Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rating old heavyweights?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Originally posted by Marchegiano View Post
    Bio books are for fan girls. I prefer era specific instead of character specific.

    One sure fire way to read a bias piece is to grab a bio book. In a bio book about Dempsey he never ducked Norfolk or Wills or Jeanette and so on and might have even whooped JJ in a hushed contest. In a bio books about Norfolk, Wills, Langford, etc not only did Dempsey duck but the story about Dempsey fighting JJ was made up in the 80s.

    Far as Marciano vs Dempsey and that having some bearing on any understanding boxing, fan girl, Mike Paul's ratings are based solely off performances against other rated fighters. The historian has Marciano at 4 and Dempsey at 12

    Ring has Marciano at 4 and Dempsey at 6 - May 2017

    Boxrec has Marciano at 4 and Dempsey at 34

    Sport Bible has Marciano at 3 and Dempsey at 30

    In fact I struggle to find a published ranking that places Dempsey in the top five let alone ahead of Rocky. He's not even close and in a h2h Dempsey would have been murdered. There's no reason to believe Roland LaStarza, Rex Layne, or Harry Matthews couldn't and wouldn't have beaten Dempsey's whole resume, and, plenty of reason to believe Demspey would have been licked by Charles, Walcott, and Moore.

    It's crazy you'd want to draw the comparison. Dempsey's not even close to Marciano.

    So you dismiss researched books but put all your stock into independent (biased) sources. Nat Fleischer had Dempsey ranked 4 and Marciano 10 on his greatest HW list. Jack Sharkey picked Dempsey to easily handle Marciano in the ring... https://www.newspapers.com/clip/1489...mparing-rocky/ , but I guess your Google/internet skills are no match for Sharkey's expertise.

    Former heavyweight champ Jack Sharkey expressed similar sentiments in a 1986 interview. Mike Tyson had just surged to the head of the division and Sharkey said of Mike, “There is only one heavyweight that I can see who would fit into the old school and that’s Tyson. They’re all cream puff punchers today except Tyson, and his secret is that he doesn’t waste many punches.”

    Then Sharkey turned his attention to Dempsey and others “Jack Dempsey was the best because he was a real fighter, and if he hit you in the shoulder he could dislocate it.

    “Ali was a real good boxer but he took too many punches in his training, which he didn’t have to take.

    “Joe Louis was nothing sensational, being a methodical fighter, but he was a great finisher when he had his man in trouble.

    “Rocky Marciano was very good and I almost put him up there with Dempsey. It would be a tough fight between those two but Dempsey, I’d say, was a better puncher.”


    The great Ray Arcel chose Dempsey to murder Marciano. Not very many coaches or boxing historians were more credible than Arcel.

    Arcel’s verdict on the Manassa Mauler was thus: “Dempsey would have absolutely beaten any fighter who came after him – without a doubt. I know all about Joe Louis and how he knocked guys’ teeth out. I have every respect for Joe – I rate him number two. But Dempsey would have killed Louis, George Foreman, any of those guys. What Jack had was God-given – you can’t develop the kind of talent he had.

    “Marciano? Same result. Dempsey would have murdered Rocky. I tell you, Jack would have chased everyone out of the ring. I trained Max Baer a couple of times and often got asked how good that booming right of his was and whether it was as good as anything Dempsey had. Are you kidding? It wasn’t even close.

    Max Schmeling, always a very astute observer and commentator on the game, was similarly fascinated by Dempsey’s almost mystical qualities. In his twilight years, Max was asked to name the boxers who had impressed him the most down through the decades. “Trying to name them all would be a little too much,” Max replied.

    “But, in alphabetical order, my short list of those boxers who will never be forgotten includes Muhammad Ali, Henry Armstrong, Georges Carpentier, Julio Cesar Chavez, George Foreman, Harry Greb, Marvin Hagler, Thomas Hearns, Jack Johnson, Ray Leonard, Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano, Carlos Monzon, Archie Moore, Willie Pep, Ray Robinson and Mike Tyson.

    “But now I want to add, all by myself, one more name: Jack Dempsey. Despite all the class shown by the others, Dempsey was not only my own idol, he remains for me to this day the greatest of them all. He was the big daddy. He embodied the complete perfection of a professional boxer.

    In a 1952 interview with ‘Look’ ****zine, Gene Tunney spoke of Dempsey thus: “Jack Dempsey, I’m convinced, was our greatest heavyweight champion. In his prime, when he knocked out Jess Willard to win the title in 1919, he would have taken the four leading heavyweights of today – Jersey Joe Walcott, Rocky Marciano, Harry (Kid) Matthews and Ezzard Charles – and flattened them all in one night.

    “These four men are honest, earnest, capable professionals. If they are not touched with ring genius, neither are they stumblebums. So I do not mean to deprecate them when I say Dempsey would have levelled them all in the same evening as follows: Matthews, two rounds. Charles, two rounds. Walcott, five rounds. Marciano, one round.

    “A total of ten rounds. Even then, I don’t consider I’m giving Dempsey any the best of it. He might have demolished each of the four in less than one round. He was eminently equipped to do it. He had many championship gifts, including a great fighting heart and the ability to absorb a tremendous punch and recuperate astonishingly fast.

