BoxRec

Dempsey would have killed Adamek in the first round.

Adamek doesn't have any defense and against a terrific swarmer like Dempsey he would have been destroyed.

DetroitHxC wrote:Adamek on his best night, at HW, vs Dempsey at his best, 15 Rounds.

They would be about the same size, if not Adamek being a little bigger.

I think Dempsey would stop him late, but I wouldn't call it a sure thing. Adamek is tough, and would go to war with him, and would trouble him with his boxing ability and ring smarts. He might be able to wear Dempsey down.

What do you think?

I think Mike Tyson against Johnny Paychek would be a great undercard --- and just as competitive, too.

Dempsey butchers Adamek. Seriously, it would be a massacre.

DetroitHxC wrote:Adamek on his best night, at HW, vs Dempsey at his best, 15 Rounds.

They would be about the same size, if not Adamek being a little bigger.

I think Dempsey would stop him late, but I wouldn't call it a sure thing. Adamek is tough, and would go to war with him, and would trouble him with his boxing ability and ring smarts. He might be able to wear Dempsey down.

What do you think?

I was hoping this was a joke.

Adamek doesn't get past the 5th round, and that's probably being generous to Tomasz. Dempsey beat much better boxers and guys just as 'tough' or tougher than Adamek. Adamek would receive a beating.

Dempsey's frightening power downed a 6'6'', 245lb Jess Willard how many times in the first round, and shattered his jaw.

This isn't Vitali Klitschko who won't mix it up and fires from a safety first, long range distance and will wait 10 rds for a ref to step in and end the tedium for him. This is DEMPSEY.

Adamek wouldn't be manouvering round a big fatty like Arreola, and even on those shaky old films Dempsey is super fast. Adamek's porous defence equals Dempsey KO1 via total annihilation.

Society does not create men like Jack Dempsey anymore.

DetroitHxC wrote:

BarryWashington wrote:Nah, Dempsey would shit on Adamek. Adamek would be too willing to trade and he's going to get killed doing that. Even if he stays in a shell he's going to get broken down by the speed & combinations of Dempsey.

Maybe, but a lot people think Adamek is unimpressive, until he beats them.

What a ridiculous statement. Were any of Adamek's victims men the calibre of Jack Dempsey? Chris Arreola? A 100 year old Andrew Golota? Please.

I should point out this guy also listed in the 'great fighters with bad chins' thread JACK DEMPSEY, and he also writes in another thread "James Toney would embarrass JACK DEMPSEY".

I just want to make it clear, the kind of educated, well informed poster we are dealing with here.

Dempsey slayed a bigger man than any of Adamek's victims at any weight, he could handle a heavyweight Tomasz Adamek.

Dempsey was hitting you everywhere, up and down. Similar to how Lebedev recently beat up (a old, past it) Toney.

Toney pot shotting and struggling with big heavy guys is a totally different ball game to Jack Dempsey, who isn't a lumbering oaf ala John Ruiz, Sam Peter, Rahman, etc.

Its pretty obvious your knowledge of Dempsey and his era of boxing is non existant, and you base your understanding on it by quickly referencing records on boxrec.

A guy who was never legitmately KOd in a 100something fights has a 'bad chin'?

A come forward aggression fighter getting knocked down? Is that some kind of revelation to you? Do you think maybe a guy who's whole game is to take your head off might be liable to get knocked down more frequently?

'Soundly outboxed'? What, after he'd been laid off for three years?

He came back and iced the guy in 7 (were it not for the long count). How many times did your beloved James Toney avenge his defeats? Oh that's right, never.

D, come on. Tunney is one of Boxing's most celebrated ring genius'. I have him ranked as the #1 175lber in history, personally. His CV is a sensation, to hunt a guy down for losing to Tunney, past your peak and coming back from THAT long a lay-off...its more than unfair. And Id like to see you address Dempsey's total shutdown of a great boxer like Tommy Gibbons if you insist on declaring Dempsey open to any guy with, "even a little defense."

BarryWashington wrote:

loaded_gloves wrote:

DetroitHxC wrote: Maybe, but a lot people think Adamek is unimpressive, until he beats them.

What a ridiculous statement. Were any of Adamek's victims men the calibre of Jack Dempsey? Chris Arreola? A 100 year old Andrew Golota? Please.

Dempsey weighed in the mid 180's-low 190's so, it would be the LHW Adamek vs. Dempsey.

Cruiserweight Adamek. I'd pick Dempsey by 8th Rd Tko.

DetroitHxC wrote:

loaded_gloves wrote:Dempsey was hitting you everywhere, up and down. Similar to how Lebedev recently beat up (a old, past it) Toney.

Toney pot shotting and struggling with big heavy guys is a totally different ball game to Jack Dempsey, who isn't a lumbering oaf ala John Ruiz, Sam Peter, Rahman, etc.

Hitting who everywhere? A bunch of guys that couldn't throw a jab or roll a punch to save their life! When Dempsey fought a good boxer, he lost, soundly.

Rubbish, please tell me what heavyweight boxers,SOUNDLY beat the prime Jack Dempsey circa 1919-23 ? He beat everybody he fought in his prime. He decisioned a master boxer Tommy Gibbons,decisively in 15rds. He beat everyone he fought from 1919 to 1923. After a three year layoff
from boxing,Dempsey fired his manager Jack Kearns,and rusty and slow at almost 32 years of age,
WITHOUT a tune-up bout, foolishly took on a peak great boxer Gene Tunney. With bad results. But Dempsey was a slow shell of himself by then.In their second bout in 1927 Dempsey had tunney down for 15-17 seconds in their famous long count bout... So in reality the young tigerish Dempsey was never truly outboxed as you claim. Please read your history. The prime Dempsey was hell for anybody before or since...

Dempsey in the modern times would be a bigger man overall(upper and lower body) with the advanced nutritional supplementations and training methods. He'd definately at least be a full fledged cruiserweight,walking around at 205 or so and then only draining down a few lbs to fight a cruiser version of Adamek,beating him likely in 8,and then In a heavyweight rematch scenario,i could see Adamek doing better but still not well enough to pull it off,probably might last an extra round or two in a Hw match.

DetroitHxC wrote:

beaujack wrote:

DetroitHxC wrote: Hitting who everywhere? A bunch of guys that couldn't throw a jab or roll a punch to save their life! When Dempsey fought a good boxer, he lost, soundly.

Rubbish, please tell me what heavyweight boxers,SOUNDLY beat the prime Jack Dempsey circa 1919-23 ? He beat everybody he fought in his prime. He decisioned a master boxer Tommy Gibbons,decisively in 15rds. He beat everyone he fought from 1919 to 1923. After a three year layoff
from boxing,Dempsey fired his manager Jack Kearns,and rusty and slow at almost 32 years of age,
WITHOUT a tune-up bout, foolishly took on a peak great boxer Gene Tunney. With bad results. But Dempsey was a slow shell of himself by then.In their second bout in 1927 Dempsey had tunney down for 15-17 seconds in their famous long count bout... So in reality the young tigerish Dempsey was never truly outboxed as you claim. Please read your history. The prime Dempsey was hell for anybody before or since...

I appreciate the input, and I intend to. Maybe he was never soundly outboxed, but I think an elite modern boxer could shut him down. He was all hooks and uppercuts.

