Jack Dempsey v. Jack Sharkey

[wouter]

Am I the only one to think that Sharkey wasn't legitimately knocked out, but was merely trying to win the fight on a foul (as Schmeling would do to him with more succes a few years later)?

[The Great John L]

I don't know, it looked like a pretty good hook to me. And the way he dropped also looked legit.

[wouter]

I don't think much of either the hook and the way Sharkey went down (but that's only my interpretation ofcourse). Sharkey looks like he can't choose between a DQ win for hitting on the break or a DQ win for low blows (note him clutching his groin while on the floor).

[The Great John L]

It's been a while since I've seen it so it might be worth another look.

[Flump]

Not sure, he was guilty of stupidity certainly - protect yourself at all times! Especially against Dempsey.

[granberry]

Am I the only one to think that Sharkey wasn't legitimately knocked out, but was merely trying to win the fight on a foul (as Schmeling would do to him with more succes a few years later)?

Try getting hit on the point of the chin by Dempsey sometime and then tell us about it.

I talked with Dempsey at his restaurant about that punch, where it landed, was it a hook or an uppercut, etc.

[The material is too valuable to put on a site like this]

[My2Sense]

I don't think much of either the hook and the way Sharkey went down (but that's only my interpretation ofcourse).

Sharkey looks like he can't choose between a DQ win for hitting on the break or a DQ win for low blows (note him clutching his groin while on the floor).

As for the first sentence, many of Dempsey's punches often looked that way. The guy just had freakish power, even with such short punches as that.

As for Sharkey's reaction, that's something only he could ever know. I believe he was legitimately floored, but whether or not he could've gotten up is another matter. I think (though I could be wrong) he was still ahead on points at that time, but it's possible the body shots had crippled him to the extent that he knew he couldn't last, and he banked everything on a desperate bid to "steal" the fight.

I know Sharkey later admitted that if he'd gotten the fight with Tunney (which the Dempsey fight was an eliminator for), part of his strategy would've been to disrupt Tunney's rhythm by complaining of non-existent low blows and basically causing a scene.

[BoxBuzz]

Am I the only one to think that Sharkey wasn't legitimately knocked out, but was merely trying to win the fight on a foul (as Schmeling would do to him with more succes a few years later)?

Try getting hit on the point of the chin by Dempsey sometime and then tell us about it.

I talked with Dempsey at his restaurant about that punch, where it landed, was it a hook or an uppercut, etc.

[The material is too valuable to put on a site like this]

Good choice to keep it a secret. I would have run off with it and sold it on E-Bay. But as we can see, You'd have to get up pretty early in the afternoon to get the jump on a fella like you.

[klompton]

Sharkey was trying to take the easy way out. If he was legitimately KOd by the hook, why was it his groin he was holding? Dempsey was obviously fouling him and Sharkey was obviously trying to win on a foul. I dont think the hook was the deciding factor at all.

[My2Sense]

Granberry

When I delete a comment I don't want you to reinsert it.
Thanks

Granberry is schizophrenic??

[HomicideHenry]

May not have been fair, may not have been the best way to take a man out, but damn it, Jack Dempsey knew how to finish a man when he saw his chances. He knocked Sharkey out legit.

[granberry]

An old Dempsey, who had no legs left,

knocked out the two best heavyweights in the world

Tunney (for 17 seconds)

and Sharkey.

[Robinson]

And one thing that is clear on the old films is that
the Dempsey that faced Tunney and Sharkey is far
less intense and is not near as quick as the man that
won the title and terrorised the division.

[Ambling Alp]

No doubt about, he wasn't the fighter that he had once been. Part of it was that he was older (though he certainly wasn't ancient) but more of it was because he had been inactive for so long.
He never should should have been off for three years before fighting Tunney. He should have had atleast one fight in 1924 and 1925. He got very rusty.

Hindsight being 20/20, after the first Tunney fight, he should have had atleast one tuneup fight before taking on Sharkey. He was never going to be 100% as good as he once was, but it would have helped him get off some of the rust before he fought Sharkey.

He looked a little better against Sharkey (than he had in the first Tunney fight) and was competitive, but still looked pretty rusty.

He looked a little better in the 2nd Tunney fight (than he looked against Sharkey) and certainly better than the first Tunney fight. However, he still wasn't the fighter that he had once been.

The big question is how Dempsey would have done against Tunney in 1926 if he had been active in 1924 and 1925. My guess is that Tunney still would have won but it would have been a much more competitive fight. Demspey than probably would have beaten Sharkey more convincingly.

[dempseyfire]

I think Dempsey was past it, but as a big Dempsey fan even I had to say many exaggerate how far Dempsey had slipped. The first Tunney bout was a case of too much, too soon after a long layoff were Jack had been living the good life. But for the Sharkey and Tunney rematches, Dempsey really went 'back to the well' training wise. Not saying he was the same 1919 Dempsey at all (his legs had noticeably less bounce and speed), but he got into as good condition as a 30 year old pressure fighter could at that point. I would say, for example, on a relative level to the peaks of their respective careers, the Dempsey that fought Sharkey > Tyson that fought post-prison.

The 1928 Jack Sharkey was a helluva fighter and besides Tunney had been the best fighter Dempsey had faced since Fulton before he won the title.

[granberry]

Dempsey's build had changed completely between the time he fought Willard and when he fought Tunney in 1926.

His entire build was softer, and his face had become soft and pouchy.

He still had his punch and his chin, but no legs left.

In the first round of his Willard fight before he knocked Willard down he showed his speed on his feet.

No one could stand up when he landed his left hook---even as an old well past it fighter against Sharkey and Tunney.

If that old Dempsey could knock out Tunney for 17 seconds, then the younger Dempsey with some legs could certainly have done it.

Sharkey said, "If you left anything open, he would hurt you."

Tommy Gibbons said, "Dempsey could beat anyone he could hit."

[Robinson]

I dont believe that Tunney had Dempsey's number, its just
that Tunney like DF, Alp and Gran mentioned was inactive and
older.

The lay off was just wrong in my opinion, he was HW champion
of the world he should have defended in that period.

I think that had they fough around that time, but like you guys said
Dempsey had been a boxer and stayed inside the ring to ply
his craft then perhaps Tunney may have stayed down
and we would have no long count controversy.

[Collins2000]

There used to be an idiot on here years ago (it may even have been an earlier version of granberry) who always claimed that Tunney "hid out" in the 175 division until he saw Dempsey was ready to be taken.

[raylawpc]

I dont believe that Tunney had Dempsey's number.

Bill Brady would have agreed with you. The former manager of Jim Corbett and Jim Jeffries was quoted once as saying that Tunney would have never beaten Dempsey in Dempsey's prime.

[dempseyfire]

I'm not sure about that. That was the popular opinion because A) Dempsey was the most idolized sports figure of the 1920s, an aggressive puncher (see modern day conception of Tyson by many sports fans), and Tunney, who was relatively standoffish, was painted as an aristocrat B) Dempsey had Tunney down in the rematch and the ensuing 'Long Count' fiasco.

I think a bout between a prime Tunney and a prime Dempsey is a pick'em affair. Dempsey always had trouble with the slicksters (draw with Billy Miske, went the distance and frustrated at times vs Gibbons) and Tunney was the best boxer of the era.

And to clarify, I'd confidently pick a peak Dempsey to KO Sharkey as well, but I think he'd still face some problems vs the Boston Gob while it lasted.

[raylawpc]

You could argue it out with Brady, except he's been dead for about 60 years . . .

[My2Sense]

There used to be an idiot on here years ago (it may even have been an earlier version of granberry) who always claimed that Tunney "hid out" in the 175 division until he saw Dempsey was ready to be taken.

[ebeneezer]

No one could stand up when he landed his left hook

Could Dempsey stand up to his own left hook?

If he was a southpaw he'd hit himself in the face,right?

[BoxBuzz]

No one could stand up when he landed his left hook

Could Dempsey stand up to his own left hook?

If he was a southpaw he'd hit himself in the face,right?

I have been told (from a reliable source) that Liston's demise may have occured from just such an anomoly. He was innocently shadowboxing in front of his hotel room mirror when for some unknown reason he began to take up the very dangerous (and in this case perhaps fatal) southpaw stance. How many left hooks did he attempt? Only the folks on the east coast can say with any certaintly.

This may of course NOT be factual, but the mystery surrounding the details leaves one to wonder. And with good cause according to my source.

[HomicideHenry]

The amazing thing about Jack Dempsey is this, that after his losses to Tunney, for a time he considered a serious comeback in the 'era' of the Schmeling's and Baer's, as he had well over 100 exhibition bouts, knocking out such men as Meyers 'KO' Christner and others...he proved in these exhibitions he could still defeat the best bangers in the world, but wasn't able to handle the movers, as Kingfish Levinsky outclassed him in an exhibition.

It was that exhibition there, that stopped Dempsey from making a legit comeback into boxing, though he would later revise his exhibition tours in his 40's against professional wrestlers, much like Archie Moore would do when he was going inbetween light-heavyweight and heavyweight.

Had he made a real comeback, I could see Dempsey getting back up into contention, but would fail miserably against Schmeling, Sharkey, Loughran, etc...*day dreams about a over the hill Dempsey against Primo Carnera*...