    “He learned his trade the hard way against fighters of all sizes, shape and brands from mining camp, deadfall and dance hall to huge arena and stadium.

    “Jack was no wild slugger. He was an extremely clever fusion of fighter and boxer. He fought out of a peculiar weave and bob and was very difficult to hit with a solid punch. In the 20 rounds I fought him – 10 at Philadelphia in 1926 and 10 at Chicago the following year – I never did get a clean shot at his jaw. He was always weaving and bobbing away from the direct line of fire.

    “Dempsey was criticised for not being able to knock out Tommy Gibbons – one of the all-time great boxers. Actually, that fight was one of Jack’s most impressive performances. Unable to reach his clever opponent with a knockout punch, he was still a fine enough combination of fighter and boxer to outscore Tommy all the way.

    “But it was Dempsey the savage puncher, the scowling attacker, who thrilled the sports world. He was a great hitter. His right hand to body or jaw was explosive. Even more devastating was his left hook to liver and jaw. Weaving and bobbing, he feinted opponents into leads, slipped those leads and jolted home his short punches to body and head. He hurt and stunned opponents. He knocked them down and, eventually, kept them down.

    “The most remarkable thing about Dempsey’s fighting make-up was the shortness of his punching. His blows seldom travelled more than six inches to a foot. He had a trick of hooking his left to the body and then to the head in practically the same movement.

    Lou Stillman’s verdict

    Gruff, strict and taciturn, the legendary and brilliant Lou Stillman ran his famous New York boxing gym with a rod of iron. Like Ray Arcel, Lou could be shy and guarded in giving his opinion of different fighters. One has to remember that such special men – along with the likes of Angelo Dundee, Manny Steward, Buddy McGirt and Teddy Atlas today – are constantly quizzed on which fighter they think was the best. They are so wary of getting into endless arguments on the subject. Many fans don’t react kindly when a trainer’s verdict doesn’t happen to dovetail with their own.

    Stillman saw thousands of fighters over a great span of years: champions, contenders, preliminary boys, ordinary men just working out. But one day Stillman saw one thing he never forgot. It was the angry punch with which the retired Dempsey knocked out Tony Galento in a sparring session. The sight and sound of that mighty blow being driven home was hard for even Stillman to believe. Right to the end, Lou maintained that it was the hardest shot he had ever seen and that Dempsey was the greatest heavyweight.

    Ray Arcel was also a witness to the chilling incident and recalled that the punch nearly decapitated Galento.

    Mike Hunnicut recently told me that the ‘real time’ film of the Dempsey-Willard fight (not the familiar, herky-jerky version by which Dempsey is so often misjudged) remains the most terrifying vision of a destructive fighter he has seen in all his years of studying motion pictures.

    Says Mike, “When you watch the films of Joe Louis and zoom in, it’s incredible to behold what Joe could do – fantastic.

    “But a real close-up view of Dempsey in real time has an almost surreal quality to it – his incredible animal-like moves and co-ordination, his terrific punch and all-round toughness. It absolutely floors the viewer. These are the qualities that the Lou Stillmans and the Ray Arcels were referring to.

    “Jack’s many illustrious opponents were rightly proud of their own toughness and fighting abilities, yet look how many came in praise of him. They would talk of him as a man apart.

    “Dempsey’s footwork, his overall boxing ability and his reflexes were genuinely exceptional. You can’t conveniently group that man with anyone else.”

    If you've ever been in a ring, or coached fighters, you can see the respective skills and style of each fighter and make an educated assessment as to how that fight would play out and who was the better boxer overall. I give Marciano credit for being a small, resilient and durable HW, but he would not stand a chance against Dempsey. Plenty of unbiased sources agree. People more qualified than an anonymous Boxrec staff writer.

    http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxin...seyFeature.htm

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by QueensburyRules View Post
      - -Most of Dempsey's sparring partners were black and he took Big Bill Tate with him to Hollywood to train for multiple busted Wills contracts and took some stick by allowing him to live with Jack. Photos of the Willard fight would seem to show Tate in his corner. As a kid he worked in a Salt Lake City boxing gym run by a known black fighter whose name escapes me, but he also had unofficial fights there, but not a lot of blacks in his part of the country much less black fighters and only came East to make his name with Wills being the last relevant contender of note.

      Racism and genocide are modern terminology unknown to ancients, so before slinging arrows and fire on ancients, clean up your own fetid generation, and good luck with that!
      Good b post.... His sparring partners vwere black anyway.... If I thought wills could have beat him, I wouldn't rate dempsey so high... But dempsey probably would have taken wills apart and dempsey knew it... Dempsey best ever heavyweight probably... Its dempsey and then the rest such as Louis, Johnson, Ali, tunnel etc...imo and opinion of most who fought and saw dempsey... Get new pollack book on dempsey... But it is expensive

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by GhostofDempsey View Post
        So you dismiss researched books but put all your stock into independent (biased) sources. Nat Fleischer had Dempsey ranked 4 and Marciano 10 on his greatest HW list. Jack Sharkey picked Dempsey to easily handle Marciano in the ring... https://www.newspapers.com/clip/1489...mparing-rocky/ , but I guess your Google/internet skills are no match for Sharkey's expertise.

