View Full Version : Do you think Jack Dempsey is overrated?


cotto16
07-12-2009, 01:47 PM
well? do you belive dempsey is overrated? bert sugar ranked him the 9th best fighter of all time. how do you rank him? and do you belive he's overrated?

TheGreatA
07-12-2009, 02:59 PM
Ranking him one of the top 10 greatest of all time is overrating him.

As I've stated previously, there has never been another heavyweight champion who did not fight his obvious number 1 contender for as long as Dempsey. After winning the championship, he became more interested in being a celebrity and an actor than defending his title against the very best, which were Harry Wills and also the much smaller Harry Greb.

I do recognize his ability and the several impressive wins he had before winning the title and right after it. Defending the title just 5 times 7 years takes away from it though.

them_apples
07-12-2009, 03:19 PM
massively overrated by boxing historians - he was still good though, just not anywhere near the top 10. I think even Rocky would have beat him.

TheGreatA
07-12-2009, 03:42 PM
massively overrated by boxing historians - he was still good though, just not anywhere near the top 10. I think even Rocky would have beat him.

Maybe.

I do think that Dempsey was very talented though. It's actually his numerous filmed sparring sessions that I'm most impressed by, more so than his actual fights (especially the wild brawl with Firpo).

For a man who could move his head and use his feet like that, he sure didn't seem to utilize those skills to the full extent.

Watch from 6:40 onwards:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mFxcNfXMA60&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mFxcNfXMA60&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

billionaire
07-12-2009, 06:35 PM
yes he is more known for his popularity than his actual fighting skills...not to say he was a bad fighter just not top 10.....bert sugar probly saw him live thats why he likes him so much....

TheGreatA
07-12-2009, 06:38 PM
yes he is more known for his popularity than his actual fighting skills...not to say he was a bad fighter just not top 10.....bert sugar probly saw him live thats why he likes him so much....

Sugar isn't that old. He isn't old enough to have seen Louis live, atleast a prime Louis.

I think he quite simply overrates Dempsey, perhaps due to his popularity. When it comes down to it, Dempsey's resume is no better than Harry Wills', in fact it's probably worse. Most don't rate Wills as top 50, Sugar has him at #82.

Thread Stealer
07-12-2009, 07:01 PM
I think he is. I recognize and respect the fact that he had a more modern style and did a lot for the sport, but in terms of actual work done as a fighter (particularly his reign as champ), he doesn't belong nearly as high as I've often seen him get ranked.

Ziggy Stardust
07-12-2009, 07:54 PM
massively overrated by boxing historians - he was still good though, just not anywhere near the top 10. I think even Rocky would have beat him.

Yeah, but you consider anyone that the boxing historians like is over-rated.....that and anyone who fought before 1960 :poke: :stooges:

Poet

them_apples
07-12-2009, 07:58 PM
Yeah, but you consider anyone that the boxing historians like is over-rated.....that and anyone who fought before 1960 :poke: :stooges:

Poet

I was only exaggerating it because I see him hit lists sometimes as high as no.2

On a flat plane he floats around perhaps mid 20's.

Ziggy Stardust
07-12-2009, 08:03 PM
I was only exaggerating it because I see him hit lists sometimes as high as no.2

On a flat plane he floats around perhaps mid 20's.

I actually have him ranked #4 on my Heavyweight ATG list.

Poet

Southpaw Stinger
07-12-2009, 08:21 PM
No, Dempsey was a real fighter. People tend to overlook his actual fighting skills these days. Dempsey grew up around fist fighting and you can see by his fghting and sparring videos how well he moved and punched.

If you think how Marciano and Frazier just endlessly moved forwards throwing shots, Dempsey actually was much superior in that he circled, moved in and out, bobbed and weaved with more skill and random combinations than the predictable headmovement of Frazier. Dempsey knew when to attack, when to back off and when to tie up. On top of that he had a huge variety of punchers and could take your head off with anyone of them. His skills are vastly underated now.

In regards to his inactivity during his championship years, that's mainly down to his manager Jack 'Doc' Kearns who wanted Dempsey to hold the title for as long as possible, so regular fighting was out of the question. Dempsey did box regular exhibition during all of these years though to try to keep in trim and earn more money from the title. It was also Kearns who wouldn't allow Dempsey to defend against a black fighter.

them_apples
07-12-2009, 08:38 PM
I actually have him ranked #4 on my Heavyweight ATG list.

Poet

can you expand on why you have him that high? I'd like to hear it:boxing:. I'm always arguing with people about having Dempsey so high on the ATg list yet the most I have recieved is "he beat the best of his generation". Which I don't think cuts it unless you want to shove Vitali up amongst the upper echelon.

His biggest win came over the likes of Jess Willard, not to mention he lost in the prime of his career against competition that was below average. (Yes he was underfed - but we can't push aside what the outcome was).

them_apples
07-12-2009, 08:39 PM
No, Dempsey was a real fighter. People tend to overlook his actual fighting skills these days. Dempsey grew up around fist fighting and you can see by his fghting and sparring videos how well he moved and punched.

If you think how Marciano and Frazier just endlessly moved forwards throwing shots, Dempsey actually was much superior in that he circled, moved in and out, bobbed and weaved with more skill and random combinations than the predictable headmovement of Frazier. Dempsey knew when to attack, when to back off and when to tie up. On top of that he had a huge variety of punchers and could take your head off with anyone of them. His skills are vastly underated now.

In regards to his inactivity during his championship years, that's mainly down to his manager Jack 'Doc' Kearns who wanted Dempsey to hold the title for as long as possible, so regular fighting was out of the question. Dempsey did box regular exhibition during all of these years though to try to keep in trim and earn more money from the title. It was also Kearns who wouldn't allow Dempsey to defend against a black fighter.

his greatness should be based upon his resume though. Not how good he looked.

Southpaw Stinger
07-12-2009, 08:59 PM
his greatness should be based upon his resume though. Not how good he looked.

His resume was also impressive, beating most of the top fighters of his era. From the big strong guys like Willard and Firpo to the clever boxers like Carpentier and Gibbons. And top contenders like Brennan and Miske. I think he also holds the record for most 1st round KO's.

TheGreatA
07-12-2009, 09:26 PM
can you expand on why you have him that high? I'd like to hear it:boxing:. I'm always arguing with people about having Dempsey so high on the ATg list yet the most I have recieved is "he beat the best of his generation". Which I don't think cuts it unless you want to shove Vitali up amongst the upper echelon.

His biggest win came over the likes of Jess Willard, not to mention he lost in the prime of his career against competition that was below average. (Yes he was underfed - but we can't push aside what the outcome was).

I would be happy to rank Dempsey in the top 5 if only he had fought Harry Wills (probably a top 15 HW in my view).

I don't think Jess Willard was his best win, in fact I believe that Fred Fulton was probably better than Willard (and as big as Willard was too), and Dempsey destroyed Fulton in 23 seconds.

Gunboat Smith beat Willard, Dempsey beat Smith twice.

Billy Miske had a really good resume as did Tommy Gibbons. Both were a little under-sized as heavyweights but no smaller than Dempsey himself.

Battling Levinsky, Bill Brennan, Carl Morris, Bob McAllister, Willie Meehan, solid contenders. Georges Carpentier, a big punching light heavyweight champion.

Luis Firpo was a product of hype but he was a bigger, stronger slugger whom Dempsey took head on. He completely fought Firpo's fight and beat him, though not without some trouble.

The reason the win over Willard is impressive, is because Willard had gotten a reputation as an iron-jawed giant who could last more than 20 rounds without tiring. He had also killed a man in the ring which added to his reputation. You could outbox him, as Jack Johnson did for 20 rounds and others did in 10 round bouts, but you couldn't outlast him or knock him out.

Dempsey had Willard on his back after about a minute into the fight and kept knocking him down with ease.

The most impressive thing about this fight to me however is that Willard kept smiling as he took the beating. Certainly a very, very tough guy if not a very skilled boxer.

Dempsey's best win, in my opinion, was his knockout over Jack Sharkey. Now there are those who believe that this win was controversial due to Sharkey being struck as he complained about low blows but I think of it as a great comeback victory over a younger up and coming fighter who went onto become the champion.

Sharkey outboxed Dempsey early on, hurt him in some rounds, looked very impressive until striking Dempsey after the bell and taunting him. Dempsey came out furious in the next round, threw numerous body blows and landed a very short left hook which knocked Sharkey off his feet and onto his face.

Sharkey had previously beaten the man Dempsey never faced Harry Wills, although Wills was in his late 30's at the time. He later won the world heavyweight title.

mickey malone
07-13-2009, 04:22 PM
well? do you belive dempsey is overrated? bert sugar ranked him the 9th best fighter of all time. how do you rank him? and do you belive he's overrated?
He's my number 11, and yes, I do feel there's a slight tendency to overate him.. He was a fine fighter by any ones standards, but I'd beg to differ on his overall ring craft.. He could be untidy & reckless, which is why he lost to Tunney (1st time).. However, the 2nd fight was Dempseys in the bag, but after knocking his man down, spent valuable seconds admiring his work, allowing Tunney to recover, hence 'the long count'.. I rate Rocky Marciano just ahead of him at no9, but had both men been around 30lbs heavier, I'd have ranked them higher..

Gettin Jiggy
07-13-2009, 06:16 PM
it amazes me how bert can have him the 9th best fighter of all time. and how he can have monzon and whitaker so low!

Gettin Jiggy
07-13-2009, 06:17 PM
I actually have him ranked #4 on my Heavyweight ATG list.

Poet

wow thats high. who do you have him above?

Ziggy Stardust
07-13-2009, 07:00 PM
wow thats high. who do you have him above?

01. Muhammad Ali
02. Joe Louis
03. Jack Johnson
04. Jack Dempsey
05. Larry Holmes
06. Sonny Liston
07. Evander Holyfield
08. George Foreman
09. Rocky Marciano
10. Mike Tyson
11. Joe Frazier
12. Harry Wills

Gettin Jiggy
07-13-2009, 07:12 PM
01. Muhammad Ali
02. Joe Louis
03. Jack Johnson
04. Jack Dempsey
05. Larry Holmes
06. Sonny Liston
07. Evander Holyfield
08. George Foreman
09. Rocky Marciano
10. Mike Tyson
11. Joe Frazier
12. Harry Wills

why do you have dempsey higher than holmes, foreman, and marcaino? holmes was a much more dominant champion at heavyweight making 20 defences.

marcaino was never beaten at heavyweight and never lost his title and proably beat better fighters than dempsey.

and foreman beat better fighters than dempsey and avoided virtually no one.

AND WERE THE HELL IS LENNOX LEWIS?

explain?

them_apples
07-13-2009, 09:38 PM
poet I thought you had a different list then that..it seems you changed it all around.

Ziggy Stardust
07-14-2009, 12:18 AM
poet I thought you had a different list then that..it seems you changed it all around.

I haven't changed it in a few months and then only the bottom four. You aren't thinking of the results of the computer tournament are you?

Poet

Ziggy Stardust
07-14-2009, 08:45 AM
why do you have dempsey higher than holmes, foreman, and marcaino? holmes was a much more dominant champion at heavyweight making 20 defences.

marcaino was never beaten at heavyweight and never lost his title and proably beat better fighters than dempsey.

and foreman beat better fighters than dempsey and avoided virtually no one.

AND WERE THE HELL IS LENNOX LEWIS?

explain?

Precisely who should be dropped so Lennox could get in?

Explain?

Poet

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 09:48 AM
Precisely who should be dropped so Lennox could get in?

Explain?

Poet

Lewis was a better heavyweight than Willis and a more dominant one. his reign was also more dominated than tyson's and listons. do he may be a better fighter, lewis also had a more dominat reign than dempsey aswell.

he deserves at least a top 12 spot!

Ziggy Stardust
07-14-2009, 09:56 AM
Lewis was a better heavyweight than Willis and a more dominant one. his reign was also more dominated than tyson's and listons. do he may be a better fighter, lewis also had a more dominat reign than dempsey aswell.

he deserves at least a top 12 spot!

My lists are based on who I perceive has better in-ring ability not who accomplished more or had a more distinguished reign. While those things may very well be an indicator of in-ring ability they are only part of a number of factors. Ultimately my rankings are based on how I see things shaking out if they all fought each other.....ie. what the final standings would look like. For me, ranking resume and achievements are a different discussion.

Poet

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 11:58 AM
My lists are based on who I perceive has better in-ring ability not who accomplished more or had a more distinguished reign. While those things may very well be an indicator of in-ring ability they are only part of a number of factors. Ultimately my rankings are based on how I see things shaking out if they all fought each other.....ie. what the final standings would look like. For me, ranking resume and achievements are a different discussion.

Poet

so you only judge on ability? and no matter how good the accomplishments were, you only look at ability. i think the main thing you have to look at is accomplishments.

Ziggy Stardust
07-14-2009, 12:22 PM
i think the main thing you have to look at is accomplishments.

Which for me is a separate discussion entirely.

Poet

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 12:35 PM
Which for me is a separate discussion entirely.

Poet

but shoundt you judge everything when doing a list. or is your HW list only judged on ability? something which you never mentioned!

Ziggy Stardust
07-14-2009, 12:53 PM
but shoundt you judge everything when doing a list. or is your HW list only judged on ability? something which you never mentioned!

PRIMARILY ability. As I said before there are a number of factors. Some people make their lists based only on accomplishments; some only on resume: Are they obligated to mention that?

Poet

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 12:56 PM
PRIMARILY ability. As I said before there are a number of factors. Some people make their lists based only on accomplishments; some only on resume: Are they obligated to mention that?

Poet

i think when doing a lis everything should be considered. and the main thing should be ACCOMPLISHMENTS! and for me demspey is just to high!

Ziggy Stardust
07-14-2009, 01:06 PM
i think when doing a lis everything should be considered. and the main thing should be ACCOMPLISHMENTS! and for me demspey is just to high!

