BoxRec

theone wrote:
Most accounts of the 2nd Brennan fight is that Brennan was ahead in the scoring after ten and that Dempsey was wobbled in the second round.

WHY are you dependent on "accounts" of the Dempsey-Brennan title fight?

I'll clue you in on a little secret:

The film is easily available.
.

WHY are you dependent on "accounts" of the Dempsey-Brennan title fight?
I'll clue you in on a little secret:
The film is easily available.

Ive never seen the Brennan fight nor was I aware that it was available. I have most of Dempseys available fights already, alot of them highlights.
Enlighten me, how easily is the Dempsey vs Brennan fight available?

And whats wrong with depending on accounts of a fight? Especially if it is substantiated by other dependable sources?

dempsey fought his worst fight of his career vs brennan i have the fight on film. this was a marciano-savold like preformance. not a good one.



just remember a peak jack dempsey dominated and brutally knocked brennan out in 6 rounds in 1918

theone wrote: Most accounts of the 2nd Brennan fight is that Brennan was ahead in the scoring after ten and that Dempsey was wobbled in the second round.

This was answered by someone else. The Brennan fight is very easy to get a hold of and has aired on ESPN several times. Rounds 1, 3, 4, 10, and 12 are showcased, so if Dempsey was wobbled in the 2nd, we don't get to see it. I don't think Dempsey looked terrible, but maybe a little lethargic.

theone wrote: 2-1-2 in fourt round fights says alot against Dempsey. Its says that for at least 16 rounds Meehan was competitive with the great Dempsey. I cant imagine a fighter of his quality being that competitive with any other all time great. Dempsey gets cut way too much slack for these losses.

When Langford lost to Meehan, he was past his best, out of shape and not a true heavyweight anyway.

It says that Dempsey is not a four-round fighter. He would blitz fighters out in the first round if possible, but against slick movers like Willie Meehan, he struggled to get his timing together. Meehan was actually quite a good boxer with fast hands. There was an article about him and his fights with Dempsey in the Classic section of The Ring a few years ago and by all accounts I've read, he was more than meets the eye.

evndrbsn wrote:Even if you think prime Tunney beats prime Dempsey, it is absurd to suggest that Tunney is leagues above Dempsey.

theone wrote: When did I state this?

Sorry, I might have misunderstood you.

theone wrote:
Dempsey droppped and stunned Tunney, that much was evident. Badly hurt? That is highly debatable. Tunney seemed able to rise early in the count and moved around with no ill effect the rest of the fight. If it were prime Dempsey it can be easily argued that Tunney would have been more careful and not have allowed Dempsey to land the combination that put him done in the first place. After 16 one sided rounds its not surprising that Tunney got careless.

You are entitled to your view but I still stick by mine. A creaky Dempsey was good enough to drop Tunney hard. That version of Dempsey was nowhere near as ferocious as the 1919 version. A ferocious version turns in the win.

theone wrote:

WHY are you dependent on "accounts" of the Dempsey-Brennan title fight?
I'll clue you in on a little secret:
The film is easily available.

Ive never seen the Brennan fight nor was I aware that it was available. I have most of Dempseys available fights already, alot of them highlights.
Enlighten me, how easily is the Dempsey vs Brennan fight available?

SEEK AND YE SHALL FIND.

It says that Dempsey is not a four-round fighter.

If Dempsey doesnt have the most 1st round ko's of any heavyweight in history, then he is in the top 3. How can you say he wasnt a four round fighter?

He would blitz fighters out in the first round if possible, but against slick movers like Willie Meehan, he struggled to get his timing together. Meehan was actually quite a good boxer with fast hands.

Exactley my point. With a bit of boxing skill Meehan gave Dempsey fits for four rounds. Tunney is a much better, conditioned fighter than Meehan. Isnt it reasonable to think Tunney could have beffuddled a prime Dempsey for a full fight ?

Dempsey fought at full speed for 15 rounds against Tommy Gibbons.

(The film is EASILY available).

theone wrote:
With a bit of boxing skill Meehan gave Dempsey fits for four rounds.

With a bit of total ignorance of Willie Meehan and how he fought

you just stated a "fact" from your imagination in order to push your obvious agenda.

WHEN did you see Willie Meehan fight?

With a bit of total ignorance of Willie Meehan and how he fought

you just stated a "fact" from your imagination in order to push your obvious agenda.

From what i read about him Meehan could box a bit. He was a slaapper who used alot of lateral movement.

Are you implying he was a great boxer?

theone wrote:
Isnt it reasonable to think Tunney could have beffuddled a prime Dempsey for a full fight ?

An over the hill Dempsey knocked out a Tunney in his prime.

You managed to miss that?

Pathetic.

With a bit of total ignorance of Willie Meehan and how he fought

you just stated a "fact" from your imagination in order to push your obvious agenda.

From what i read about him Meehan could box a bit. He was a slaapper who used alot of lateral movement.

Are you implying he was a great boxer?

theone wrote:

With a bit of total ignorance of Willie Meehan and how he fought

you just stated a "fact" from your imagination in order to push your obvious agenda.

From what i read about him Meehan could box a bit. He was a slaapper who used alot of lateral movement.

Are you implying he was a great boxer?

I am IMPLYING that you never saw Willie Meehan fight.

I am IMPLYING that you are not competent to make the statements you do about him and how he fought.

I am IMPLYING that you never saw Willie Meehan fight.

I am IMPLYING that you are not competent to make the statements you do about him and how he fought.

You dont have to imply it, I readily admit it. I dont need to have watched Meehan fight to educate myself on what type of fighter he was.

I never saw Greb fight and only a bit of langford, but I can gauge how well they fought in thier era from other sources.

theone wrote:

I am IMPLYING that you never saw Willie Meehan fight.

I am IMPLYING that you are not competent to make the statements you do about him and how he fought.

You dont have to imply it, I readily admit it. I dont need to have watched Meehan fight to educate myself on what type of fighter he was.

I never saw Greb fight and only a bit of langford, but I can gauge how well they fought in thier era from other sources.

What makes you think you are a competent "gauger"?

What makes you think you are a competent "gauger"?

Well, I'm a good enough "gauger" to know this discussion is about to deteriorate into a silly back and forth. So I'll bail out of it now.

>>>I am IMPLYING that you never saw Willie Meehan fight. I am IMPLYING that you are not competent to make the statements you do about him and how he fought<<<

That means very little in assessing a fighter. A person that does proper research of newspapers and the such can find out a lot more about Willie Meehan than another person could by watching, what, only the one, or two total films that may exist of Meehan.

I'd say the person that has read many accounts and recaps of a fighter’s career to be a lot more knowledgeable than someone who has only seen one, or two fights of a fighter!

And although Dempsey is one of my favorites...Meehan made him look foolish the times they fought.

granberry wrote:An over the hill Dempsey knocked out a Tunney in his prime.

I just checked boxrec and my memory is correct. Tunney won both of his fights with Dempsey.

You must have missed that.