        Former heavyweight champ Jack Sharkey expressed similar sentiments in a 1986 interview. Mike Tyson had just surged to the head of the division and Sharkey said of Mike, “There is only one heavyweight that I can see who would fit into the old school and that’s Tyson. They’re all cream puff punchers today except Tyson, and his secret is that he doesn’t waste many punches.”

        Then Sharkey turned his attention to Dempsey and others “Jack Dempsey was the best because he was a real fighter, and if he hit you in the shoulder he could dislocate it.

        “Ali was a real good boxer but he took too many punches in his training, which he didn’t have to take.

        “Joe Louis was nothing sensational, being a methodical fighter, but he was a great finisher when he had his man in trouble.

        “Rocky Marciano was very good and I almost put him up there with Dempsey. It would be a tough fight between those two but Dempsey, I’d say, was a better puncher.”


        The great Ray Arcel chose Dempsey to murder Marciano. Not very many coaches or boxing historians were more credible than Arcel.

        Arcel’s verdict on the Manassa Mauler was thus: “Dempsey would have absolutely beaten any fighter who came after him – without a doubt. I know all about Joe Louis and how he knocked guys’ teeth out. I have every respect for Joe – I rate him number two. But Dempsey would have killed Louis, George Foreman, any of those guys. What Jack had was God-given – you can’t develop the kind of talent he had.

        “Marciano? Same result. Dempsey would have murdered Rocky. I tell you, Jack would have chased everyone out of the ring. I trained Max Baer a couple of times and often got asked how good that booming right of his was and whether it was as good as anything Dempsey had. Are you kidding? It wasn’t even close.

        Max Schmeling, always a very astute observer and commentator on the game, was similarly fascinated by Dempsey’s almost mystical qualities. In his twilight years, Max was asked to name the boxers who had impressed him the most down through the decades. “Trying to name them all would be a little too much,” Max replied.

        “But, in alphabetical order, my short list of those boxers who will never be forgotten includes Muhammad Ali, Henry Armstrong, Georges Carpentier, Julio Cesar Chavez, George Foreman, Harry Greb, Marvin Hagler, Thomas Hearns, Jack Johnson, Ray Leonard, Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano, Carlos Monzon, Archie Moore, Willie Pep, Ray Robinson and Mike Tyson.

        “But now I want to add, all by myself, one more name: Jack Dempsey. Despite all the class shown by the others, Dempsey was not only my own idol, he remains for me to this day the greatest of them all. He was the big daddy. He embodied the complete perfection of a professional boxer.

        In a 1952 interview with ‘Look’ ****zine, Gene Tunney spoke of Dempsey thus: “Jack Dempsey, I’m convinced, was our greatest heavyweight champion. In his prime, when he knocked out Jess Willard to win the title in 1919, he would have taken the four leading heavyweights of today – Jersey Joe Walcott, Rocky Marciano, Harry (Kid) Matthews and Ezzard Charles – and flattened them all in one night.

        “These four men are honest, earnest, capable professionals. If they are not touched with ring genius, neither are they stumblebums. So I do not mean to deprecate them when I say Dempsey would have levelled them all in the same evening as follows: Matthews, two rounds. Charles, two rounds. Walcott, five rounds. Marciano, one round.

        “A total of ten rounds. Even then, I don’t consider I’m giving Dempsey any the best of it. He might have demolished each of the four in less than one round. He was eminently equipped to do it. He had many championship gifts, including a great fighting heart and the ability to absorb a tremendous punch and recuperate astonishingly fast.

        “He learned his trade the hard way against fighters of all sizes, shape and brands from mining camp, deadfall and dance hall to huge arena and stadium.

        “Jack was no wild slugger. He was an extremely clever fusion of fighter and boxer. He fought out of a peculiar weave and bob and was very difficult to hit with a solid punch. In the 20 rounds I fought him – 10 at Philadelphia in 1926 and 10 at Chicago the following year – I never did get a clean shot at his jaw. He was always weaving and bobbing away from the direct line of fire.

        “Dempsey was criticised for not being able to knock out Tommy Gibbons – one of the all-time great boxers. Actually, that fight was one of Jack’s most impressive performances. Unable to reach his clever opponent with a knockout punch, he was still a fine enough combination of fighter and boxer to outscore Tommy all the way.

        “But it was Dempsey the savage puncher, the scowling attacker, who thrilled the sports world. He was a great hitter. His right hand to body or jaw was explosive. Even more devastating was his left hook to liver and jaw. Weaving and bobbing, he feinted opponents into leads, slipped those leads and jolted home his short punches to body and head. He hurt and stunned opponents. He knocked them down and, eventually, kept them down.

        “The most remarkable thing about Dempsey’s fighting make-up was the shortness of his punching. His blows seldom travelled more than six inches to a foot. He had a trick of hooking his left to the body and then to the head in practically the same movement.

        Lou Stillman’s verdict

        Gruff, strict and taciturn, the legendary and brilliant Lou Stillman ran his famous New York boxing gym with a rod of iron. Like Ray Arcel, Lou could be shy and guarded in giving his opinion of different fighters. One has to remember that such special men – along with the likes of Angelo Dundee, Manny Steward, Buddy McGirt and Teddy Atlas today – are constantly quizzed on which fighter they think was the best. They are so wary of getting into endless arguments on the subject. Many fans don’t react kindly when a trainer’s verdict doesn’t happen to dovetail with their own.

        Stillman saw thousands of fighters over a great span of years: champions, contenders, preliminary boys, ordinary men just working out. But one day Stillman saw one thing he never forgot. It was the angry punch with which the retired Dempsey knocked out Tony Galento in a sparring session. The sight and sound of that mighty blow being driven home was hard for even Stillman to believe. Right to the end, Lou maintained that it was the hardest shot he had ever seen and that Dempsey was the greatest heavyweight.

        Ray Arcel was also a witness to the chilling incident and recalled that the punch nearly decapitated Galento.

        Mike Hunnicut recently told me that the ‘real time’ film of the Dempsey-Willard fight (not the familiar, herky-jerky version by which Dempsey is so often misjudged) remains the most terrifying vision of a destructive fighter he has seen in all his years of studying motion pictures.

        Says Mike, “When you watch the films of Joe Louis and zoom in, it’s incredible to behold what Joe could do – fantastic.

        “But a real close-up view of Dempsey in real time has an almost surreal quality to it – his incredible animal-like moves and co-ordination, his terrific punch and all-round toughness. It absolutely floors the viewer. These are the qualities that the Lou Stillmans and the Ray Arcels were referring to.

        “Jack’s many illustrious opponents were rightly proud of their own toughness and fighting abilities, yet look how many came in praise of him. They would talk of him as a man apart.

        “Dempsey’s footwork, his overall boxing ability and his reflexes were genuinely exceptional. You can’t conveniently group that man with anyone else.”

        If you've ever been in a ring, or coached fighters, you can see the respective skills and style of each fighter and make an educated assessment as to how that fight would play out and who was the better boxer overall. I give Marciano credit for being a small, resilient and durable HW, but he would not stand a chance against Dempsey. Plenty of unbiased sources agree. People more qualified than an anonymous Boxrec staff writer.

        http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxin...seyFeature.htm
        Why would I read Nat's ****? He's a liar and a plagiarist at best. You can tell me he did a lot for boxing's growth but his history isn't worth a damn. Why not go to the source Nat lifted his work from?

        I didn't read the rest of your post because I have no time for surface level *******s who think they've done research when they read a book. Especially bio books sold on the glorification of figures rather than the truth.

        The worth of your credentialed authors is a flippant as the names chosen. The same organizations have other authors pal. They write books about other people and come to other conclusions. It's a **** swinging contest and little else.

        Book about Dempsey gives you the excuses. Book about Lanford gives you the duck narrative. The truth is found in the papers.

        Even Dempseys record is corrupted by second hand accounting. He lost to Lester. Only one known primary source called it a draw, the other two call it a loss, but, since dudes who write books have mindless followers **** consensus of the era for consensus from the book writers as if they have more authority to history or less ulterior motivations then contemporary sportswriters.


        You know why the Police Gazette is way more important than Ring? Because PG is where Nat got all his stories from. The only difference is Nat did poor research, confusing men like Young Sambo for Sambo Sutton and such laziness, and filled in where he lacked with outright bull**** that couldn't possibly be true.


        I don't argue with mother ****ers who think Jack Dempsey might maybe have fought Jack Johnson because they read it in an 80s mag that sources a teens newpaper that starts with "This is a fantasy fight" in the ****ing article, and that bud, in a nutshell, is all you seem to ever have for me.

        Wasn't it you who put over some book as if it was hard to find then me who posted the pages from a free online source anyone can get? Or was that some other Dempsey fan who thinks themselves tall because they read glorification drivel?


        Pull out Ezzard Charles trainer as "the" authority? **** off man, you've become damn near a useless poster. You used to post source material at least. Now you're all these clowns whose books contradict one another and the source material they claim they read pick Dempsey, don't pay attention to the ones who don't, plus also Ezzie's trainer like Jack....****ing joke man.

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by QueensburyRules View Post
          - -Most of Dempsey's sparring partners were black and he took Big Bill Tate with him to Hollywood to train for multiple busted Wills contracts and took some stick by allowing him to live with Jack. Photos of the Willard fight would seem to show Tate in his corner. As a kid he worked in a Salt Lake City boxing gym run by a known black fighter whose name escapes me, but he also had unofficial fights there, but not a lot of blacks in his part of the country much less black fighters and only came East to make his name with Wills being the last relevant contender of note.

          Racism and genocide are modern terminology unknown to ancients, so before slinging arrows and fire on ancients, clean up your own fetid generation, and good luck with that!
          Gdamn it. You spew out rubbish post after post... and then post something like this which is brilliant IMO. What would it take to get more of posts like "the one above" from you? Not trying to control your trolling, but damn... it would be so nice to get more gems like this...

          Off ignore.

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by GhostofDempsey View Post
            So you dismiss researched books but put all your stock into independent (biased) sources. Nat Fleischer had Dempsey ranked 4 and Marciano 10 on his greatest HW list. Jack Sharkey picked Dempsey to easily handle Marciano in the ring... https://www.newspapers.com/clip/1489...mparing-rocky/ , but I guess your Google/internet skills are no match for Sharkey's expertise.

