Jack Dempsey could be champ in this era...

[Justin]

Let's hear it. Why wouldn't he?

His size? No way, his tenacity and performance against guys much larger than him proves size didn't matter if you're that tough, and swarm your opponent.

Look at his fights vs Carl Morris, Fred Fulton, Jess Willard, and Firpo... Those guys were taller, weighed 25-60 LBS more, and he still beat 'em.

You think Lennox Lewis would have been champ back in the 1910's because he has a good jab, and he's a monster? Hell no he wouldn't, 190 LB guys swarming over him with 4 and 6 oz. gloves would have dropped him, and he would have never even been remembered.

Let's hear the arguements.

[Tantum]

.

[Justin]

He did have a great chin, he was only KO'd once in his career, AND THAT WAS USING 4 OZ GLOVES!

Lennox Lewis has been KO'd buy smaller guys, using 10 oz gloves.

Tyson KO'd by Lennox and Buster Douglas, using 8 and 10 oz gloves (Not quite sure if the 8 oz gloves were still allowed when Tyson-Douglas happened)

The way to beat dempsey was with ring generalship and agility... Like Tunney had. Lewis don't move anything like a Tunney, and has poor defense... Dempsey would rock Lewis' world, especially under the "no-neutral corner" rule, which Dempsey loved so much.


I'd say Dempsey could, and would beat Lennox, Holyfield, Tyson, etc 50-70% of the time under the 1910 boxing rules, and 40-60% of the time using Modern rules

[Guest]

glad I found this page.....you really make me laugh Justin

a sub 200lb fighter would find it difficult to swarm when

a/ The divisions current best jab is ramming your teeth thru the back of your head
b/ 250lbs+ is leaning down and breaking your back.
c/ The referee doesn´t allow elbows , forearms . head etc.....

Dempsey would be swatted like a fly..

Join the gene pool evolution and stop reminiscing the past.

The past is past ..... and Lewis and even Bowe would have dominated in any era......thats a fact.

[wouter]

Bowe couldn't even dominate his own era

[Guest]

Dempsey was unquestionably a great heavyweight--better than Tyson or Frazier, who are the two champions whose styles most closely resemble his. Wearing small gloves and with no standing eight count, he would have had a puncher's chance against anyone. But I think that it's ultimately unfair to compare a 185 pound man to a 250 pounder. In accessing older heavyweight champs. I think you have to factor in the size differences as compared to modern heavyweights. Jack was not even a large cruiserweight. And you can throw out Willard, Fulton, and Firpo as examples of Dempsey's success against huge men. They were just rough guys without skills--vastly different than Lennox Lewis.

[p4p1]

well with todays heavyweights i think dempsey would be the best in the division easy

[Goodnight, Irene]

"...The past is past ..... and Lewis and even Bowe would have dominated in any era......thats a fact." - Guest

Now you're the one being laughed at.

[pound per pound]

Let's hear it. Why wouldn't he?

His size? No way, his tenacity and performance against guys much larger than him proves size didn't matter if you're that tough, and swarm your opponent.

Look at his fights vs Carl Morris, Fred Fulton, Jess Willard, and Firpo... Those guys were taller, weighed 25-60 LBS more, and he still beat 'em.

You think Lennox Lewis would have been champ back in the 1910's because he has a good jab, and he's a monster? Hell no he wouldn't, 190 LB guys swarming over him with 4 and 6 oz. gloves would have dropped him, and he would have never even been remembered.

Let's hear the arguements.

Dempsey's best match ups were vs bigger fighters. Heavyweights like Morris, Fulton, Willard, and Fripo did not last long.

JD, had excellent hand speed, quick feet, and slip and duck type of defense. In the clinches, Dempsey was a beast. At 6'1 1/2" and a 77" reach, you'd have to assume Dempsey had the frame to carry an extra 10-15 pounds or so before he began to lose speed, flexibility and stamina. This would make Dempsey around 200 -205 pounds. While this is still small by modern standards the thing to focus on here is Dempsey’s explosive hitting power. If you can hit as hard as Dempsey did, it’s a real equalizer vs lack of size. I think he proved this in his own era, and nothing was wrong with Willard or Firpo’s chin.

