Goodnight, Irene wrote:Then you simply don't understand what you're looking at.
I don't mean to come off as rude, but you don't understand how Dempsey hit. No one ever laughed. They grimaced, they howled, they crumpled to the canvas.
No Heavyweight champion in history laughs off Jack Dempsey's best punch. Punched no harder than Ali? Get real
Maybe after I watch another 33 years of Boxing I will be able to grasp the sport as well as you do. I strive to learn half of what you've forgotten.
Quite a few Light heavyweights stood up to his best shots. I'd like to see how they handled Joe Frazier's. The only thing in a ring Dempsey had on Frazier was the ability to start fast and eye sight. It wouldn't be nearly enough.
Jack was certainly a bigger puncher than Ali comparable to their eras. I doubt it would bother Frazier in the slightest.
Well and in Jack Dempsey's era they fought with socks on their hands.
I think stinglikeabee's analysis of the Heavyweights is absorbing. I'm 76 and have been a dedicated boxing fan since WW2, but rarely have I seen such a logical review of boxers. Great reading.
When I read all these posts dissing Jack Dempsey, I think about the absolute respect that boxing people from his own era had for him. I can't think of a single boxing person from Dempsey's era who saw him fight and lived into the 60s and 70s who didn't have the highest regard for his ability and punching power.
Even Jim Jeffries - who generally thought most fighters who campaigned after his era were pussies - considered Dempsey a great fighter.
raylawpc wrote:When I read all these posts dissing Jack Dempsey, I think about the absolute respect that boxing people from his own era had for him. I can't think of a single boxing person from Dempsey's era who saw him fight and lived into the 60s and 70s who didn't have the highest regard for his ability and punching power.
Even Jim Jeffries - who generally thought most fighters who campaigned after his era were pussies - considered Dempsey a great fighter.
I'm with you on this Ray. Imagine Dempsey today, with the benefits of modern nutrition, weight training and steroids. He'd come in at about 220 and go through the division like a chemical fire.
raylawpc wrote:When I read all these posts dissing Jack Dempsey, I think about the absolute respect that boxing people from his own era had for him. I can't think of a single boxing person from Dempsey's era who saw him fight and lived into the 60s and 70s who didn't have the highest regard for his ability and punching power.
Even Jim Jeffries - who generally thought most fighters who campaigned after his era were pussies - considered Dempsey a great fighter.
I'm with you on this Ray. Imagine Dempsey today, with the benefits of modern nutrition, weight training and steroids. He'd come in at about 220 and go through the division like a chemical fire.
raylawpc wrote:When I read all these posts dissing Jack Dempsey, I think about the absolute respect that boxing people from his own era had for him. I can't think of a single boxing person from Dempsey's era who saw him fight and lived into the 60s and 70s who didn't have the highest regard for his ability and punching power.
Even Jim Jeffries - who generally thought most fighters who campaigned after his era were pussies - considered Dempsey a great fighter.
I'm with you on this Ray. Imagine Dempsey today, with the benefits of modern nutrition, weight training and steroids. He'd come in at about 220 and go through the division like a chemical fire.
Judging by Dempseys and Jefferie's prime physiques compared to 95% of current heavyweights, I think they are better off without 'modern nurtrition' . . . .
raylawpc wrote:When I read all these posts dissing Jack Dempsey, I think about the absolute respect that boxing people from his own era had for him. I can't think of a single boxing person from Dempsey's era who saw him fight and lived into the 60s and 70s who didn't have the highest regard for his ability and punching power.
Even Jim Jeffries - who generally thought most fighters who campaigned after his era were pussies - considered Dempsey a great fighter.
I'm with you on this Ray. Imagine Dempsey today, with the benefits of modern nutrition, weight training and steroids. He'd come in at about 220 and go through the division like a chemical fire.
Judging by Dempseys and Jefferie's prime physiques compared to 95% of current heavyweights, I think they are better off without 'modern nurtrition' . . . .
Maybe. I just hate seeing guys like Dempsey and Jeffries get dissed like they do by modern fans. These guys were giants of the game in their primes. The idea that they couldn't have competed today is just laughable, IMO.
raylawpc wrote:When I read all these posts dissing Jack Dempsey, I think about the absolute respect that boxing people from his own era had for him. I can't think of a single boxing person from Dempsey's era who saw him fight and lived into the 60s and 70s who didn't have the highest regard for his ability and punching power.
Even Jim Jeffries - who generally thought most fighters who campaigned after his era were pussies - considered Dempsey a great fighter.
I'm with you on this Ray. Imagine Dempsey today, with the benefits of modern nutrition, weight training and steroids. He'd come in at about 220 and go through the division like a chemical fire.
Judging by Dempseys and Jefferie's prime physiques compared to 95% of current heavyweights, I think they are better off without 'modern nurtrition' . . . .
Maybe. I just hate seeing guys like Dempsey and Jeffries get dissed like they do by modern fans. These guys were giants of the game in their primes. The idea that they couldn't have competed today is just laughable, IMO.[/quote]
It's simply due to ignorance of those time periods and the quality of fighters then. Somehow blown-up Holyfield at 205-210 can compete with any heavyweight in history but the 215 lb Jefferies or the 190 lb Dempsey, who trained like demons to get down to fighting weights in which they could fight all day, should be cruisers? Ridiculous . . .Dempsey wouldn't need an extra 20 lbs to generate enough power to knock out Wladimir Klitschko.
It's hard to judge fighters outside of their eras, but it's also a very enjoyable past time.
Jeffries and Dempsey were great fighters. But these days everyone subscribes to bigger is better.
Nice to see that Saad had Johnson among his top 10.
I do think that the argument that these guys weren't big enough is fairly flat considering that most of today's HWs (with a few exceptions) have regular dimensions but carry lots of weight.
There was also an interesting analysis done several months ago by somebody in this Forum who extrapolated from some scientific studies that guys like Dempsey, if born in 1985 instead of 1895, would have been taller and significantly heavier. So the notion that these guys would have been small heavyweights if born in today's era may not hold water.
If I recall, under his analysis, Jeffries would have been something like 6'5" and 250+ pounds.
You Dempsey fans are a hostile bunch. picking Joe Frazier over him means he is trash? Love the high and mighty attitude. I'm ignorant to all things in early Boxing because I think jack Dempsey is overrated. Funny shit and the theory of the men being larger today is a great laugh. Though the Heavyweights could use them as it's far and away the worst era in Heavyweight history.
I rank Evander over Dempsey because of his superior resume and skills. Sue me.
Yes, I like Dempsey, lifted straight out of history, over either Klitschko heads up.
But can you imagine what a 220-pound Dempsey would do to him? The folks at ringside would have to be ready to duck out of the way of Klitshcko's flying head.
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Umm, I was joking too.Like I said you are way too uptight about this.
You read too much into my posts. I could give a sh*t about this. It's boxing - a mere pastime. Back in the day it was important because I derived revenue from it. But today, in the total scheme of things its only an amusement.