            Former heavyweight champ Jack Sharkey expressed similar sentiments in a 1986 interview. Mike Tyson had just surged to the head of the division and Sharkey said of Mike, “There is only one heavyweight that I can see who would fit into the old school and that’s Tyson. They’re all cream puff punchers today except Tyson, and his secret is that he doesn’t waste many punches.”

            Then Sharkey turned his attention to Dempsey and others “Jack Dempsey was the best because he was a real fighter, and if he hit you in the shoulder he could dislocate it.

            “Ali was a real good boxer but he took too many punches in his training, which he didn’t have to take.

            “Joe Louis was nothing sensational, being a methodical fighter, but he was a great finisher when he had his man in trouble.

            “Rocky Marciano was very good and I almost put him up there with Dempsey. It would be a tough fight between those two but Dempsey, I’d say, was a better puncher.”


            The great Ray Arcel chose Dempsey to murder Marciano. Not very many coaches or boxing historians were more credible than Arcel.

            Arcel’s verdict on the Manassa Mauler was thus: “Dempsey would have absolutely beaten any fighter who came after him – without a doubt. I know all about Joe Louis and how he knocked guys’ teeth out. I have every respect for Joe – I rate him number two. But Dempsey would have killed Louis, George Foreman, any of those guys. What Jack had was God-given – you can’t develop the kind of talent he had.

            “Marciano? Same result. Dempsey would have murdered Rocky. I tell you, Jack would have chased everyone out of the ring. I trained Max Baer a couple of times and often got asked how good that booming right of his was and whether it was as good as anything Dempsey had. Are you kidding? It wasn’t even close.

            Max Schmeling, always a very astute observer and commentator on the game, was similarly fascinated by Dempsey’s almost mystical qualities. In his twilight years, Max was asked to name the boxers who had impressed him the most down through the decades. “Trying to name them all would be a little too much,” Max replied.

            “But, in alphabetical order, my short list of those boxers who will never be forgotten includes Muhammad Ali, Henry Armstrong, Georges Carpentier, Julio Cesar Chavez, George Foreman, Harry Greb, Marvin Hagler, Thomas Hearns, Jack Johnson, Ray Leonard, Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano, Carlos Monzon, Archie Moore, Willie Pep, Ray Robinson and Mike Tyson.

            “But now I want to add, all by myself, one more name: Jack Dempsey. Despite all the class shown by the others, Dempsey was not only my own idol, he remains for me to this day the greatest of them all. He was the big daddy. He embodied the complete perfection of a professional boxer.

            In a 1952 interview with ‘Look’ ****zine, Gene Tunney spoke of Dempsey thus: “Jack Dempsey, I’m convinced, was our greatest heavyweight champion. In his prime, when he knocked out Jess Willard to win the title in 1919, he would have taken the four leading heavyweights of today – Jersey Joe Walcott, Rocky Marciano, Harry (Kid) Matthews and Ezzard Charles – and flattened them all in one night.

            “These four men are honest, earnest, capable professionals. If they are not touched with ring genius, neither are they stumblebums. So I do not mean to deprecate them when I say Dempsey would have levelled them all in the same evening as follows: Matthews, two rounds. Charles, two rounds. Walcott, five rounds. Marciano, one round.

            “A total of ten rounds. Even then, I don’t consider I’m giving Dempsey any the best of it. He might have demolished each of the four in less than one round. He was eminently equipped to do it. He had many championship gifts, including a great fighting heart and the ability to absorb a tremendous punch and recuperate astonishingly fast.

            “He learned his trade the hard way against fighters of all sizes, shape and brands from mining camp, deadfall and dance hall to huge arena and stadium.

            “Jack was no wild slugger. He was an extremely clever fusion of fighter and boxer. He fought out of a peculiar weave and bob and was very difficult to hit with a solid punch. In the 20 rounds I fought him – 10 at Philadelphia in 1926 and 10 at Chicago the following year – I never did get a clean shot at his jaw. He was always weaving and bobbing away from the direct line of fire.

            “Dempsey was criticised for not being able to knock out Tommy Gibbons – one of the all-time great boxers. Actually, that fight was one of Jack’s most impressive performances. Unable to reach his clever opponent with a knockout punch, he was still a fine enough combination of fighter and boxer to outscore Tommy all the way.

            “But it was Dempsey the savage puncher, the scowling attacker, who thrilled the sports world. He was a great hitter. His right hand to body or jaw was explosive. Even more devastating was his left hook to liver and jaw. Weaving and bobbing, he feinted opponents into leads, slipped those leads and jolted home his short punches to body and head. He hurt and stunned opponents. He knocked them down and, eventually, kept them down.

            “The most remarkable thing about Dempsey’s fighting make-up was the shortness of his punching. His blows seldom travelled more than six inches to a foot. He had a trick of hooking his left to the body and then to the head in practically the same movement.

            Lou Stillman’s verdict

            Gruff, strict and taciturn, the legendary and brilliant Lou Stillman ran his famous New York boxing gym with a rod of iron. Like Ray Arcel, Lou could be shy and guarded in giving his opinion of different fighters. One has to remember that such special men – along with the likes of Angelo Dundee, Manny Steward, Buddy McGirt and Teddy Atlas today – are constantly quizzed on which fighter they think was the best. They are so wary of getting into endless arguments on the subject. Many fans don’t react kindly when a trainer’s verdict doesn’t happen to dovetail with their own.

