<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ONFKgforsX0&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ONFKgforsX0&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Tribute by Ted Spoon.

I often throw the cat in among the pidgeons, & say that he's overrated, and inspite of Poet's success in educating me a bit more about his style, there hasn't been any major turn around in my opinion..
I'm not saying he wasn't a great fighter, but just doesn't cut it as a top tenner for me.. As often discussed, his resume as champ, irrespective of the politics at the time, simply is not very good.. TBH, I've always been suspicious of the way he took the title, one of the reasons being, is that he'd reputedly taken a brown envelope earlier in his career, to lie down in one for Fireman Jim Flynn, and lets face it, there's no smoke without fire.. Adding to the fact that some of Willards injuries have never been seen in a boxing ring before or since, does make you wonder....
He defended 7 times in 7 years, the highlight being the KO of LH champ Carpentier.. He then lost twice to another LH in Gene Tunney..
17 career KD's, the struggles with Willie Meehan, and getting punched out of the ring by Firpo are not exactly who I'd have in mind as top 10..

However, All the negatives out of the way, he was great to watch, & had a very exciting style that endeared him to generations.. He was a real beast at 185!

I often throw the cat in among the pidgeons, & say that he's overrated, and inspite of Poet's success in educating me a bit more about his style, there hasn't been any major turn around in my opinion..
I'm not saying he wasn't a great fighter, but just doesn't cut it as a top tenner for me.. As often discussed, his resume as champ, irrespective of the politics at the time, simply is not very good.. TBH, I've always been suspicious of the way he took the title, one of the reasons being, is that he'd reputedly taken a brown envelope earlier in his career, to lie down in one for Fireman Jim Flynn, and lets face it, there's no smoke without fire.. Adding to the fact that some of Willards injuries have never been seen in a boxing ring before or since, does make you wonder....
He defended 7 times in 7 years, the highlight being the KO of LH champ Carpentier.. He then lost twice to another LH in Gene Tunney..
17 career KD's, the struggles with Willie Meehan, and getting punched out of the ring by Firpo are not exactly who I'd have in mind as top 10..

However, All the negatives out of the way, he was great to watch, & had a very exciting style that endeared him to generations.. He was a real beast at 185!

I've called him overrated as well, mostly because a lot of people rate him top 10 pound for pound which is not possible in my opinion. I have trouble rating him because even though he was great and a terror at 185 lbs, he can only be rated as a heavyweight and there have been better, more accomplished heavyweights than him.

However with some studying I've learned to respect him more and more. He was explosive and KO'ing men like Willard and Fred Fulton pretty much in one round is impressive for any fighter. Some may laugh off many of Dempsey's opponents as circus acts but they were not.

The KO loss to Fireman Flynn looks embarrassing and I'm not certain whether it was fixed or not. According to a pre-fight news article Dempsey was actually in good shape and viewed Flynn as a stepping stone. Perhaps he just got caught.

Not fighting Harry Wills is the real black mark on his record in my view. Never before or since has a top contender not received a title shot in almost a decade. A middleweight like Greb also beat many of Dempsey's opponents yet never received a shot.

I've always thought that Dempsey looks better on the many films of his sparring and boxing exhibitions. In the ring he often fought with pure rage and aggression and didn't display all the skills he possessed. He had quick feet like Tyson although faster because he was much lighter. Good bobbing & weaving as well even if he often abandoned the use of it. He was a real student of the game if you've ever read his books.

Not fighting Harry Wills is the real black mark on his record in my view.

Very true..

Not fighting Harry Wills is the real black mark on his record in my view.

Not fighting Harry Wills is the real black mark on his record in my view.

Very true..

While I agree to an extent, you still have to take into consideration the time and era. I don't think Dempsey had a problem with fighting anybody but Sam Langford. I also believe (my opinion only) that he would have beaten Wills decisively. But you're bot right. In a historical sense it never looks good not to fight your top challenger.

Jack Dempsey was invincible like superman but he was drugged with kryptonite before the Tunney fights.....course i could be wrong.

best heavyweight there ever was, or will be. its just the way it goes.

brains, speed, skill, guts and power- look at what he did to willard. plus he had 75 one round kos, more than any amatuer or pro in history [inc exhitions]

haha 6:36 uppercut is funny :D

brains, speed, skill, guts and power- look at what he did to willard. plus he had 75 one round kos, more than any amatuer or pro in history [inc exhitions]

I agree with the sentence in bold, but you can't be the greatest without the comp of Ali or the defenses and longevity of Louis. No knock on Dempsey, just the way I see it.

Not fighting Harry Wills is the real black mark on his record in my view.

Very true..

It has really diminished Dempsey's reputation and enhanced Wills's. I have never doubted that had they fought Dempsey would have won comfortably Wills was made for him.

It has really diminished Dempsey's reputation and enhanced Wills's. I have never doubted that had they fought Dempsey would have won comfortably Wills was made for him.
I wouldn't have put me Model T Ford on it..

FLICKER-FILM does none of the fighters any favour pre 1940.. to really appreciate Jack Dempsey at his best take a look at his fights with Tunney & Sharkey.. Tunney was the first ever scientific boxer who used incredible footwork with jab and move tactics.. against Sharkey Jack Dempsey looks awesome, bobbing & weaving, rolling with punches while very aggressive...

we should never critisize fighters from the turn of the century, its the footage we should critisize

i do not know what the big hype surrounding jack dempsey is all about,in terms of size he was puny for a heavyweight and look at the way he threw his punches,wide wild punches with his face unprotected,if he were fighting today he would not even beat a welterweight,the fighters in the old days just did not have the all round talent and athletics to actually even step in the ring with todays greats and last one full round,:boxing:

i do not know what the big hype surrounding jack dempsey is all about,in terms of size he was puny for a heavyweight and look at the way he threw his punches,wide wild punches with his face unprotected,if he were fighting today he would not even beat a welterweight,the fighters in the old days just did not have the all round talent and athletics to actually even step in the ring with todays greats and last one full round,:boxing:

We all kneel before your genius.

It has really diminished Dempsey's reputation and enhanced Wills's. I have never doubted that had they fought Dempsey would have won comfortably Wills was made for him.

i agree Dempsey would have destroyed Wills

These Wills "made for Dempsey" arguments I find laughable. There's a reason Langford only beat him twice and lost 13 times. And at least one of the times Wills lost it was because he got careless. Wills was not the type of fighter to fight the other guy's fight. Dempsey was not stronger, and Wills was not a fighter to be roughed up. Wills had all the tools to school Dempsey. A prime Wills was never decisioned, and he fought some of the greatest opposition of all time.

These Wills "made for Dempsey" arguments I find laughable. There's a reason Langford only beat him twice and lost 13 times. And at least one of the times Wills lost it was because he got careless. Wills was not the type of fighter to fight the other guy's fight. Dempsey was not stronger, and Wills was not a fighter to be roughed up. Wills had all the tools to school Dempsey. A prime Wills was never decisioned, and he fought some of the greatest opposition of all time.
To be fair Obama, Langford was giving Wills 6 years and had a far bigger advantage in size than he will have over Dempsey who he will be giving the 6 years to.

In a perfect world Jess Willard would have given a shot at Harry Wills and Wills instead of Willard would have fought Dempsey in Toledo, prime for prime.

To be fair Obama, Langford was giving Wills 6 years and had a far bigger advantage in size than he will have over Dempsey who he will be giving the 6 years to.

Langford was 175+ lbs at the time. Up to 190. He was KOing Heavyweights when he was a Junior Middleweight.

I give him a pass for a lot of the Wills losses, but not the first 4 or so.

I was thinking more the 5'6 against 6'3

I was thinking more the 5'6 against 6'3

Body shots also score KOs. The way Langford fought made him pretty good against taller men. Guys his size gave him more trouble (Meehan, Walcott, Gans, Temple, Blackburn, Holly).