Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Thoughts On This Top 20 Heavyweight List

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by GJC View Post
    *****, Wills was a great fighter not doubting that but he wasn't quick.
    Like I said personally I'd bet the house on Dempsey really fancy him in this match up.
    Dempsey was a phenominal fighting machine who had devastating punching-power, he hit Jesse Willard so hard he broke his jaw in 7 places and knocked out his front teeth, Dempsey would be far too much for Wills due to his speed, power and ring smarts
    Last edited by sonnyboyx2; 10-01-2009, 08:27 AM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by GJC View Post
      Johnson probably is a bit high but you have to take into account that in my mind he was 30 odd years of his time and quite a student of the game so who is to say he wouldn't have adjusted and been a force in whatever era he fought. As for the Klits beating him,maybe but they wouldn't be knocking him out in the 26th round I have my doubts whether they could last 15 stamina wise.
      Agreed on the stamina issue.... Vitally looked like he'd had Ronnie Kray taken of his back, when Arreola's corner retired him..

      Felt terribly sorry for Chris, who cried like a baby.. I know & he knew that Vitally was gassed, & beatable.. Although, lacking in some departments, Arreola has the heart of a lion, & a very solid chin.. Much in the mould of a young Chuvalo..
      I sincerely hope that he replaces his corner with immediate effect..

      With regard to Johnson, I rate him as just outside of the top 10, & the Klit's (love em or hate em) are dominating the division, & in years to come will probably be replacing names like Johnson &/or Dempsey, Marciano, Tunney, Langford etc on a lot of lists (experts included)...

      Although, I'd still say the bros would be to big for Jack, Vitally did get upset by Chris Byrd, & Johnson was a lot more crafty, so I can see where your coming from..

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by mickey malone View Post
        Agreed on the stamina issue.... Vitally looked like he'd had Ronnie Kray taken of his back, when Arreola's corner retired him..

        Felt terribly sorry for Chris, who cried like a baby.. I know & he knew that Vitally was gassed, & beatable.. Although, lacking in some departments, Arreola has the heart of a lion, & a very solid chin.. Much in the mould of a young Chuvalo..
        I sincerely hope that he replaces his corner with immediate effect..

        With regard to Johnson, I rate him as just outside of the top 10, & the Klit's (love em or hate em) are dominating the division, & in years to come will probably be replacing names like Johnson &/or Dempsey, Marciano, Tunney, Langford etc on a lot of lists (experts included)...

        Although, I'd still say the bros would be to big for Jack, Vitally did get upset by Chris Byrd, & Johnson was a lot more crafty, so I can see where your coming from..
        Still, at least Vitaly lets his hands go which is a lot more than you can say for his little sister Wlad. It's one of the things that makes Vitaly a hell of a lot more dangerous against an opponent that he doesn't have a big reach advantage over than Wlad is.

        Poet

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Obama View Post
          The second Meehan loss was not remotely early in Dempsey's career. And Dempsey was supposed to be at his best in the early rounds. Sam Langford was past his prime when Willie got to him. Prime Langford blasts his ass. Besides they only fought once. Dempsey fought the SOB 5 times.

          Langford was still beating top ranked heavyweights so I see no excuses. Truth is styles make fights and its hard to judge fighters with all time great careers based on 4 round fights. So what if Dempsey was supposed to be at his best early. Every fight and every fighter is different. We all know before Dempsey got famous that many times he'd be fighting just so he could eat. Could that have been the case in some of these fights? Seems a possibility. We also know in his last fight against Meehan he was in his sixth fight in just over two months. Maybe Willie just had his number in 4 round fights. None of it changes everything else he did though and I just find it difficult to judge a fighter based on 4 round fights.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post

            Langford was still beating top ranked heavyweights so I see no excuses. Truth is styles make fights and its hard to judge fighters with all time great careers based on 4 round fights. So what if Dempsey was supposed to be at his best early. Every fight and every fighter is different. We all know before Dempsey got famous that many times he'd be fighting just so he could eat. Could that have been the case in some of these fights? Seems a possibility. We also know in his last fight against Meehan he was in his sixth fight in just over two months. Maybe Willie just had his number in 4 round fights. None of it changes everything else he did though and I just find it difficult to judge a fighter based on 4 round fights.
            I found that particularly funny since the rest of your post is nothing but making excuses for Dempsey.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by poet682006 View Post
              Still, at least Vitaly lets his hands go which is a lot more than you can say for his little sister Wlad. It's one of the things that makes Vitaly a hell of a lot more dangerous against an opponent that he doesn't have a big reach advantage over than Wlad is.

              Poet
              Sure!... Vitaly's never in a dull fight.. I've always liked him, ever since he did a demolition job on Herbie Hyde.. Not that I've got anything against Hyde, I just loved the way Vitaly fought, & has done since (if we forget about the rotator cuff incident).. The only traversty, is that the wrong brother had a back injury for 3 years..

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Obama View Post
                I found that particularly funny since the rest of your post is nothing but making excuses for Dempsey.
                Yeah well what are you going to do? I could find reasons both fighters lost to Meehan and defend them forever. I still don't believe its relevant to judge a fighters entire career based on 4 round fights earlier in his career and neither do most boxing historians that I am aware of.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post
                  Yeah well what are you going to do? I could find reasons both fighters lost to Meehan and defend them forever. I still don't believe its relevant to judge a fighters entire career based on 4 round fights earlier in his career and neither do most boxing historians that I am aware of.
                  They weren't all early in his career, and he met the man 5 times. As there's no other better indication that he could beat a crafty fighter of his own size or greater, it's highly relevant to the topic at hand. Don't lose sight of the argument.

                  4 round fights then are not 4 round fights now. You could make any elite fighter today fight a 4 rounder and it would be at a very high level. The length of a fight merely makes the fighters adjust the pace it goes at. If it's shorter go harder. If it's longer ease up. Since fights went over 50 rounds at one point, lets just write off the 12 round championship bouts of today just because they are too short compared to the epic battles back then. Or lets not.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Obama View Post
                    They weren't all early in his career, and he met the man 5 times. As there's no other better indication that he could beat a crafty fighter of his own size or greater, it's highly relevant to the topic at hand. Don't lose sight of the argument.

                    4 round fights then are not 4 round fights now. You could make any elite fighter today fight a 4 rounder and it would be at a very high level. The length of a fight merely makes the fighters adjust the pace it goes at. If it's shorter go harder. If it's longer ease up. Since fights went over 50 rounds at one point, lets just write off the 12 round championship bouts of today just because they are too short compared to the epic battles back then. Or lets not.

                    4 rounds does not give a fighter time to adjust to a style he isn't comfortable against, especially against a man with over 100 fights. If it did, why not just schedule championship fights for the 4 rounds than? If it did give a fighter time and was a proper indication, Zab would have beaten Floyd. That is just one example out of thousands, I am sure.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post

                      4 rounds does not give a fighter time to adjust to a style he isn't comfortable against, especially against a man with over 100 fights. If it did, why not just schedule championship fights for the 4 rounds than? If it did give a fighter time and was a proper indication, Zab would have beaten Floyd. That is just one example out of thousands, I am sure.
                      You can't necessarily compare the first 4 rounds of a 12 round fight to what they would be if the fight was scheduled for only 4 rounds.

                      And once again you're treating every fight Dempsey had with Meehan as an inexperienced version of Dempsey. The best win Dempsey ever had was against Fred Fulton (would be Jack Sharkey if Dempsey didn't get his ass beat from beginning to end then cheat to win). He KOed Fulton in 1 round. His last loss to Meehan came AFTER he defeated Fulton. I really don't want to hear this inexperience crap anymore.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP