Jack Dempsey, Joe Louis, & Rocky?

[NYDominican]

Throughout Jack Dempsey, Joe Louis, and Rocky Marciano's primes of their careers, they were on top.

Had Jack, Joe, and Rocky fought at any time between early 1959 till late June, 1988? ------ Would Dempsey, Louis, and Marciano have been dominant? Or, wouldn't they?


Please explain.

[DrDuke]

Everyone of them would be likely to rule in the Patterson era. Everyone could handle Liston too, although Dempsey-Liston would be a tougher bout to predict. During the Ali-Frazier-Foreman era none of them would be a champion (only if like in a case of Jimmy Ellis and Ernie Terrell). During the Holmes era all of them would be in the mix of the secondary titles challengers, while no one would be able to win Holmes. The same with Tyson.

[Ambling Alp II]

Louis would have been a champion at anytime in the history of the sport excluding Ali's prime. He was the 2nd best heavyweight ever.
Marciano and Dempsey are more hit and miss. There were periods of time when they would have the best and others when they would not have been.

[f read]

Louis would have been a champion at anytime in the history of the sport excluding Ali's prime. He was the 2nd best heavyweight ever.
Marciano and Dempsey are more hit and miss. There were periods of time when they would have the best and others when they would not have been.

Agreed Joe Louis was an all time great some argue he was the greatest heavyweight of all time. He and Ali i would put 1A 1B. It is an in house debate who was superior. Louis had a reign of nearly 12 years and 25 title defenses incredible. I really appreciate and respect longevity. He could have easily slipped up trained light and took for granted a lesser opponent and lost. He did not and that is saying something. Marciano the most with the least. He was short armed and lacked in the skill and finesse area. However he was well conditioned determined and was a bad man. My best friend now deceased called him the baddest 185 pound man that ever lived. Marciano would be a champion no doubt maybe not in the heavyweight division but without question in a lighter weight class. Dempsey i believe was the least of the three. He was a phenom and an absolute killer with a mean streak also lacking in skills and finesse but long on intestinal fortitude. I would say his chances of being a champ in the modern era would be the least likely of the three. However he did not fight in the modern era and more than made his mark not only on boxing but on sports. He and Babe Ruth were the biggest sports heroes of the 1920s.

[Crease]

Everyone of them would be likely to rule in the Patterson era. Everyone could handle Liston too, although Dempsey-Liston would be a tougher bout to predict.

Agreed with Patterson, once Floyd held their firepower he would have went into his shell until he got stopped... As for Liston, he was a big bully - Louis would outbox him and Dempsey and Marciano would outlast him... He would just get disheartened that he couldn't intimidate them.

During the Ali-Frazier-Foreman era none of them would be a champion (only if like in a case of Jimmy Ellis and Ernie Terrell).

Joe Louis would be ultra competitive. I'd actually pick him to beat Frazier more comfortably than Ali ever did... Foreman vs the three of them is a bit of an unknown quantity... I think Ali outpointing Dempsey is a given (considering Jack fought 10 rounders) against Marciano, that would be a true battle of styles...

During the Holmes era all of them would be in the mix of the secondary titles challengers, while no one would be able to win Holmes. The same with Tyson.

Call me crazy but I always thought that Holmes was a little overrated... His list of victories look very thin in terms of quality...