I am fairly confident that Dempsey would be one of the champions today, and perhaps the #1 guy. He might have lost a few here and there, but that’s only because the modern era is loaded with guys who can hit.

While fighters like Tua, Sanders, Brewster, Peter, Maskeav, ect... might not be great fighters they are great punchers who can end a match quickly if they catch their guy clean.

[Thunder and Lightning]

Let's hear it. Why wouldn't he?
You think Lennox Lewis would have been champ back in the 1910's because he has a good jab, and he's a monster? Hell no he wouldn't, 190 LB guys swarming over him with 4 and 6 oz. gloves would have dropped him, and he would have never even been remembered.

This is kind of a weird statement considering Jess Willard was champion in the 1910's, then again Lewis is black so he wouldn't have been given a shot at the title anyway

[dempseyfire]

Let's hear it. Why wouldn't he?

His size? No way, his tenacity and performance against guys much larger than him proves size didn't matter if you're that tough, and swarm your opponent.

Look at his fights vs Carl Morris, Fred Fulton, Jess Willard, and Firpo... Those guys were taller, weighed 25-60 LBS more, and he still beat 'em.

You think Lennox Lewis would have been champ back in the 1910's because he has a good jab, and he's a monster? Hell no he wouldn't, 190 LB guys swarming over him with 4 and 6 oz. gloves would have dropped him, and he would have never even been remembered.

Let's hear the arguements.

He might have lost a few here and there, but that’s only because the modern era is loaded with guys who can hit.

While fighters like Tua, Sanders, Brewster, Peter, Maskeav, ect... might not be great fighters they are great punchers who can end a match quickly if they catch their guy clean.

And the 19teens didn't have a lot of big punchers??

Some people (and I'm not saying you P4P . . speaking to others) have such a warped idea of this. Tua's fat-ass is smaller than Dempsey but he comes into the ring with big biceps and a load of fat on his 5'10 frame (whereas in tip-tip shape Tua would be about 205 lbs) and suddenly he's a contender, whereas a supremely conditioned 190 lb man much greater in every facet is out of his league.

A 5'10 MIDDLEWEIGHT eats up to 230 lbs in his late 30s. . he has shots vs the big guys, but not the naturally much bigger and stronger man who trains DOWN to 190 lbs.

If a person can follow that logic there is little hope for them.

[yiddo14]

Any great heavyweight over the years would have been a major force in any era.

The suggestion that a modern day Dempsey would'nt be good enough to wina title in the heavies is ludicrous and almost just as bad as suggesting that Lennox Lewis would'nt have stood a chance back in the 1910s

The likes of Dempsey, Lewis, Frazier, Louis, Holyfield, Ali, Johnson, Holmes etc etc were great because they could fvcking fight, irrespective of any era!!!!

Talent is permanent.

Yes, Dempsey would have been a force in todays heavyweight division, just as Lewis would have been back in the 1910s..just as Marciano would have been in the 1980s...just as Larry Holmes would have been in the 1920s....just as Holyfield would have been in the 1900s etc etc etc

[Ambling Alp]

Amen!

[pound per pound]

Let's hear it. Why wouldn't he?

His size? No way, his tenacity and performance against guys much larger than him proves size didn't matter if you're that tough, and swarm your opponent.

Look at his fights vs Carl Morris, Fred Fulton, Jess Willard, and Firpo... Those guys were taller, weighed 25-60 LBS more, and he still beat 'em.

You think Lennox Lewis would have been champ back in the 1910's because he has a good jab, and he's a monster? Hell no he wouldn't, 190 LB guys swarming over him with 4 and 6 oz. gloves would have dropped him, and he would have never even been remembered.

Let's hear the arguements.