I'm concerned with who would win. Lennox Lewis may have a nice list of accomplishments but those won't stop him from getting crushed if put in the ring against, say, Sonny Liston, who doesn't have that sort of list.

There isn't anything unusual about this sort of thing: Sportsfans have been doing it from time immemorial. They talk about "could the '72 Dolphins hang with the '79 Steelers" or "how the '27 Yankees would do against the '86 Mets" ect. Boxing is no different.

Poet

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 01:09 PM
I'm concerned with who would win. Lennox Lewis may have a nice list of accomplishments but those won't stop him from getting crushed if put in the ring against, say, Sonny Liston, who doesn't have that sort of list.

There isn't anything unusual about this sort of thing: Sportsfans have been doing it from time immemorial. They talk about "could the '72 Dolphins hang with the '79 Steelers" or "how the '27 Yankees would do against the '86 Mets" ect. Boxing is no different.

Poet

personally i dont think. you should judge of fantasy fights who should be were. because for instance, do you judge who goes higher in a 160 list, by putting ketchel and hopkins in a fantasy fight? when there era's were so different and there fighting styles were?

Ziggy Stardust
07-14-2009, 01:20 PM
personally i dont think. you should judge of fantasy fights who should be were. because for instance, do you judge who goes higher in a 160 list, by putting ketchel and hopkins in a fantasy fight? when there era's were so different and there fighting styles were?

If you go to the thread that is "stickied" at the top of this section, the "All-Time Heavyweight" thread, and read from the beginning you'll see how these lists came about. Most of the factors that were used to determine THOSE rankings were based on ability as well: Defense, foot speed, hand speed, chin, ect. ect. ect.

The point is, sportsfans have traditionally discussed "who was better" not who won the most titles or made the most defenses or held the belt the longest.

Poet

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 01:22 PM
If you go to the thread that is "stickied" at the top of this section, the "All-Time Heavyweight" thread, and read from the beginning you'll see how these lists came about. Most of the factors that were used to determine THOSE rankings were based on ability as well: Defense, foot speed, hand speed, chin, ect. ect. ect.

The point is, sportsfans have traditionally discussed "who was better" not who won the most titles or made the most defenses or held the belt the longest.

Poet

well i have heard lots of boxing people judge on accomplishments! which i think is the main thing not abiltiy! just shocking that willis is in the list but not lewis. and dempsey is to high!

Ziggy Stardust
07-14-2009, 01:28 PM
well i have heard lots of boxing people judge on accomplishments! which i think is the main thing not abiltiy! just shocking that willis is in the list but not lewis. and dempsey is to high!

There are people on this forum who only consider accomplishments. There are others who don't. People have different ways of looking at things. I don't object to discussing accomplishments but I DO consider it a separate discussion from "who's better, who's best?"

Poet

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 02:14 PM
There are people on this forum who only consider accomplishments. There are others who don't. People have different ways of looking at things. I don't object to discussing accomplishments but I DO consider it a separate discussion from "who's better, who's best?"

Poet

fair enought dude, its ya opinion and ya sticking with it!

GJC
07-14-2009, 02:34 PM
Sugar isn't that old. He isn't old enough to have seen Louis live, atleast a prime Louis.

I think he quite simply overrates Dempsey, perhaps due to his popularity. When it comes down to it, Dempsey's resume is no better than Harry Wills', in fact it's probably worse. Most don't rate Wills as top 50, Sugar has him at #82.
top ten pfp ATG is too high, top ten HW for sure IMO.
Said before I have a lot of respect for Wills and his record and he should have got his shot.
I do kind of think not fighting Dempsey has helped his rep because I think his style was made for Dempsey personally. Big and not particularily fast was a style that Dempsey thrived on. As for Greb, great middle but I think HW was a weight too far so to speak.
I realise the legend that he used to school Dempsey in sparring makes many think he would have beaten him in the ring but it is apples and oranges. Ali used to look dreadful in sparring by all accounts but didn't lose too many in the ring.

TheGreatA
07-14-2009, 04:56 PM
top ten pfp ATG is too high, top ten HW for sure IMO.
Said before I have a lot of respect for Wills and his record and he should have got his shot.
I do kind of think not fighting Dempsey has helped his rep because I think his style was made for Dempsey personally. Big and not particularily fast was a style that Dempsey thrived on. As for Greb, great middle but I think HW was a weight too far so to speak.
I realise the legend that he used to school Dempsey in sparring makes many think he would have beaten him in the ring but it is apples and oranges. Ali used to look dreadful in sparring by all accounts but didn't lose too many in the ring.

I also think that Wills was somewhat "lucky" not to fight Dempsey but then again I've never seen any footage of a prime Harry Wills, only clips of him in his late 30's. Still, it's a fight that should have happened, Wills was Dempsey's number 1 contender for the length of his reign from 1919 until the end of it.

