View Full Version : Jack Dempsey?


MRBOOMER
02-10-2012, 03:12 AM
The Man who Tyson got his style from I was watching a Tyson defense highlight on my phone and was think back to what Tyson got hit with most and I thougt of the uppercut. When I thought of this I thought fighters from Dempseys age often didn't throw uppercuts and only tried to throw jabs crosses and hooks do you think in this age where uppercuts or more commonly throw would he be as effective because I think if Tyson couldn't get past them all to well and I see his style as a more perfected Dempsey then he couldn't either.

Thoughts?

JAB5239
02-10-2012, 10:21 AM
The Man who Tyson got his style from I was watching a Tyson defense highlight on my phone and was think back to what Tyson got hit with most and I thougt of the uppercut. When I thought of this I thought fighters from Dempseys age often didn't throw uppercuts and only tried to throw jabs crosses and hooks do you think in this age where uppercuts or more commonly throw would he be as effective because I think if Tyson couldn't get past them all to well and I see his style as a more perfected Dempsey then he couldn't either.

Thoughts?

Jack Johnson has one of the all time great heavyweight uppercuts and he's from before Dempsey's era.

CarlosG815
02-10-2012, 11:48 AM
Tyson in his prime was hard to catch with any punch. When he abandoned the defense that made him so hard to hit, the punch he got caught with the most was the straight right hand which could stun him and could be followed up by a left hook.

In not moving his head against Douglas, Douglas was able to throw the jab into his face all night and follow up with a powerful straight right which lead to swelling and limiting Tyson's ability to see.

Tyson being a short and evasive fighter, it would not be beneficial for an opponent to attempt an uppercut, especially since Mike usually controlled the fight as to where it took place (center of the ring, or you on the ropes). If you could get him on the ropes like Holyfield did and get him to cover up, then you could slip some uppercuts in but IIRC Holyfield didn't even do that, he was able to throw hooks to the head to force the stoppage once he had Mike on the ropes.

Typical heavyweights of his era were too tall (Usually a 3"+ height advantage over Mike) to utilize an uppercut. Mike's uppercut was so stellar because he was smaller and was able to utilize his low center of gravity to pack a mega uppercut from any part of the ring.

Sugarj
02-10-2012, 07:08 PM
Another point is that you have to be fairly close to your opponent to fire off an uppercut. Against prime Tyson you were always at a handspeed disadvantage so the likelyhood is that he'd beat you to the punch with a hook or straight right regardless.....

nomadman
02-11-2012, 06:49 AM
Tyson in his prime was hard to catch with any punch. When he abandoned the defense that made him so hard to hit, the punch he got caught with the most was the straight right hand which could stun him and could be followed up by a left hook.

In not moving his head against Douglas, Douglas was able to throw the jab into his face all night and follow up with a powerful straight right which lead to swelling and limiting Tyson's ability to see.

Tyson being a short and evasive fighter, it would not be beneficial for an opponent to attempt an uppercut, especially since Mike usually controlled the fight as to where it took place (center of the ring, or you on the ropes). If you could get him on the ropes like Holyfield did and get him to cover up, then you could slip some uppercuts in but IIRC Holyfield didn't even do that, he was able to throw hooks to the head to force the stoppage once he had Mike on the ropes.

Typical heavyweights of his era were too tall (Usually a 3"+ height advantage over Mike) to utilize an uppercut. Mike's uppercut was so stellar because he was smaller and was able to utilize his low center of gravity to pack a mega uppercut from any part of the ring.

A pretty good breakdown, but I disagree with the last part. Taller fighters are generally at an advantage in landing the uppercut against a shorter fighter because their range of motion before hitting the target is shorter.

Mike's uppercut was stellar, for sure, but he's a bit of an anolmaly as far as that goes, as he was in most other things.

MonsieurGeorges
02-14-2012, 07:17 PM
Tyson in his prime was hard to catch with any punch. When he abandoned the defense that made him so hard to hit, the punch he got caught with the most was the straight right hand which could stun him and could be followed up by a left hook.

In not moving his head against Douglas, Douglas was able to throw the jab into his face all night and follow up with a powerful straight right which lead to swelling and limiting Tyson's ability to see.

Tyson being a short and evasive fighter, it would not be beneficial for an opponent to attempt an uppercut, especially since Mike usually controlled the fight as to where it took place (center of the ring, or you on the ropes). If you could get him on the ropes like Holyfield did and get him to cover up, then you could slip some uppercuts in but IIRC Holyfield didn't even do that, he was able to throw hooks to the head to force the stoppage once he had Mike on the ropes.

Typical heavyweights of his era were too tall (Usually a 3"+ height advantage over Mike) to utilize an uppercut. Mike's uppercut was so stellar because he was smaller and was able to utilize his low center of gravity to pack a mega uppercut from any part of the ring.

I agree with all this. I think Mike's defense also slipped because he stopped using his feet. There was a period where he was slightly past his prime but still had good upper body movement, but then he became stationary with his feet and looked vulnerable to a long right hand or a 1-2

Marchegiano
02-19-2012, 03:53 PM
A pretty good breakdown, but I disagree with the last part. Taller fighters are generally at an advantage in landing the uppercut against a shorter fighter because their range of motion before hitting the target is shorter.

Mike's uppercut was stellar, for sure, but he's a bit of an anolmaly as far as that goes, as he was in most other things.

Well, buddy, I wouldn't say either is right or wrong. An uppercut by itself with no more defining description is neither man's punch. Gapping is what decides if it's the short man's or long man's. Just like hooks or any other 90 degree punch. If your shorter and inside you will do more damage with the same punch. Because the long man must curve his elbow beyond the 90 degree to acute. If your short and outside your likely to have to reach too much forcing your 90 to be obtuse. Anything but a pure 90 degrees diminishes the all important power-line. Or course accuracy and raw muscle give each guy a bit of play, but like the Spartans said there is no right or wrong there is only belief in right and wrong. Fighting is about will. Will, will force wrong to become right and right to become ktfo. MO

Ray Corso
02-19-2012, 05:10 PM
Maybe Dempsey laughs when and if your uppercut lands!!! Then what??
I met Mr. Dempsey a few times at his restruant in New York, my first impression was that he was NO small man!! He was 6' to 6" 1" and at his age then about 235lbs. his shoulders were very wide and his hands were huge. He moved around very smoothly and had a very gentle way about him (most people you don't want to be in the ring with are like that) Theres an old story that IS true about two men trying to rob an old man getting in a cab in the City. Look it up, I think its part of a Dempsey bio. When the cops showed up one guy was unconscience the other wandering around on the sidewalk after he Woke Up! Jack I think was in his late 70s then. Ray.

crold1
02-19-2012, 07:21 PM
Tyson in his prime was hard to catch with any punch. When he abandoned the defense that made him so hard to hit, the punch he got caught with the most was the straight right hand which could stun him and could be followed up by a left hook.

In not moving his head against Douglas, Douglas was able to throw the jab into his face all night and follow up with a powerful straight right which lead to swelling and limiting Tyson's ability to see.

Tyson being a short and evasive fighter, it would not be beneficial for an opponent to attempt an uppercut, especially since Mike usually controlled the fight as to where it took place (center of the ring, or you on the ropes). If you could get him on the ropes like Holyfield did and get him to cover up, then you could slip some uppercuts in but IIRC Holyfield didn't even do that, he was able to throw hooks to the head to force the stoppage once he had Mike on the ropes.

Typical heavyweights of his era were too tall (Usually a 3"+ height advantage over Mike) to utilize an uppercut. Mike's uppercut was so stellar because he was smaller and was able to utilize his low center of gravity to pack a mega uppercut from any part of the ring.

It depends on where the uppercut comes from and who was throwing it. One of the best shots Tyson was caught with, and one of his toughest fights in his big run, was Tucker. Tucker timed him coming in with the left uppercut in the first for big affect and added a few more from there. Tucker was doing pretty well generally until he broke his right around the fifth and Tyson did a good job outboxing the taller man there but the uppercut was the punch he was getting suckered with.

Carl Williams was starting to get close with the shot but got bombed out. Douglas used it and the rest of the kitchen sink. Thomas didn't really have one.

The height wasn't what was stopping anyone from landing the uppercut. It was dependent on foes and who brought what. Mike was nowhere near as hard to hit as I think you make out. A lot of his best defensive clips highlight Mike before the title when he was fighting mostly local mechanics.

That's not to say he didn't have good D. He was more elusive earlier in his career than he was later, and used good head movement, but a lot of guys were simply too scared to throw more than one or two at a time. Tillis made a lot of contact. Tucker did it and competed. Thomas got himself at least a little into the fight between the first and sixth and landed some nice straight rights. Tony Tubbs hit him a lot in the first and then got drilled in two (great hook).

He had a great chin when he got caught which was one reason even the foes who could get to him couldn't do it enough. Tyson did hit back after all. :)

them_apples
02-19-2012, 07:49 PM
Jack Johnson has one of the all time great heavyweight uppercuts and he's from before Dempsey's era.

Johnson would clinch and feed his opponent uppercuts. I really only see that style working against smaller weaker opponents.