            Stillman saw thousands of fighters over a great span of years: champions, contenders, preliminary boys, ordinary men just working out. But one day Stillman saw one thing he never forgot. It was the angry punch with which the retired Dempsey knocked out Tony Galento in a sparring session. The sight and sound of that mighty blow being driven home was hard for even Stillman to believe. Right to the end, Lou maintained that it was the hardest shot he had ever seen and that Dempsey was the greatest heavyweight.

            Ray Arcel was also a witness to the chilling incident and recalled that the punch nearly decapitated Galento.

            Mike Hunnicut recently told me that the ‘real time’ film of the Dempsey-Willard fight (not the familiar, herky-jerky version by which Dempsey is so often misjudged) remains the most terrifying vision of a destructive fighter he has seen in all his years of studying motion pictures.

            Says Mike, “When you watch the films of Joe Louis and zoom in, it’s incredible to behold what Joe could do – fantastic.

            “But a real close-up view of Dempsey in real time has an almost surreal quality to it – his incredible animal-like moves and co-ordination, his terrific punch and all-round toughness. It absolutely floors the viewer. These are the qualities that the Lou Stillmans and the Ray Arcels were referring to.

            “Jack’s many illustrious opponents were rightly proud of their own toughness and fighting abilities, yet look how many came in praise of him. They would talk of him as a man apart.

            “Dempsey’s footwork, his overall boxing ability and his reflexes were genuinely exceptional. You can’t conveniently group that man with anyone else.”

            If you've ever been in a ring, or coached fighters, you can see the respective skills and style of each fighter and make an educated assessment as to how that fight would play out and who was the better boxer overall. I give Marciano credit for being a small, resilient and durable HW, but he would not stand a chance against Dempsey. Plenty of unbiased sources agree. People more qualified than an anonymous Boxrec staff writer.

            http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxin...seyFeature.htm
            Good artcle

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by Willie Pep 229 View Post
              I found it strange too . . . two possibilities come to mind . . . that I am incorrect when Miske started to become ill, it may have been after the Dempsey fight (II) --- because after the Dempsey fight (II) he goes on to fight some serious competition, e.g Tommy Gibbons twice. So maybe he wasn't ill when he met Dempsey the second time, but he is dead the first month of '24.

              The other possibility; friend or no friend the title was on the line so Miske had to go. I don't buy into this: Dempsey no doubt carried Carpentier and Dempsey was too confident of a fightr to fight in panic.

              The first fight I am comfortable in believing he just sparred with his friend. Dempsey at that point was on a KO run that would make Mike Tyson envy (check out his 1918-1919 run) and the 10 round NWS against Miske stands out as an oddity.

              It would be the only KD Miske ever suffered. While others were winning UD/NWS Dempsey was taking everyone out.
              By first fight, I'm thinking you mean second fight...?


              He got the decision vs. Miske in the first fight, then got a KO2, 5 KO1's, then a TKO5, lost to Meehan, KO1, KO3, KO1...then the 2nd Miske fight which was a decision in 6.

              Does that change things or make it clearer? I honestly was just confused why it was believed he took it easy on him at all. In one of his books, he mentioned the first fight was tough. I didn't see a mention of the 2nd fight at all, then the 3rd fight was the one where he knocked him out in 3 and helped him to his stool. I think that's how it went...?
              Last edited by travestyny; 12-04-2020, 11:52 PM.

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by Marchegiano View Post
                Why would I read Nat's ****? He's a liar and a plagiarist at best. You can tell me he did a lot for boxing's growth but his history isn't worth a damn. Why not go to the source Nat lifted his work from?

                I didn't read the rest of your post because I have no time for surface level *******s who think they've done research when they read a book. Especially bio books sold on the glorification of figures rather than the truth.

                The worth of your credentialed authors is a flippant as the names chosen. The same organizations have other authors pal. They write books about other people and come to other conclusions. It's a **** swinging contest and little else.

                Book about Dempsey gives you the excuses. Book about Lanford gives you the duck narrative. The truth is found in the papers.

                Even Dempseys record is corrupted by second hand accounting. He lost to Lester. Only one known primary source called it a draw, the other two call it a loss, but, since dudes who write books have mindless followers **** consensus of the era for consensus from the book writers as if they have more authority to history or less ulterior motivations then contemporary sportswriters.


                You know why the Police Gazette is way more important than Ring? Because PG is where Nat got all his stories from. The only difference is Nat did poor research, confusing men like Young Sambo for Sambo Sutton and such laziness, and filled in where he lacked with outright bull**** that couldn't possibly be true.


                I don't argue with mother ****ers who think Jack Dempsey might maybe have fought Jack Johnson because they read it in an 80s mag that sources a teens newpaper that starts with "This is a fantasy fight" in the ****ing article, and that bud, in a nutshell, is all you seem to ever have for me.

                Wasn't it you who put over some book as if it was hard to find then me who posted the pages from a free online source anyone can get? Or was that some other Dempsey fan who thinks themselves tall because they read glorification drivel?