He might have lost a few here and there, but that’s only because the modern era is loaded with guys who can hit.

While fighters like Tua, Sanders, Brewster, Peter, Maskeav, ect... might not be great fighters they are great punchers who can end a match quickly if they catch their guy clean.

And the 19teens didn't have a lot of big punchers??

Some people (and I'm not saying you P4P . . speaking to others) have such a warped idea of this. Tua's fat-ass is smaller than Dempsey but he comes into the ring with big biceps and a load of fat on his 5'10 frame (whereas in tip-tip shape Tua would be about 205 lbs) and suddenly he's a contender, whereas a supremely conditioned 190 lb man much greater in every facet is out of his league.

A 5'10 MIDDLEWEIGHT eats up to 230 lbs in his late 30s. . he has shots vs the big guys, but not the naturally much bigger and stronger man who trains DOWN to 190 lbs.

If a person can follow that logic there is little hope for them.

The 19teens had some big punchers, just not as much as we have today. Dempsey, Wills, and Fripo come to mind, but the depth of the punchers today dwarfs that of the 19teens -20's.

Tua is a fat head, but he he hits you with that hook flush, odds are that guy is toast.

[dempseyfire]

He might have lost a few here and there, but that’s only because the modern era is loaded with guys who can hit.

While fighters like Tua, Sanders, Brewster, Peter, Maskeav, ect... might not be great fighters they are great punchers who can end a match quickly if they catch their guy clean.

And the 19teens didn't have a lot of big punchers??

Some people (and I'm not saying you P4P . . speaking to others) have such a warped idea of this. Tua's fat-ass is smaller than Dempsey but he comes into the ring with big biceps and a load of fat on his 5'10 frame (whereas in tip-tip shape Tua would be about 205 lbs) and suddenly he's a contender, whereas a supremely conditioned 190 lb man much greater in every facet is out of his league.

A 5'10 MIDDLEWEIGHT eats up to 230 lbs in his late 30s. . he has shots vs the big guys, but not the naturally much bigger and stronger man who trains DOWN to 190 lbs.

If a person can follow that logic there is little hope for them.

The 19teens had some big punchers, just not as much as we have today. Dempsey, Wills, and Fripo come to mind, but the depth of the punchers today dwarfs that of the 19teens -20's.

Tua is a fat head, but he he hits you with that hook flush, odds are that guy is toast.

I strongly disagree. Bigger punchers based on what? Firpo, Willard, Dempsey, Brennan, Godfrey, Coffey, Fulton, and Willis all had the power to match the likes of Sanders, Brewster, Tua, Maskaev etc. and they are laregly in much better condition.

[pound per pound]

Dempseyfire

I strongly disagree. Bigger punchers based on what? Firpo, Willard, Dempsey, Brennan, Godfrey, Coffey, Fulton, and Willis all had the power to match the likes of Sanders, Brewster, Tua, Maskaev etc. and they are laregly in much better condition.

From 2000-2007, the following heavyweight punchers have fought. Lewis, Tyson, Klitschko, Klitschko, Tua, Sanders, Brewster, Peter, Rhaman, Maskaev, Virchis, D. Williams, and Briggs.

And then there are plenty of guys on the next level that could whack you out of there if they catch you like Brock, Chagaev, McCall, and Mesi,

There is little wiggle room here. This is decade of heavyweight boxing has more punchers, and more elite level punchers in comparison to the 19teens to 1920’s. Check the knockout percentages, and you'll see. Or better yet just imagine if the modern punchers were fighting light heavies or cruiser weights. I think it is safe to say they would have even more KO's.

This is not to say that Dempsey, or Wills could not hit. They could!

[BigJuicyHog]

What about Dempsey fighting today as a cruiserweight? I dont think it would be pretty for the cruiser division.

[p4p1]

imangine how many great heavyweight would be at cruiserweight patterson anfd marciano along with dempsey to name just a few and im sure there were alot of guys that could of made 190lbs if they wanted 2

[Ezzard]

Let's hear it. Why wouldn't he?

