BoxRec

Jaclem wrote:..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.)

Jaclem, I remember you stating before that you were not much of a fan of Dempsey. Any reasons why?

..ezzard...i kind of blow hot and cold on dempsey. i think my negative attitude came back in the 50s when that sportswriters poll named him the greatest heavyweight ever, well over 2nd place joe louis, and the popular opinion among historians then was that he'd kayo louis if they'd met in their prime. i thought this was hugely overrating him. i thought louis was much the superior fighter and would kayo the wild swinging dempsey early. my opinions about dempsey's power are expressed in my previous post. if louis could stand over a guy like that the guy would get decapitated.

so...i tended to downplay dempsey, and still do, but i have to admit i'm impressed when i see him bobbing and weaving and going on the attack and he does look fast and that barrage he hit tunney with inthe second fight was a good example of combination power punching. still... long count or no tunney did get up and go on to win...and if dempsey had been the puncher he's made out to be the count could have gone to a hundred before they carted tunney off to the hospital.

plus, reading about dempsey...and i think i've read all the books there are...show him as one tough guy who overcame a lot of obstacles on the way up.

but...greatest ever? no way. a good exciting fighter hyped in the era of colorful sportswriters and way way overrated.

Big thanks for the reply, Jaclem

I think Dempsey should be behind Louis, no doubt. I do believe though these days he's quickly disregarded by fans. He seemed to have that speed of punch that can drop an opponent, disorient him without necessarily stretching him out.

1 thing about standing over a guy... I've often wondered this but maybe it's not as easy to land the kind of finishing blow required. The leverage is not easy to get. You see a lot of films where opponents generally get cuffed about before falling back down. Just sort of wondering out loud whether it really was a great advantage. Easy to put the guy back down but maybe not so easy to keep him there.

One last question, if I can draw you on it... Who would you pick Dempsey or Marciano?

...dempsey..

Woah....Jaclem and I agree on this and yet Rocky beat both Ezzard and Archie. Which DOES NOT mean I would pick Dempsey to beat Ezzard and Archie....at least not on the same night.

BoxBuzz wrote:Woah....Jaclem and I agree on this and yet Rocky beat both Ezzard and Archie. Which DOES NOT mean I would pick Dempsey to beat Ezzard and Archie....at least not on the same night.

You might pick prime Dempsey to beat them on the nights Rocky fought them (obviously instead of Rock)...

Jaclem wrote:..and if dempsey had been the puncher he's made out to be the count could have gone to a hundred before they carted tunney off to the hospital.


.

And in almost 90 fights who was able to knockout Gene Tunney??

Cojimar 1945 wrote: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.

You don't have to KO a top guy to be a big puncher. You only need to hit hard. Maskaev, and Sanders chin or stamina might have cost them a fight or two, but never their power.

Peter's career is still very young, but based on some of the KO's I've seen, the man can hit.

A KO percentage is built mostly upon Power, Skills, and Stamina. A fighter's weight and gloves weight / type, a good chin that prevents TKO/ KO losses also factor in. It is no accident that modern fighters heavyweights have higher KO percentages. They are bigger, stronger, and hit harder in general.

The old timers used lighter " puncher's gloves " What if you gave those gloves to Tyson, Klitschko, or Tua....and matched them vs the same fighters in the 1910's-1920's?

Don't sneer at glove weight. It can make a difference. Look at what a few ounces of extra padding has done to modern lower weight fighters.

pound per pound wrote:A KO percentage is built mostly upon Power, Skills, and Stamina.

Sorry, but for most fighters it's built on carefull match making.

The Great John L wrote:

pound per pound wrote:A KO percentage is built mostly upon Power, Skills, and Stamina.

Sorry, but for most fighters it's built on carefull match making.

Good point. I forgot to mention match making. Match making has been in play for decades. In truth Marciano, and Dempsey had many easy early fights. Louis fought quite a few past their prime guys. Foreman fattened his KO percentage when he came back and fought many stiffs. And the beat goes on. These guys were great punchers who got some nice match making too. Every top prospect has some match making, but the big punchers are the ones who score the KO's. The punchers with Skills are more likely to land their best, and the punchers with Stamina keep their power late in fights and can stop someone late.

If we look at the ring records, you will see that guys like Klitschko's, Lewis, and Tyson fought less guys with losing records ( match making ) then the fighters of past decades. It is true in general, but not all cases.

Jim Jeffries did not fight many or any fighters with losing records, but many old timers did. Povetkin may be the next big thing. He has only fought one man with a losing record.

In addition, modern heavyweight do not fight light heavies or cruisers for the most part. Old time heavies did. In general, fighters have a harder time moving up in class and taking the punch. It seems like no one wants to touch on my points of glove weight or weight of the fighters in general making a difference. It does.

My point is if we compare and contrast the sub .500 fighters fought between the old time and modern era, and you will see the modern era has fought less of them.

Careful match making was nearly impossible for fighters in Dempsey’s era and earlier because it was very difficult to get enough information about prospective opponents to judge who was an easy touch.

