BoxRec

who do you like?



6'3 215lb Tim Witherspoon vs 6'1 185lb Jack Dempsey

Goodbye Tim Witherspoon.

LOL

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:who do you like?


6'3 215lb Tim Witherspoon vs 6'1 185lb Jack Dempsey

QUESTION FOR YOU:

who do you like?

6'6 1/2" 242lb Jess Willard vs 6' 1 1/2" 187lb Jack Dempsey

Yes, because Jess Willards skills really are comparable to Witherspoons aren't they, granberry?

Or is anyone who disagrees with you a member of the 'Ali Industry'

overhand_right wrote:Yes, because Jess Willards skills really are comparable to Witherspoons aren't they, granberry?

Or is anyone who disagrees with you a member of the 'Ali Industry'

Boxing "expert" overhand right knows ALL ABOUT Willard's 26-round knockout of Jack Johnson.

Tell us all about it, modern day boxing "expert."

LOL

Anyone ever heard me profess to be a boxing "expert"?

But yes, i do know all about Willards 26th rd kayo of a 37 year old Jack Johnson in the blazing Cuban heat.

Let me guess- here come the tough guy insults ay Granberry?

Any heavyweight in history would have big trouble in tackling the Dempsey that hammered Willard. That said, Tim Witherspoon is a totally different kettle of fish to Jess Willard. Witherspoon was an extremely good all-round heavyweight; big, very good skills, excellent chin and durability and decent power. Tim would last longer than Willard did, if it were over 12 rounds he may see the final bell.
However big and strong Willard was he was pretty immobile and presented a stationary target for Dempsey's attacks, hence he took a savage beating. No way would Witherspoon stand there and present an easy target for Dempsey to hit.

You pretty much summed up my thoughts. Willard was a huge waddling target. Witherspoon just a little bit more crafty than Willard, i'm sure most people round here would concede.

dr_devious wrote:Any heavyweight in history would have big trouble in tackling the Dempsey that hammered Willard. That said, Tim Witherspoon is a totally different kettle of fish to Jess Willard. Witherspoon was an extremely good all-round heavyweight; big, very good skills, excellent chin and durability and decent power. Tim would last longer than Willard did, if it were over 12 rounds he may see the final bell.
However big and strong Willard was he was pretty immobile and presented a stationary target for Dempsey's attacks, hence he took a savage beating. No way would Witherspoon stand there and present an easy target for Dempsey to hit.

Boxing "expert" devious displays his expertise again.

Boxing expert devious knows SO MUCH about Willard's beating of Jack Johnson over 26 rounds.

devious has seen the film and studied it DEEPLY

and applied all of his vast knowledge of the techniques of boxing

to arrive at his deeply thought conclusions

(on a fight he has never seen--even though all 26 rounds are easily available).

Very impressive devious.

As usual.

LOL

overhand_right wrote:You pretty much summed up my thoughts. Willard was a huge waddling target. Witherspoon just a little bit more crafty than Willard, i'm sure most people round here would concede.

Yes the "thoughts" of someone who has never seen the film of 26 rounds of Willard beating Jack Johnson.

What does "most people around here" have to do with what Willard did in the 26 round fight against Jack Johnson

which you and your fellow "thinker" devious have never seen?

Ignorance is bliss.

dr_devious wrote: Tim would last longer than Willard did, if it were over 12 rounds he may see the final bell.

Your "Tim" lasted less than three minutes of the first round against the great Bonecrusher Smith.

LOL

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:who do you like?



6'3 215lb Tim Witherspoon vs 6'1 185lb Jack Dempsey

Assuming they were fighting under modern rules, ie. 12 rounds, not being allowed to stand over your floored opponent and then punching them when they stand etc....then Witherspoon was good and big enough to give Dempsey problems.

Whether he could keep Dempsey away for the duration is another matter? Dempsey trails on points but winner by late stoppage.

Controversial wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:who do you like?



6'3 215lb Tim Witherspoon vs 6'1 185lb Jack Dempsey

Assuming they were fighting under modern rules, ie. 12 rounds, not being allowed to stand over your floored opponent and then punching them when they stand etc....then Witherspoon was good and big enough to give Dempsey problems.

Whether he could keep Dempsey away for the duration is another matter? Dempsey trails on points but winner by late stoppage.

More fairy tales from another modern boxing "expert."

Now give us your modern fairy tale concoction of how long Witherspoon would last against Bonecrusher Smiith.

granberry wrote:

Controversial wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:who do you like?



6'3 215lb Tim Witherspoon vs 6'1 185lb Jack Dempsey

Assuming they were fighting under modern rules, ie. 12 rounds, not being allowed to stand over your floored opponent and then punching them when they stand etc....then Witherspoon was good and big enough to give Dempsey problems.

Whether he could keep Dempsey away for the duration is another matter? Dempsey trails on points but winner by late stoppage.

More fairy tales from another modern boxing "expert."

Now give us your modern fairy tale concoction of how long Witherspoon would last against Bonecrusher Smiith.

Thats my opinion, you have yours I have mine. Any fighter can be hurt by a big punching 16+ stone heavyweight even Dempsey. Witherspoon had previously beat Smith, he just got caught cold. It happens, he displayed a good chin previous so you can hardly call him chinny because of that. Dempsey was punched out the ring by Firpo, a big puncher who was smaller than Smith.

Dempsey fought men smaller than himself and didn't always flatten them so you can't assume he would flatten Witherspoon. I still think he would stop Witherspoon late in the fight though.

They had the huge advantage of being able to stand over fallen oppenents in Dempseys era, like he did with Willard. Imagine how many results would be different if that were still the case?

I get the impression you are an old man who, like most old people, thinks everything was so much better in their day.

Are there any modern day fighter (last 30 years) that you actually do rate?

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:who do you like?



6'3 215lb Tim Witherspoon vs 6'1 185lb Jack Dempsey

Dempsey is of course favorite, but if Dempsey doesn't KO Withersppon early Witherspoon would have a decent chance to edge it out on points.

Btw, in the 1980s Dempsey wouldn't have come in at 185.

Boxing "expert" granberry strangely/conviniently forgets/plain doesn't know that in June 1985 Tim Witherspoon outpointed Bonecrusher Smith easily over 12 rds.

Most people know the extenuating circumstances between his 1986 rematch with Bonecrusher.

With no ability to take part in adult dialogue, start throwing insults and laying on thick layers of sarcasm....

pundit wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:who do you like?



6'3 215lb Tim Witherspoon vs 6'1 185lb Jack Dempsey

Dempsey is of course favorite, but if Dempsey doesn't KO Withersppon early Witherspoon would have a decent chance to edge it out on points.

Btw, in the 1980s Dempsey wouldn't have come in at 185.

Yeah, he might have come in at about 210 and been slow and listless with poor stamina…

Controversial wrote:
Dempsey fought men smaller than himself

Boxing "expert" controversial displays his utter ignorance.

Jess Willard was 6' 6 1/2" tall and weight 242 pounds when he fought Dempsey.

Fred Fulton was 6' 5". Dempsey knocked Fulton out in 18 seconds of the first round including the ten count.

Firpo was 6' 3" .

Carl Morris was 6' 4" and weighed 235.


By the way, controversial,

HOW TALL was Ali?

Was he eight feet tall?

Or was he ten feet tall?

LOL

Controversial wrote:
They had the huge advantage of being able to stand over fallen oppenents in Dempseys era,

Ali never went to a neutral corner in his fights with

Archie Moore

Liston

Bonavena

Did you miss those fights, controversial?

LOL

granberry wrote:

dr_devious wrote:Any heavyweight in history would have big trouble in tackling the Dempsey that hammered Willard. That said, Tim Witherspoon is a totally different kettle of fish to Jess Willard. Witherspoon was an extremely good all-round heavyweight; big, very good skills, excellent chin and durability and decent power. Tim would last longer than Willard did, if it were over 12 rounds he may see the final bell.
However big and strong Willard was he was pretty immobile and presented a stationary target for Dempsey's attacks, hence he took a savage beating. No way would Witherspoon stand there and present an easy target for Dempsey to hit.

Boxing "expert" devious displays his expertise again.

Boxing expert devious knows SO MUCH about Willard's beating of Jack Johnson over 26 rounds.

devious has seen the film and studied it DEEPLY

and applied all of his vast knowledge of the techniques of boxing

to arrive at his deeply thought conclusions

(on a fight he has never seen--even though all 26 rounds are easily available).

Very impressive devious.

As usual.

LOL

Woteva Granny.

granberry wrote:

Controversial wrote:
Dempsey fought men smaller than himself

Boxing "expert" controversial displays his utter ignorance.

Jess Willard was 6' 6 1/2" tall and weight 242 pounds when he fought Dempsey.

Fred Fulton was 6' 5". Dempsey knocked Fulton out in 18 seconds of the first round including the ten count.

Firpo was 6' 3" .

Carl Morris was 6' 4" and weighed 235.


By the way, controversial,

HOW TALL was Ali?

Was he eight feet tall?

Or was he ten feet tall?

LOL

Firstly you took my post completely out of context as usual. I meant Dempsey fought smaller guys and didn't always flatten them. I didn't mean they were ALL smaller than him, some were. I know he fought bigger fighters but he also fought smaller ones.

Secondly I said Smith was bigger than Firpo which he was. Smith was 6'4" and 228lb and Firpo was 6'2" and 216lb. So looks like I was right.

And thirdly what has Ali got to do with this thread?

I appreciate your old and get confused so I'll let it slide.

Plus you still never answered my question. What fighter in the last 30 years do you actually rate?

granberry wrote:

Controversial wrote:
They had the huge advantage of being able to stand over fallen oppenents in Dempseys era,

Ali never went to a neutral corner in his fights with

Archie Moore

Liston

Bonavena

Did you miss those fights, controversial?

LOL

Show me the footage of any of these fights where Ali stood over his opponent and clubbed them when they tried to stand up.

I still fail to see what Ali has to do with this thread?

granberry wrote:

Controversial wrote:
Dempsey fought men smaller than himself

Fred Fulton was 6' 5". Dempsey knocked Fulton out in 18 seconds of the first round including the ten count.

Granberry, I assume then as Witherspoon was stopped in one round and you think that makes him crap, the same can be said about Fulton.

Blimey knocked out in 8 seconds he must have been really really really crap. Looks like Dempsey fought some pretty weak opposition to me

At his best, Tim Witherspoon was a talented fighter with
good boxing skills. As a result, it isn't a given that Jack
Dempsey would destroy Witherspoon.

- Chuck Johnston

Controversial wrote:

granberry wrote:

Controversial wrote:
Dempsey fought men smaller than himself

Fred Fulton was 6' 5". Dempsey knocked Fulton out in 18 seconds of the first round including the ten count.

Granberry, I assume then as Witherspoon was stopped in one round and you think that makes him crap, the same can be said about Fulton.

Blimey knocked out in 8 seconds he must have been really really really crap. Looks like Dempsey fought some pretty weak opposition to me

Boxing "expert controversial displays some more of his "knowledge."

Fred Fulton stopped Sam Langford in 7 rounds in 1917.

That made him the number one contender for Jess Willard's title.

Poor controversial doesn't know who Sam Langford is.

And of course he has just demonstrated he doesn't know who Fred Fulton is.

Total ignorance qualifies boxing "expert" controversial to arrive at his deeply thought out "conclusions" .