His size? No way, his tenacity and performance against guys much larger than him proves size didn't matter if you're that tough, and swarm your opponent.

Look at his fights vs Carl Morris, Fred Fulton, Jess Willard, and Firpo... Those guys were taller, weighed 25-60 LBS more, and he still beat 'em.

You think Lennox Lewis would have been champ back in the 1910's because he has a good jab, and he's a monster? Hell no he wouldn't, 190 LB guys swarming over him with 4 and 6 oz. gloves would have dropped him, and he would have never even been remembered.

Let's hear the arguements.

He might have lost a few here and there, but that’s only because the modern era is loaded with guys who can hit.

While fighters like Tua, Sanders, Brewster, Peter, Maskeav, ect... might not be great fighters they are great punchers who can end a match quickly if they catch their guy clean.

And the 19teens didn't have a lot of big punchers??

Some people (and I'm not saying you P4P . . speaking to others) have such a warped idea of this. Tua's fat-ass is smaller than Dempsey but he comes into the ring with big biceps and a load of fat on his 5'10 frame (whereas in tip-tip shape Tua would be about 205 lbs) and suddenly he's a contender, whereas a supremely conditioned 190 lb man much greater in every facet is out of his league.

A 5'10 MIDDLEWEIGHT eats up to 230 lbs in his late 30s. . he has shots vs the big guys, but not the naturally much bigger and stronger man who trains DOWN to 190 lbs.

If a person can follow that logic there is little hope for them.

Glad someone made the point about Toney but the man who proves that Dempsey and the so called smalller guys could make it is Holyfield who was Cruiserweight himself, bulked up on modern science and IMO was the best HW of his era including giants like Lewis, Bowe, etc... If Holyfield can do it then so can Dempsey.

[yiddo14]

There can be little doubt Holyfield used "modern science", thats for sure!!!

Seriously though, I don't think Dempsey would have needed steroids either to have been a force in todays heavyweight division.
As I said above, he was great fighter.That's usually more than adequate(irrelevant of size)

[dempseyfire]

Dempseyfire

I strongly disagree. Bigger punchers based on what? Firpo, Willard, Dempsey, Brennan, Godfrey, Coffey, Fulton, and Willis all had the power to match the likes of Sanders, Brewster, Tua, Maskaev etc. and they are laregly in much better condition.

From 2000-2007, the following heavyweight punchers have fought. Lewis, Tyson, Klitschko, Klitschko, Tua, Sanders, Brewster, Peter, Rhaman, Maskaev, Virchis, D. Williams, and Briggs.

And then there are plenty of guys on the next level that could whack you out of there if they catch you like Brock, Chagaev, McCall, and Mesi,

There is little wiggle room here. This is decade of heavyweight boxing has more punchers, and more elite level punchers in comparison to the 19teens to 1920’s. Check the knockout percentages, and you'll see. Or better yet just imagine if the modern punchers were fighting light heavies or cruiser weights. I think it is safe to say they would have even more KO's.

This is not to say that Dempsey, or Wills could not hit. They could!

Knockout percentages don't mean anything . . .anyone who can hit can rack up a 75-80% KO ratio by knocking out bums. And if the likes of Brock, Mesi, Peter, Tua etc. had to fight more guys hungry and in shape at 190-200 lbs who could box, you can bet their KO percentages would go down. 30 lbs of muscle and fat don't make your chin any better.

They also let fights go on back then which would've surely been stopped LONG before today. Back then there was no such thing as a "premature stoppage" Either a guy was out for 10 or his corner stopped the fight.