Greb was a middleweight but he had beaten the best heavyweights (the same men Dempsey fought and sometimes struggled with) and did give Dempsey all he could handle in sparring. He wanted a shot at Dempsey but never got it.

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 04:58 PM
I also think that Wills was somewhat "lucky" not to fight Dempsey but then again I've never seen any footage of a prime Harry Wills, only clips of him in his late 30's. Still, it's a fight that should have happened, Wills was Dempsey's number 1 contender for the length of his reign from 1919 until the end of it.

Greb was a middleweight but he had beaten the best heavyweights (the same men Dempsey fought and sometimes struggled with) and did give Dempsey all he could handle in sparring. He wanted a shot at Dempsey but never got it.

let me ask you. who would you have higher in a ATG Heavyweight List Willis or Lennox Lewis? and were would you put Lewis?

TheGreatA
07-14-2009, 05:17 PM
let me ask you. who would you have higher in a ATG Heavyweight List Willis or Lennox Lewis? and were would you put Lewis?

I have a tough time rating Wills because there's little footage of him and he never won the title (never got a shot at it either). At the same time he had a great resume and went practically unbeaten for 10 years save for two freak incidents (an early DQ loss and a hand injury).

I think very highly of Lennox Lewis who fought the best of his time and beat everyone he ever faced. He had two bad losses and the best fighters he beat were not at their best but he was also ducked during the mid 90's.

I would rate Lewis above Wills, mainly because he did eventually get a shot at proving his greatness against Holyfield and Tyson while Wills never did.

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 05:59 PM
I have a tough time rating Wills because there's little footage of him and he never won the title (never got a shot at it either). At the same time he had a great resume and went practically unbeaten for 10 years save for two freak incidents (an early DQ loss and a hand injury).

I think very highly of Lennox Lewis who fought the best of his time and beat everyone he ever faced. He had two bad losses and the best fighters he beat were not at their best but he was also ducked during the mid 90's.

I would rate Lewis above Wills, mainly because he did eventually get a shot at proving his greatness against Holyfield and Tyson while Wills never did.

good post! its just poster poet done a top 15 heavyweight list and never included Lewis. Which i find very shocking to say the least. but had dempsey at number 3 far to high for my liking!

GJC
07-14-2009, 06:30 PM
I also think that Wills was somewhat "lucky" not to fight Dempsey but then again I've never seen any footage of a prime Harry Wills, only clips of him in his late 30's. Still, it's a fight that should have happened, Wills was Dempsey's number 1 contender for the length of his reign from 1919 until the end of it.

Greb was a middleweight but he had beaten the best heavyweights (the same men Dempsey fought and sometimes struggled with) and did give Dempsey all he could handle in sparring. He wanted a shot at Dempsey but never got it.
No Wills should have got his shot no arguments.
You think Greb could have beaten Dempsey?

GJC
07-14-2009, 06:33 PM
good post! its just poster poet done a top 15 heavyweight list and never included Lewis. Which i find very shocking to say the least. but had dempsey at number 3 far to high for my liking!
Was it Poet's personal list or those computer things he did?
Lewis should make a top 15 I have in my top 12.
I will have to check Dempsey I would imagine I have him top 6, I always reserve the right to change my list depending on mood bar 1) Ali and 2) Louis :)

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 06:35 PM
Was it Poet's personal list or those computer things he did?
Lewis should make a top 15 I have in my top 12.
I will have to check Dempsey I would imagine I have him top 6, I always reserve the right to change my list depending on mood bar 1) Ali and 2) Louis :)

it was his personal list.

Ziggy Stardust
07-14-2009, 06:45 PM
Was it Poet's personal list or those computer things he did?
Lewis should make a top 15 I have in my top 12.
I will have to check Dempsey I would imagine I have him top 6, I always reserve the right to change my list depending on mood bar 1) Ali and 2) Louis :)

It was top 12 not top 15.

01. Muhammad Ali
02. Joe Louis
03. Jack Johnson
04. Jack Dempsey
05. Larry Holmes
06. Sonny Liston
07. Evander Holyfield
08. George Foreman
09. Rocky Marciano
10. Mike Tyson
11. Joe Frazier
12. Harry Wills

Poet

TheGreatA
07-14-2009, 06:48 PM
No Wills should have got his shot no arguments.
You think Greb could have beaten Dempsey?

Greb had the amazing ability to frustrate much bigger men. Tunney needed all of his science to beat Greb.

He beat Billy Miske, Tommy Gibbons, Bill Brennan, Battling Levinsky, Willie Meehan, Gunboat Smith whom Dempsey fought and defended his title against. Greb also defeated heavyweight contenders Bartley Madden, Charley Weinert, Kid Norfolk, Jack Renault and others.