And yes, modern HWs often times fight CWs during their careers. Usually, the CW will simply carrying enough extra weight to come in at 200+ lbs. The CW division didn’t exist in Dempsey’s era.

pound per pound wrote:

The Great John L wrote:

pound per pound wrote:A KO percentage is built mostly upon Power, Skills, and Stamina.

Sorry, but for most fighters it's built on carefull match making.

Good point. I forgot to mention match making. Match making has been in play for decades. In truth Marciano, and Dempsey had many easy early fights. .

Evidence of this???

In regards to glove weight, the move from 4 ounce shoe/horse leather gloves to 6 and 8 ounce gloves with heavier padding would actually INCREASE KO percentage, as the 4 ounce gloves offered limited protection to the hands (thus, a guy wasn't going to be throwing many homerun-shots) To the contrary, a modern 8 ounce Reyes glove allows you to bombs away with abandon.

As John L points out, Cruisers who aren't just pumped up light HWs who can't make the weight, and of any value at all, move up where the money is at HW.
Do you think all of that body fat/mass improves the chins of the likes of Byrd, Toney, Chambers, Ibragimov etc? All of them in top condition would weigh 185-200 lbs, just like many of the men Dempsey and Marciano fought. Add in the likes of Tua, Chagaev, Brock etc. and those guys in top shape weigh 205-215 tops. Back in their deeper divisions you couldn't get away with being so overweight facing so many top conditioned guys.

dempseyfire wrote:As John L points out, Cruisers who aren't just pumped up light HWs who can't make the weight, and of any value at all, move up where the money is at HW.

df, and even beyond that point, many times "modern" HWs fight guys who are actually CWs but who simply do not train down to <200 for some fights and come into the fights at 200+. A guy like Imamu Mayfield is an excellent example of a CW who ocassionally steps up to get beaten by a HW. And interestingly, sometimes he even beats a large HW.

Something that should be pointed out about old timers fighting a lot of weak competition. In general, fighters had to fight more fights, period. They were fighting weak oponents in addition to strong opponents.
Dempsey specifically, did indeed fight a lot of tomato cans. However he had over 70 fights before he even got a title fight. He fought contenders like Bill Brennan,Carl Morris,Fred Fulton,Fireman Flynn, and Billy Miske before he ever got a title shot.
He also fought some decent opponents early in his career such as Joe Bonds,Terry Kellar,Homer Smith, and John Lester Johnson. These guys didn't have pretty records, but were good fighters.

Often serious contenders as well as fringe contenders fought each other multiple times. Naturally since only one guy can win a fight, winning %'s of these guys aren't going to be as high as the guys nowadays who usually do their best to avoid each other in non-title fights.

Many of the opponents that top fighters nowadays beat, fought weak opponents themselves. The % of competitve fights is much lower than it used to be many years ago. If you don't start off your career 15-0 with at least 10 koockouts, these days, it's probably because you aren't very good.
Take for example, Chris Byrd. Almost no one would consider him a hard puncher at all. However, even he was 13-0 and had 10 knockouts in his first 13 fights. As a result, even now, he has 21 knockouts in 45 fights which at first glance indicates that he had decent power.

As far as the point that you don't have to ko a top guy to be a big puncher-Well yes you do to prove you are a good puncher. When Sanders,Peter, and Maskaev fight stiffs, they usually stop them. However, when they fight someone that can take a punch, they haven't, atleast yet. That isn't a coincidence.
Until these guys do stop someone credible, they shouldn't be considered that hard of a puncher. It's that simple.

Ambling Alp wrote:Something that should be pointed out about old timers fighting a lot of weak competition. In general, fighters had to fight more fights, period. They were fighting weak oponents in addition to strong opponents.
Dempsey specifically, did indeed fight a lot of tomato cans. However he had over 70 fights before he even got a title fight. He fought contenders like Bill Brennan,Carl Morris,Fred Fulton,Fireman Flynn, and Billy Miske before he ever got a title shot.
He also fought some decent opponents early in his career such as Joe Bonds,Terry Kellar,Homer Smith, and John Lester Johnson. These guys didn't have pretty records, but were good fighters.

Often serious contenders as well as fringe contenders fought each other multiple times. Naturally since only one guy can win a fight, winning %'s of these guys aren't going to be as high as the guys nowadays who usually do their best to avoid each other in non-title fights.

Many of the opponents that top fighters nowadays beat, fought weak opponents themselves. The % of competitve fights is much lower than it used to be many years ago. If you don't start off your career 15-0 with at least 10 koockouts, these days, it's probably because you aren't very good.
Take for example, Chris Byrd. Almost no one would consider him a hard puncher at all. However, even he was 13-0 and had 10 knockouts in his first 13 fights. As a result, even now, he has 21 knockouts in 45 fights which at first glance indicates that he had decent power.

As far as the point that you don't have to ko a top guy to be a big puncher-Well yes you do to prove you are a good puncher. When Sanders,Peter, and Maskaev fight stiffs, they usually stop them. However, when they fight someone that can take a punch, they haven't, atleast yet. That isn't a coincidence.
Until these guys do stop someone credible, they shouldn't be considered that hard of a puncher. It's that simple.

I hope people read this post....