[Ambling Alp]

I agree completely with dempseyfire here. Knockout %'s can be very deceiving.
Today's top fighters usually fight very carefully selected opponents on their way up. They usually have a very high KO% in their first 15-25 fights. Then they eventually start fight better competiton and their KO % go down some. Of course since they only fight twice a year once they are a contender they usually still wind up with a fairly high KO % by the time they retire.
You also have to factor in that you seldom see Top 10 contenders fight each other. They usually bide their time fighting tomato cans while waiting for a title shot. Since there is 4 "titles" they can win, there is little incentive to risk fighting someone good if it's not for a title. Sooner or later they will get a title shot.
In the Teens, top contenders often fought each, often multiple times. Naturally their KO %'s will suffer because of that.

And of course as dempseyfire mentioned, fights were seldom stopped back then. "TKO's" were much more rare. It's wasn't until the 1920's and 1930's that you start gradually seeing fights being stopped more often and even then it took more to stop a fight then it does today.
There also was no 3 Knockdown rule.

Take a look at Willard's record. He had 35 fights and "only" 20 knockouts. However, only 2 were TKOs. He knocked out 18 of 35 opponents for the count of 10. That's a fairly high %.

Dempsey is even better. He had "only" 51 ko's in 83 fights. However, he only had 2 TKO's. He had 49 fights where he knocked out his opponent for the count of 10. Of course some were against weak competition, however many were over Top 10 opponents.

Lastly, why are some of these modern fighters considered big punchers?
Who has Danny Williams,Chagaev,Virchis,Peter, or Brock stopped that is any good at all? They build up high Ko%'s against journeyman but when they fight anyone decent they can't stop them.
Sanders reputation is most from knocking out Klitschko, otherwise who has he stopped? Brewster's record as well isn't that impressive if you take out the Klitschko fight.

[Ezzard]

I agree completely with dempseyfire here. Knockout %'s can be very deceiving.
Today's top fighters usually fight very carefully selected opponents on their way up. They usually have a very high KO% in their first 15-25 fights. Then they eventually start fight better competiton and their KO % go down some. Of course since they only fight twice a year once they are a contender they usually still wind up with a fairly high KO % by the time they retire.
You also have to factor in that you seldom see Top 10 contenders fight each other. They usually bide their time fighting tomato cans while waiting for a title shot. Since there is 4 "titles" they can win, there is little incentive to risk fighting someone good if it's not for a title. Sooner or later they will get a title shot.
In the Teens, top contenders often fought each, often multiple times. Naturally their KO %'s will suffer because of that.

And of course as dempseyfire mentioned, fights were seldom stopped back then. "TKO's were much mopre rare. It's wasn't until the 1920's and 1930's that you start gradually seeing fights being stopped more often and even then it was it took more to stop a fight then it does today.
There also was no 3 Knockdown rule.

Take a look at Willard's record. He had 35 fights and "only" 20 knockouts. However, only 2 were TKOs. He knocked out 18 of 35 opponents for the count of 10. That's a fairly high %.

Dempsey is even better. He had "only" 51 ko's in 83 fights. However, he only had 2 TKO's. He had 49 fights where he knocked out his opponent for the count of 10. Of course some were against weak competition, however many were over Top 10 opponents.

Lastly, why are some of these modern fighters considered big punchers?
Who has Danny Williams,Chagaev,Virchis,Peter, or Brock stopped that is any good at all? They build up high Ko%'s against journeyman but when they fight anyone decent they can't stop them.
Sanders reputation is most from knocking out Klitschko, otherwise who has he stopped? Brewster's record as well isn't that impressive if you take out the Klitschko fight.

Totally agree. Dempsey was scoring clean KO's against top contenders of the day.

[Cojimar 1945]

Tyson, the Klitschkos, Lewis and Tua could be considered big punchers but Sanders, Peter and Maskaev seem to lack the credentials to be considered really big punchers. Peter never stopped a highly rated heavyweight who was really durable and Sanders only kayoed one heavyweight ranked in the top 10 during his entire career.

[Jaclem]

..not taking sides...just asking as i often do when dempsey's power comes up...how many times did willard and firpo get up after dempsey knocked them down?.....(and let's not even factor in dempsey's being able to stand right by them and hit them as soon as their gloves were off the canvas.)