                Pull out Ezzard Charles trainer as "the" authority? **** off man, you've become damn near a useless poster. You used to post source material at least. Now you're all these clowns whose books contradict one another and the source material they claim they read pick Dempsey, don't pay attention to the ones who don't, plus also Ezzie's trainer like Jack....****ing joke man.
                I just schooled your sorry ass. You said you stopped reading after Fleischer was mentioned, which is why I bolded the names of the other testimonies. You cited Ring ****zine in your prior post...who do you think founded Ring ****zine idiot? The same guy you call a plagiarizer! You're a casual, a hopeless fanboy who cherry-picks his "facts" and backs them up with anonymous sources. Just like your clown friend who hijacks every thread.

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by GhostofDempsey View Post
                  I just schooled your sorry ass. You said you stopped reading after Fleischer was mentioned, which is why I bolded the names of the other testimonies. You cited Ring ****zine in your prior post...who do you think founded Ring ****zine idiot? The same guy you call a plagiarizer! You're a casual, a hopeless fanboy who cherry-picks his "facts" and backs them up with anonymous sources. Just like your clown friend who hijacks every thread.
                  lmao. Do you really think you schooled anyone? You don't get the point, do you?


                  Whether he sparred a billion black boxers, whether Jesus himself claims Dempsey was the best thing since sliced bread...Dempsey backed down from fighting the best competition. He clearly avoided Wills. He avoided Greb. He avoided old Joe Jeannette in a damn exhibition.

                  Opinions from a few people don't mean much. You don't get credit for fights that you were too afraid to take, dumbass. You don't get credit for who thought you would win. You get credit for fighting and winning, which Dempsey was apparently not prepared to do. And that's the facts.

                  But I love how Marchegiano got you all hot and bothered
                  Last edited by travestyny; 12-04-2020, 05:20 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by GhostofDempsey View Post
                    I just schooled your sorry ass. You said you stopped reading after Fleischer was mentioned, which is why I bolded the names of the other testimonies. You cited Ring ****zine in your prior post...who do you think founded Ring ****zine idiot? The same guy you call a plagiarizer! You're a casual, a hopeless fanboy who cherry-picks his "facts" and backs them up with anonymous sources. Just like your clown friend who hijacks every thread.
                    Oh Ring was started by nat?? Ya don't ****ing say.

                    Pedestrians as **** but don't let that stop you from acting like you know something the rest of us don't.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by GhostofDempsey View Post
                      So you dismiss researched books but put all your stock into independent (biased) sources. Nat Fleischer had Dempsey ranked 4 and Marciano 10 on his greatest HW list. Jack Sharkey picked Dempsey to easily handle Marciano in the ring... https://www.newspapers.com/clip/1489...mparing-rocky/ , but I guess your Google/internet skills are no match for Sharkey's expertise.

                      Former heavyweight champ Jack Sharkey expressed similar sentiments in a 1986 interview. Mike Tyson had just surged to the head of the division and Sharkey said of Mike, “There is only one heavyweight that I can see who would fit into the old school and that’s Tyson. They’re all cream puff punchers today except Tyson, and his secret is that he doesn’t waste many punches.”

                      Then Sharkey turned his attention to Dempsey and others “Jack Dempsey was the best because he was a real fighter, and if he hit you in the shoulder he could dislocate it.

                      “Ali was a real good boxer but he took too many punches in his training, which he didn’t have to take.

                      “Joe Louis was nothing sensational, being a methodical fighter, but he was a great finisher when he had his man in trouble.

                      “Rocky Marciano was very good and I almost put him up there with Dempsey. It would be a tough fight between those two but Dempsey, I’d say, was a better puncher.”


                      The great Ray Arcel chose Dempsey to murder Marciano. Not very many coaches or boxing historians were more credible than Arcel.

                      Arcel’s verdict on the Manassa Mauler was thus: “Dempsey would have absolutely beaten any fighter who came after him – without a doubt. I know all about Joe Louis and how he knocked guys’ teeth out. I have every respect for Joe – I rate him number two. But Dempsey would have killed Louis, George Foreman, any of those guys. What Jack had was God-given – you can’t develop the kind of talent he had.

                      “Marciano? Same result. Dempsey would have murdered Rocky. I tell you, Jack would have chased everyone out of the ring. I trained Max Baer a couple of times and often got asked how good that booming right of his was and whether it was as good as anything Dempsey had. Are you kidding? It wasn’t even close.

                      Max Schmeling, always a very astute observer and commentator on the game, was similarly fascinated by Dempsey’s almost mystical qualities. In his twilight years, Max was asked to name the boxers who had impressed him the most down through the decades. “Trying to name them all would be a little too much,” Max replied.

                      “But, in alphabetical order, my short list of those boxers who will never be forgotten includes Muhammad Ali, Henry Armstrong, Georges Carpentier, Julio Cesar Chavez, George Foreman, Harry Greb, Marvin Hagler, Thomas Hearns, Jack Johnson, Ray Leonard, Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano, Carlos Monzon, Archie Moore, Willie Pep, Ray Robinson and Mike Tyson.

                      “But now I want to add, all by myself, one more name: Jack Dempsey. Despite all the class shown by the others, Dempsey was not only my own idol, he remains for me to this day the greatest of them all. He was the big daddy. He embodied the complete perfection of a professional boxer.