Detroit, Jack Dempsey in the 1950 poll of over 200 sportswriters,who saw the great heavyweights ringside from Jack Johnson to the great Joe Louis,voted Jack Dempsey as the greatest fighter they had ever seen, by a LARGE majority. Along with great fighters of the past as Sam Langford, Mickey Walker, Gene Tunney, Jack Sharkey, Max Schmeling,who also opined that the prime Jack Dempsey of Toledo 1919 to 1923,was the greatest heavyweight that THEY also had ever seen. I also include the great trainer Ray Arcel,who saw young Dempsey and all the HW champs up to Ali. Were all these great boxing figures who saw Jack Dempsey at his devastating best, before his 3 year layoff,less an authority than you respectfully, 85 years AFTER his last fight ? I think not Detroit. Dempsey was called a "man-killer for good reason. He kod 25 men in the first round. He flattened giants such as Carl Morris, Fred Fulton, Jess Willard [who was never floored before], Luis Angel Firpo, in two rounds, decisioned boxing HOF Tommy Gibbons in 15rds, etc. The prime Manassa Mauler had welterweight speed, and great two-handed punching power, a great set of whiskers,and a kill or be killed attitude in the ring. Not for nothing was he voted the greatest heavyweight in his prime...Even when he was a slow shell of himself in 1927, Dempsey flattened a prime Jack Sharkey....

Beau,

What is your take on Tunney against a younger Dempsey? Ive always favoured Dempsey there, though not by a lot.

Detroit,

I would bank on Vitali falling to Dempsey --- but be aware I am a huge detractor of Vitali's (whom Ive often compared to Willard), hes a guy I just find immensely over-rated. Hard to land your jab on a much faster rival if timing isnt your strong suite.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Beau,

What is your take on Tunney against a younger Dempsey? Ive always favoured Dempsey there, though not by a lot.

Detroit,

I would bank on Vitali falling to Dempsey --- but be aware I am a huge detractor of Vitali's (whom Ive often compared to Willard), hes a guy I just find immensely over-rated. Hard to land your jab on a much faster rival if timing isnt your strong suite.

I can't see Gene Tunney beating a prime tigerish Jack Dempsey. Highly unlikely IMO. Dempsey's main asset was his great quickness and speed. When he fought Gene Tunney in 1926 after a THREE YEAR layoff,he was a plodding shell of his prime. No one can take a 3 year layoff and without a tune-up bout, beat a Gene Tunney at his peak. But in the second bout ,I still think that were it not for the
17 second or so "long count",Dempsey would have stopped Tunney in the 7th round...
Vitali IMO was no better than a younger Jess Willard. I can't see Klitschko taking a beating from Jack Johnson for 25 rounds, biding his time for the ko of Johnson in the 26th rd. I might get in trouble, but I feel that Primo Carnera would have outhustled the robotic Vitali in 15 rounds. Primo Carnera had more stamina than Vitali I believe...

The question as posed, scandalizes the intellect.

But it appears to have stirred the pot.

What draws you to Dempsey in the first place, D?

Beau, I would have substantially less faith in Dempsey (whilst still favouring him) to get the job done --- IMO, Tunney would always spell him trouble, he was just SUCH a great all-round package (ring intellect, punch arsenal, reflexes, adaptability, hand and footspeed, a great chin, and under-valued power), you could dismiss the first schooling of Dempsey almost entirely, owing to ill-preparation, ring rust, and age...but not the second, IMO. Dempsey was over-the-hill but active and focused again, yet Tunney was again SO decisive in victory, it is hard to ignore his chances against even the young Dempsey, IMO.

Close bout. Id probably have Dempsey either overwhelming Tunney early, or stopping him while down on the cards at some point. It always amazed me the number of parallels these two contests share with the Holmes-Shavers fights, BTW.

He made Boxing huge.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:He made Boxing huge.

I wouldnt call that strictly true, but I can certainly appreciate the viewpoint. He and Rickard took the sport to new levels, simply put.

Did you know there are paper reports and articles on Dempsey's fights from Australia, and even New Zealand!? From the 20's!!!!! Thats PHENOMENAL.

DetroitHxC wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:What draws you to Dempsey in the first place, D?

