us an inkling into how Dempsey would APPROACH such a fight fine. But I dont think it says anything at all in regards to how much success he would have once he was actually in the ring.

 

Youve also read numerous accounts of how Fleischer thought Dempsey was a demigod right? Remember that discussion we had a while back? Nevermind that during the actual events Fleischer picked Wills to knockout Dempsey, Carpentier, and Gibbons. Lets not get the actual facts in the way of what an old Fleischer said decades later to sell magazines. Youve also read for years how Pep won a round without throwing a punch, how Ketchel only lost to Papke because he was punched in the throat on the handshake, how Tunney learned how to beat Greb and whipped him every time out after their first fight, how Angelo Dundee bought Ali several minutes between rounds by tearing his glove against Cooper, etc etc. Boxing has a lot of great stories that sound really dramatic and make for fascinating reading but just dont hold up under scrutiny. Oh, and it wasnt 100 degrees in Toledo either. It was hot but not that hot. Not 105, and not 100... Old stories die hard.

 

Dempsey was an overhyped bum and beat nothing but bums and shot fighters who were never that good. He was never a world champion just a white champion because he drew the color line and ducked Harry Wills. He rarely made defences as a "champion" and ended with a measly record of 4-2 in championship bouts. The only good boxer in his era he faced was the small featherfisted Tunney and he lost twice and got dropped.

How would he deal with Wlad who is a superior boxer,huge power puncher, bigger, stronger, faster, more athletic, better footwork, with leaps and bounds better skills? That 190 pound skinnyfat bum Dempsey would get smashed.


The street fighting bum Firpo who had no boxing ability whatsoever and wouldn't be fit to even be Wlad's sparring partner knocked Dempsey's ass out if the ring.

Dempsey is the biggest hypejob in boxing history. In retrospect he ****ing sucked.

 

The nutrition and the sport science of the modern era is clearly better, but the skill-level among the guys of yesteryear was better. What's interesting is outside the heavyweights, the size of the other divisions hasn't changed very much. For example, a featherweight of 1925 is roughly the same size as a featherweight of today's day and age. While there were big heavyweights back then, there are more big heavyweights today.

I guess I think styles make fights. Ultimately, Dempsey would be better against some fighters but Gene Tunney outboxed Dempsey.

How deep was the heavyweight division during their time? How does it stack up against the best eras? Everyone pisses on the Klitschkos because the current heavyweight division is considered weak, but how weak is it compared with Dempsey's era?

It's a tough question really.