Dempsey would have to be at his best to catch Greb. Greb's swarming tactics likely wouldn't work against the one punch KO power of Dempsey but Greb was described as being fairly elusive as well.

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 06:49 PM
It was top 12 not top 15.

01. Muhammad Ali
02. Joe Louis
03. Jack Johnson
04. Jack Dempsey
05. Larry Holmes
06. Sonny Liston
07. Evander Holyfield
08. George Foreman
09. Rocky Marciano
10. Mike Tyson
11. Joe Frazier
12. Harry Wills

Poet

can i see your top 50 fighters of all time p4p?

Ziggy Stardust
07-14-2009, 06:54 PM
can i see your top 50 fighters of all time p4p?

I only have top 20 p4p so it will have to do.

01. Ray Robinson
02. Bob Fitzsimmons
03. Sam Langford
04. Roberto Duran
05. Henry Armstrong
06. Alexis Arguello
07. Benny Leonard
08. Ray Leonard
09. Pernell Whitaker
10. Ezzard Charles
11. Joe Gans
12. Roy Jones
13. Pascual Perez
14. Eder Jofre
15. Miguel Canto
16. Carlos Zarate
17. Charley Burley
18. Marvin Hagler
19. Jimmy Wilde
20. Willie Pepp

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 07:04 PM
I only have top 20 p4p so it will have to do.

01. Ray Robinson
02. Bob Fitzsimmons
03. Sam Langford
04. Roberto Duran
05. Henry Armstrong
06. Alexis Arguello
07. Benny Leonard
08. Ray Leonard
09. Pernell Whitaker
10. Ezzard Charles
11. Joe Gans
12. Roy Jones
13. Pascual Perez
14. Eder Jofre
15. Miguel Canto
16. Carlos Zarate
17. Charley Burley
18. Marvin Hagler
19. Jimmy Wilde
20. Willie Pepp

were are the hw's? and were is monzon, chavez, archie moore, barney ross, and tony canzoneri? i disagree with a fair bit there poet lol.

Ziggy Stardust
07-14-2009, 07:12 PM
were are the hw's? and were is monzon, chavez, archie moore, barney ross, and tony canzoneri? i disagree with a fair bit there poet lol.

I'm philisophically opposed to putting Heavyweights on p4p lists. As for Monzon, why on Earth would I put someone I consider the most ordinary looking ATG on my top 20 p4p? Chavez? He barely makes my top 10 Lightweight list (at #10).

Poet

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 07:19 PM
I only have top 20 p4p so it will have to do.

01. Ray Robinson
02. Bob Fitzsimmons
03. Sam Langford
04. Roberto Duran
05. Henry Armstrong
06. Alexis Arguello
07. Benny Leonard
08. Ray Leonard
09. Pernell Whitaker
10. Ezzard Charles
11. Joe Gans
12. Roy Jones
13. Pascual Perez
14. Eder Jofre
15. Miguel Canto
16. Carlos Zarate
17. Charley Burley
18. Marvin Hagler
19. Jimmy Wilde
20. Willie Pepp

canto, hagler, perez and zarate shound be on there. and alexis is far to high. monzon was better than all of them. but yet isnt there.

and pep is to low.

AND WERE THE HELL IS HARRY GREB?

sorry poet i feel your list is pretty pour

them_apples
07-14-2009, 07:20 PM
Which for me is a separate discussion entirely.

Poet

you think Johnson beats Holmes, Foreman, Tyson and Holyfield? unless I misunderstood you your list is based on a heavyweights ability (i'm assuming on their best night) Johnson was the first black guy in boxing to really test the waters, but based on ability he looks very primitive, especially compared to a guy like Holmes.

also, Walcott needs a mention, very good ability at heavyweight even. Basically made a fool of everyone he fought but sometimes blew it with a bad mistake.

Ziggy Stardust
07-14-2009, 07:24 PM
you think Johnson beats Holmes, Foreman, Tyson and Holyfield? unless I misunderstood you your list is based on a heavyweights ability (i'm assuming on their best night) Johnson was the first black guy in boxing to really test the waters, but based on ability he looks very primitive, especially compared to a guy like Holmes.

also, Walcott needs a mention, very good ability at heavyweight even. Basically made a fool of everyone he fought but sometimes blew it with a bad mistake.

Walcott is one of those fighters who drops in and out of 12. He was actually in last year until I decided to bump him for Tyson.

Actually I DO feel Johnson beats those guys. I don't go as far as Bert Sugar who had him rated #1 Heavyweight all-time well into the 1990s though.

Poet

Ziggy Stardust
07-14-2009, 07:27 PM
sorry poet i feel your list is pretty pour

Sorry, I feel your nuthugging of Monzon is pretty POOR :boxing:

PS. Monzon couldn't carry Arguello's jock.....and Duran would have made Monzon his *****.

Poet

Gettin Jiggy
07-14-2009, 07:47 PM
Sorry, I feel your nuthugging of Monzon is pretty POOR :boxing:

PS. Monzon couldn't carry Arguello's jock.....and Duran would have made Monzon his *****.

Poet

come on poet lets not talk silly. in my mind monzon was a better fighter than alexis. but they both could carry each others jock. and are you saying duran could beat monzon at 160? lets not talk silly now!

Southpaw16BF
07-14-2009, 09:55 PM
Greb had the amazing ability to frustrate much bigger men. Tunney needed all of his science to beat Greb.

He beat Billy Miske, Tommy Gibbons, Bill Brennan, Battling Levinsky, Willie Meehan, Gunboat Smith whom Dempsey fought and defended his title against. Greb also defeated heavyweight contenders Bartley Madden, Charley Weinert, Kid Norfolk, Jack Renault and others.

Dempsey would have to be at his best to catch Greb. Greb's swarming tactics likely wouldn't work against the one punch KO power of Dempsey but Greb was described as being fairly elusive as well.

Pretty amazing how well Greb dealt with bigger men. And it is indeed true that the Heavyweights Greb would defeat would go on to challage Dempsey.

After reading all the newspaper reports of there sparring sessions. There is no douting Greb had the upper hand. Dempsey coundt seem to handle Greb's swarming elusive style.

Do not a huge puncher, in one of the sessions Greb also split Dempsey's cheekbone. But there was a moment in one of the sparring sessions were Dempsey hit Greb with accurate body shot that lifted Greb of his feet, but Greb grined through it.

Before the sparring sessions Greb had hoped that sparring Dempsey would lead to a good relationship with him, and this relationship would better his chances of landing a fight, but after seeing just how good Greb was in sparring Dempsey went even more off the idea of the two ever having a showdown.

Also a interesting note is that Dempsey asked Greb to help him prepare for the first Tunney fight, but Greb declined the offer due to the fact that Greb knew Tunney would lick him.

I always felt Greb was never fond of Dempsey at times, and it is belived Greb would say to Dempsey when are you going to fight me you bum. Pretty harsh words.

GJC
07-15-2009, 03:37 PM
Pretty amazing how well Greb dealt with bigger men. And it is indeed true that the Heavyweights Greb would defeat would go on to challage Dempsey.

After reading all the newspaper reports of there sparring sessions. There is no douting Greb had the upper hand. Dempsey coundt seem to handle Greb's swarming elusive style.

Do not a huge puncher, in one of the sessions Greb also split Dempsey's cheekbone. But there was a moment in one of the sparring sessions were Dempsey hit Greb with accurate body shot that lifted Greb of his feet, but Greb grined through it.

Before the sparring sessions Greb had hoped that sparring Dempsey would lead to a good relationship with him, and this relationship would better his chances of landing a fight, but after seeing just how good Greb was in sparring Dempsey went even more off the idea of the two ever having a showdown.

Also a interesting note is that Dempsey asked Greb to help him prepare for the first Tunney fight, but Greb declined the offer due to the fact that Greb knew Tunney would lick him.

I always felt Greb was never fond of Dempsey at times, and it is belived Greb would say to Dempsey when are you going to fight me you bum. Pretty harsh words.
Like I said before I always take sparring sessions with a pinch of salt. Ali was not the best at sparring and if you counted his sparring sessions as read you would probably have 20 fighters beating him.
Greb was a great great fighter but IMO Dempsey at HW would be too much for him.

GJC
07-15-2009, 03:40 PM
canto, hagler, perez and zarate shound be on there. and alexis is far to high. monzon was better than all of them. but yet isnt there.

and pep is to low.

AND WERE THE HELL IS HARRY GREB?

sorry poet i feel your list is pretty pour
Peoples lists are a personal thing if ours were all the same we wouldn't have much to talk about would we?
Pep would be higher on my list and Greb would be in it but thats my list not yours or Poets.

Dodie Boy
07-15-2009, 03:40 PM
Yes & No...Or is there a middle answer..

GJC
07-15-2009, 03:43 PM
Sorry, I feel your nuthugging of Monzon is pretty POOR :boxing:

PS. Monzon couldn't carry Arguello's jock.....and Duran would have made Monzon his *****.

Poet
oooo way too harsh Poet.
I would have Duran and Arguello above Monzon too but Monzon is a great fighter. He ain't a pretty fighter but he is a great fighter.
Jab don't swing :)

Squabbles94806
07-15-2009, 03:47 PM
well? do you belive dempsey is overrated? bert sugar ranked him the 9th best fighter of all time. how do you rank him? and do you belive he's overrated?

I don't think he's tremendously overrated. I think Marciano is overrated. 9th best fighter might be accurate.

Southpaw16BF
07-16-2009, 01:32 PM
Like I said before I always take sparring sessions with a pinch of salt. Ali was not the best at sparring and if you counted his sparring sessions as read you would probably have 20 fighters beating him.
Greb was a great great fighter but IMO Dempsey at HW would be too much for him.

A big difference. Ali would let sparring parthers hit him with there best, due to wanting his body to get use to feel hard punchers. In one of the sessions Dempsey was going all out on Greb due to frustration. It was basically a ''Gym Fight''

joseph5620
07-16-2009, 11:23 PM
well? do you belive dempsey is overrated? bert sugar ranked him the 9th best fighter of all time. how do you rank him? and do you belive he's overrated?

In terms of accomplishments,yes.

joseph5620
07-16-2009, 11:24 PM
I don't think he's tremendously overrated. I think Marciano is overrated. 9th best fighter might be accurate.

Marciano should clearly rank higher than Dempsey.

Mikhnienko
07-17-2009, 11:23 PM
Also keep in mind that Greb did most of that blind in one eye

Coonhound13
07-20-2009, 12:25 PM
Jack is known for his punching and ferocity but his defense is very underrated. Overall I think if anything he is underrated.

Coonhound13
07-20-2009, 12:28 PM
About Marciano, people tend to overrate or underrate him. The knock on him is all his big fights were against older guys but really Moore, Walcott and Charles were among the most skilled ring saavy fighters ever.

Obama
07-20-2009, 03:58 PM
Definitely over rated. He steered clear of semi-elite / elite technically sound heavyweights altogether (Willie Meehan aside) until he was past his prime. Then of course he was clowned in his last 3 fights, despite winning one quite questionably. And I'd give him credit for fighting Meehan but he only beat him 1 out of 5 times...

Kinetic Linking
07-21-2009, 06:18 PM
nobody's perfect. I've never seen any fighter combine movement and power, pound for pound, the way he did. Show me anyone who did that. He's way at the top of the pound for pound power list, based on his performance against willard fighting at 180, and he was bouncing around the ring and circling the first round of that fight. Bob Fitzsimmons could also move quite well and blast punches, but didn't have the lateral movement. I'd say you can't overrate a fighter who was arguably the greatest mover/puncher ever.

Gettin Jiggy
07-21-2009, 06:26 PM
nobody's perfect. I've never seen any fighter combine movement and power, pound for pound, the way he did. Show me anyone who did that. He's way at the top of the pound for pound power list, based on his performance against willard fighting at 180, and he was bouncing around the ring and circling the first round of that fight. Bob Fitzsimmons could also move quite well and blast punches, but didn't have the lateral movement. I'd say you can't overrate a fighter who was arguably the greatest mover/puncher ever.

what about his resume and title reign. both werent brillant!

Kinetic Linking
07-21-2009, 07:26 PM
Any way you look at it he's not overrated. Peak ability was totally legendary as I already said. Career? He went from hobo to heavyweight champ during the golden age of boxing and kept the title for 7 years. Legendary.

You have to understand what that era was like. His title reign looks bad taken out of context, but under the circumstances it was great.

Obama
07-22-2009, 04:24 PM
Jack Dempsey vs Joe Frazier would answer a lot of questions for me about Jack. I just can't see Jack beating a guy like Ali.

Gettin Jiggy
07-22-2009, 04:52 PM
Jack Dempsey vs Joe Frazier would answer a lot of questions for me about Jack. I just can't see Jack beating a guy like Ali.

roughly were would you have dempsey in a atg list?

Obama
07-22-2009, 10:31 PM
roughly were would you have dempsey in a atg list?

I rate him #11 Heavyweight (still ahead of Frazier by the way), and p4p he'd make my top 100. Maybe top 75. Top 50...nah.

Kinetic Linking
07-22-2009, 11:33 PM
obama is wronga

mickey malone
07-23-2009, 08:54 AM
I rate him #11 Heavyweight (still ahead of Frazier by the way), and p4p he'd make my top 100. Maybe top 75. Top 50...nah.
11's about right.. I have him there to, but I don't think Frazier should be lower..

sonnyboyx2
07-23-2009, 03:07 PM
About Marciano, people tend to overrate or underrate him. The knock on him is all his big fights were against older guys but really Moore, Walcott and Charles were among the most skilled ring saavy fighters ever.
i agree with you, all 3 would be a match for any fighter

louis54
09-25-2009, 09:42 PM
he was great. sure could hit- he did lift willard off his feet with a body punch in round three. amazing.