His energy, grittiness, and whirlwind attack. The way he is held in such high regard by people older than me, and the fact he packed so much power while being so much lighter than a lot of modern heavyweights. He represents action, determination, and a time when boxing was still HUGE. Also, the way he accomplished what he did with almost like a natural fighting style, no straight up boxing technique. I'm sure he was well trained, but to me his style was like an old school version of Roy Jones, doing a lot of things wrong, but making up for it in physical tools. Another thing is that he would always go balls out for a knockout, something you don't see from heavyweights nowadays.

True, and interesting comparison with Jones. Like him several decades later, Dempsey had a style all his own.

DetroitHxC wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:What draws you to Dempsey in the first place, D?

His energy, grittiness, and whirlwind attack. The way he is held in such high regard by people older than me, and the fact he packed so much power while being so much lighter than a lot of modern heavyweights. He represents action, determination, and a time when boxing was still HUGE. Also, the way he accomplished what he did with almost like a natural fighting style, no straight up boxing technique. I'm sure he was well trained, but to me his style was like an old school version of Roy Jones, doing a lot of things wrong, but making up for it in physical tools. Another thing is that he would always go balls out for a knockout, something you don't see from heavyweights nowadays.

Detroit, I'll win you over...Respectfully, you have much to learn about Jack Dempsey. After JD met Jack Kearns out West, Dempsey became the Jack Dempsey so feared in his time. A couple of facts
about Dempsey : While he was about 187-195 in his prime,his weight was misleading .From the waist up Dempsey had the frame of a 210 fighter, but his small waist and dancer's legs , put him at about 190 pounds the morning of the bout. And in those tougher days heavyweights trained harder, ran more, fought more often, resulting in much leaner heavyweights than today. And no steroids I might add...Nat Fleischer ,founder of the RING magazine always described Dempsey as "amazingly strong"
for his weight...Lean and MEAN, without a trailer of fat to lug along...One other thing D. Dempsey
as Gene Tunney wrote, was very hard to hit solidly on his chin. He had his chin tucked in his shoulder always, and with his bobbing and weaving style ,he was a difficult target to hit cleanly. He seldom if ever was badly cut on his face. And this nonsense that he had a bad "chin" and was dropped often
is poppycock. After Jack Kearns met and trained the Jack Dempsey we know, Dempsey from 1919 to 1927 ,was only floored by the crude but powerful hitting Luis Angel Firpo once, and then pushed out of the ring soon after in 1923,and the ONLY other time in 1927,when old and slow, Gene Tunney dropped Dempsey for a one count in the last round...So D, where is the weak chin B.S. ?
Believe the great writers who saw him ringside before his 3 year layoff, and raved about him.
and as I posted before, take heed of what the great Sam Langford,said of him, as well as Mickey Walker, Gene Tunney, Jack Sharkey, Max Schmeling, each who boxed with him, and called him the best heavyweight they had ever seen ! Take care.

Jack Dempsey easy KO.

DetroitHxC wrote:Adamek on his best night, at HW, vs Dempsey at his best, 15 Rounds.

They would be about the same size, if not Adamek being a little bigger.

I think Dempsey would stop him late, but I wouldn't call it a sure thing. Adamek is tough, and would go to war with him, and would trouble him with his boxing ability and ring smarts. He might be able to wear Dempsey down.

What do you think?

demsey is an animal ko 1 ends adameks career breaks his nose and jaw in ninety secondsI admire your defence of your view but its one round for adamek

mugabi wrote:

DetroitHxC wrote:Adamek on his best night, at HW, vs Dempsey at his best, 15 Rounds.

They would be about the same size, if not Adamek being a little bigger.

I think Dempsey would stop him late, but I wouldn't call it a sure thing. Adamek is tough, and would go to war with him, and would trouble him with his boxing ability and ring smarts. He might be able to wear Dempsey down.

What do you think?

demsey is an animal ko 1 ends adameks career breaks his nose and jaw in ninety secondsI admire your defence of your view but its one round for adamek