                      In a 1952 interview with ‘Look’ ****zine, Gene Tunney spoke of Dempsey thus: “Jack Dempsey, I’m convinced, was our greatest heavyweight champion. In his prime, when he knocked out Jess Willard to win the title in 1919, he would have taken the four leading heavyweights of today – Jersey Joe Walcott, Rocky Marciano, Harry (Kid) Matthews and Ezzard Charles – and flattened them all in one night.

                      “These four men are honest, earnest, capable professionals. If they are not touched with ring genius, neither are they stumblebums. So I do not mean to deprecate them when I say Dempsey would have levelled them all in the same evening as follows: Matthews, two rounds. Charles, two rounds. Walcott, five rounds. Marciano, one round.

                      “A total of ten rounds. Even then, I don’t consider I’m giving Dempsey any the best of it. He might have demolished each of the four in less than one round. He was eminently equipped to do it. He had many championship gifts, including a great fighting heart and the ability to absorb a tremendous punch and recuperate astonishingly fast.

                      “He learned his trade the hard way against fighters of all sizes, shape and brands from mining camp, deadfall and dance hall to huge arena and stadium.

                      “Jack was no wild slugger. He was an extremely clever fusion of fighter and boxer. He fought out of a peculiar weave and bob and was very difficult to hit with a solid punch. In the 20 rounds I fought him – 10 at Philadelphia in 1926 and 10 at Chicago the following year – I never did get a clean shot at his jaw. He was always weaving and bobbing away from the direct line of fire.

                      “Dempsey was criticised for not being able to knock out Tommy Gibbons – one of the all-time great boxers. Actually, that fight was one of Jack’s most impressive performances. Unable to reach his clever opponent with a knockout punch, he was still a fine enough combination of fighter and boxer to outscore Tommy all the way.

                      “But it was Dempsey the savage puncher, the scowling attacker, who thrilled the sports world. He was a great hitter. His right hand to body or jaw was explosive. Even more devastating was his left hook to liver and jaw. Weaving and bobbing, he feinted opponents into leads, slipped those leads and jolted home his short punches to body and head. He hurt and stunned opponents. He knocked them down and, eventually, kept them down.

                      “The most remarkable thing about Dempsey’s fighting make-up was the shortness of his punching. His blows seldom travelled more than six inches to a foot. He had a trick of hooking his left to the body and then to the head in practically the same movement.

                      Lou Stillman’s verdict

                      Gruff, strict and taciturn, the legendary and brilliant Lou Stillman ran his famous New York boxing gym with a rod of iron. Like Ray Arcel, Lou could be shy and guarded in giving his opinion of different fighters. One has to remember that such special men – along with the likes of Angelo Dundee, Manny Steward, Buddy McGirt and Teddy Atlas today – are constantly quizzed on which fighter they think was the best. They are so wary of getting into endless arguments on the subject. Many fans don’t react kindly when a trainer’s verdict doesn’t happen to dovetail with their own.

                      Stillman saw thousands of fighters over a great span of years: champions, contenders, preliminary boys, ordinary men just working out. But one day Stillman saw one thing he never forgot. It was the angry punch with which the retired Dempsey knocked out Tony Galento in a sparring session. The sight and sound of that mighty blow being driven home was hard for even Stillman to believe. Right to the end, Lou maintained that it was the hardest shot he had ever seen and that Dempsey was the greatest heavyweight.

                      Ray Arcel was also a witness to the chilling incident and recalled that the punch nearly decapitated Galento.

                      Mike Hunnicut recently told me that the ‘real time’ film of the Dempsey-Willard fight (not the familiar, herky-jerky version by which Dempsey is so often misjudged) remains the most terrifying vision of a destructive fighter he has seen in all his years of studying motion pictures.

                      Says Mike, “When you watch the films of Joe Louis and zoom in, it’s incredible to behold what Joe could do – fantastic.

                      “But a real close-up view of Dempsey in real time has an almost surreal quality to it – his incredible animal-like moves and co-ordination, his terrific punch and all-round toughness. It absolutely floors the viewer. These are the qualities that the Lou Stillmans and the Ray Arcels were referring to.

                      “Jack’s many illustrious opponents were rightly proud of their own toughness and fighting abilities, yet look how many came in praise of him. They would talk of him as a man apart.

                      “Dempsey’s footwork, his overall boxing ability and his reflexes were genuinely exceptional. You can’t conveniently group that man with anyone else.”

                      If you've ever been in a ring, or coached fighters, you can see the respective skills and style of each fighter and make an educated assessment as to how that fight would play out and who was the better boxer overall. I give Marciano credit for being a small, resilient and durable HW, but he would not stand a chance against Dempsey. Plenty of unbiased sources agree. People more qualified than an anonymous Boxrec staff writer.

                      http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxin...seyFeature.htm
                      Arcel was probably the biggest Dempsey fanboy ever, and his hyperbolic tellings of Jack's greatness should be taken with a grain of salt.

                      That Tunney had his own reasons for talking up Dempsey is surely only too obvious!

                      As for Stillman watching Dempsey ko'ing Galento with the hardest punch he ever saw... well, that simply never happened! Just one of boxing's many myths.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP