Dempsey V Marciano's Challengers?

[Bronson66]

Prime Jack against the versions of Rocky's challengers that Rocky fought. Does he do better or worse?

Rocky's results.

Walcott ko1

Lastarza tko11

Charles dec15

Charles ko8

****ell tko 9

Moore ko9

[Dr Z]

Well let's examine who they fought in title defense first. For the purpose of the tread only wins will be discussed, but the ages, activity levels and performances of the winner are key.


First up JD opponets..

Title defense wins over.

1. Miske who was dying of bright's disease. It was really a no decision fight. " During the fight, I began to feel that Billy wasn't giving me as tough a battle as I had expected. He did not seem like his old self.'" - Jack Dempsey. So he beat a dying man.

2. Brennan. Brennan was a good challager in fine working condition, but he had Dempsey hurt and JD had to come back to win in 12. There is some controversy as Brennan may have beaten the count. This one is one film to see.

3. Carpentier, The 172 pound challenger injured his hand and quickly faded Ko'd in four, but the Frenchman was doing well pre-injury. On film to see.

4. Gibbons. Shelby’s residents walked away disappointed and angry. Dempsey lacked his usual sharpness and power while Gibbons, who managed to cut Dempsey’s eye in round two, slapped on repeated clinches and generally tried to neutralize the champion.

After 15 nondescript rounds, referee Jim Dougherty – who was handpicked by Kearns – raised Dempsey’s hand with no argument from Gibbons. Because Kearns had dibs on the first $300,000 of income – and because only $72,000 of the third installment was paid to Team Dempsey – Gibbons ended up fighting for free. A lackluster affair and one that was poorly filmed by the statadard of the time.


5. Fripo. Demsey was down twice and hurt. Luckily he had the defensively inpet Fripo

After the fight Dempsey said "He is game and the hardest puncher I ever faced. It was the first time I was knocked down since I became champion and I'll never forget it. I saw eight million stars when I got that punch on the chin that knocked me out of the ring. ... I didn't even know he had knocked me out of the ring until I came to on my stool between rounds. I thought I had been knocked out."

And there is controversy of course as there is in many if Dempey fights.

It was a violation of the Rules of Boxing for the newspapermen to push Dempsey back into the ring. The rules state: "If a boxer is knocked out of the ring, he gets a count of 20 to get back in and on his feet. He cannot be assisted." Some people question to this day whether Dempsey would have been able to “beat the count” if not for this push back into the ring. In addition, the film is edited and JD may have been out of the ring for more than 20 seconds. And Dempsey did not obeythe rules.

Dempsey stood directly over Fripo in violation of the rules while Referee Gallagher began the count. Firpo attempted to rise and Dempsey lunged right at him, the blow grazing Firpo’s head just as he was getting off the canvas. The referee overlooked this unintentional violation of the rules.

At the very least Fripo deserved a re-match. That did not happen. Long Island City promoter Simon Flaherty offered Dempsey a huge purse to defend the title against African-American contender Harry Wills at the event. That did not happen either.

That is a wrap on Dempsey's successful title defenses.
He beat a dying man, beat the shimpy Carpentier who injured his hand, won a hard fought battle vs. Brennan and had to come back to stop him, won a lackluster fight over Gibbons, and beat Fripo with fouls and aid from the crowd.

His best opponents in Wills and Greb were avoided. Somehow I think Marciano's title opponets were a bit better.



.

[Willie Pep 229]

They have been asking this question since Marciano first won the title.

52Dec.jpg

[Willie Pep 229]

Dr. Z wrote:

Gibbons. Shelby's residents walked away disappointed and angry.

...................................

God no!

The Shelby fans were ecstatic. Gibbons went the distance, something no one had done since Miske. (And even Miske had been KOed in the interim.)

From 1918 and Homer Smith to Gibbons in summer '23 Dempsey recorded 22 KOs over 25 fights.*

Only friend Billy Miske was allowed to surrive the distance (10 and 6 rounds) the other 20 fighters couldn't go the distance. Many going down in one or two rounds, with much violence.

Fans today don't realize Dempsey was more feared and dominating than Tyson was in 1989.

When it (Gibbons) was over, the fans rushed the ring and carried the challenger around the ring.

Going the distance with the feared Dempsey left no one angry or disappointed except Dempsey, who in fact was very rusty, having not fought in 24 months.

*And of course another four round decision loss to Willie Mehan snuck in there, which seemed to be a Dempsey tradition.

Personally, I believe, during Dempsey's run to the title he carried both Miske and Mehan because they were friends.

[Bronson66]

They have been asking this question since Marciano first won the title.

52Dec.jpg

I have this magazine,the consensus was that at the time Marciano was not as good as Dempsey.



I asked the Forums opinion on these fights,I did not ask for a concentrated attack on Dempsey himself which a hating fool has readily supplied,[similar to his recent attack on Joe Louis,]but I will address them.

"Dying Miske"?
After this ko defeat,the only one Billy suffered, he had a further 23 fights over the next 3 years, losing only 1, a decision to Gibbons,and Miske wasn't fighting patsies either, among those he beat were:
Renault
Brennan x2
Meehan
Weinert
Gibbons
Fulton
I think that puts Miske's health issues in perspective.
As you said ,against Gibbons Dempsey hadn't fought for 2 years and he was the target of vitriolic attacks in Shelby, which did nothing for his mental state.
Gibbons opted to just survive,and when a clever boxer does that it can be extremely difficult to get a stoppage victory.

Against Firpo Dempsey never completely left the ring,and he was not pushed back in it by reporters he was pushed off them.

Firpo did not get a rematch with Dempsey because he went straight back to Argentina after the fight to cash in on the
South American rights to the fight that he had acquired,instead of staying in the US and campaigning for another title shot.

It would be a year before Firpo came back to the US, during which time had added lard to his frame and was not in the best of condition.
A dreary decision loss to Wills finished his hopes of a rematch,and did nothing to enhance Wills' reputation either.

After the Firpo fight the rules regarding going to a corner after a KD were clarified .

[Marchegiano]

It frustrates me that it's so easy for people to see the Dempsey in Marciano and Dempsey and Marciano in Tyson but anything older is surely alien and there is no connection with this very visible style and the origins of the sport.

There is no deeper truth to be found in a set of tactics being so viable the people, the places, the equipment, the rules, even the food sources can be changed so much so that it is almost indiscernible and yet still this marvel of a style remains perfectly suited for creating champions at the highest level.

Please can we just once pause and rather pitting Dempsey, Marciano, and Tyson against one another in a vicarious **** measuring contest how about instead we take notice this style of fighting is actually special.


We can read through countless accounts and get all sorts of surprising styles through time. Plenty come and go and their viability is very much rules based. It does not take much research and involvement with history to run into the floppers does it? But that style is hella dead ain't it? Got ruled out didn't it? get me? Plenty of those, but, that sword and shield don't die. You can't make a fair rules system that can kill it. It has only one rival and that rival comes and goes with attitudes.

Isn't it cool? neat?




Instead we have these ****ty butthurt fanboy debates where we act like Nat and Tex are good sources, no one had a monetary reason to push Dempsey, Dempsey was not such a huge star because he was the first backed by a promotional media company, and that company did not push the Dempsey mystique long after his retirement for financial gains.




My point is I don't really like talking **** about Jack Dempsey all the ****ing time. I would like to praise him, but with Jack comes his semi-******ed fans who love to admit Nat was a conman but also a great source for who Jack was. I'm continuously pitted against Dempsey, a man I admire, a style I hold in the highest regard because You lot are too ****** to form an argument that does not 100% revolve around that trash magazine.

Likewise, youse lot are old ****s who were sold the lie and even though the ****ing jury is out now and you know Nat was a CONMAN you STILL source him, his bull****, and business partners like as if he wasn't the prototype for Don ****ing King who, btw, still praises Tyson like a god.


There isn't a man here who will claim Nat was not a plagiarist but don't let that stop you from sourcing his mag doe and that's not ******.



There is Jack Dempsey without Ring magazine. He doesn't need it. Your arguments are ******, and just because y'all circle jerk one another and give me the brush off doesn't mean I don't notice the fallout of my posts. You know damn well Nat = Conman is more than good enough reason to stop citing ****ing RING when dealing with Dempsey, a HOFer with plenty of HOF wins and praise from all over.





Take your Ring, shove it up your ass. It's worthless here and you ****ing know it. There is not a single habitual member here that does not know that mag especially in that era is bull**** to sell bull****. You all admit it and only ever argue against it when you're using ring in your fairy *** off contests.







additionally, you ****** ****s. Back To The Future is an 80s movies set in the 50s. Holmes is an 80s fighter compared to a 50s fighter. If you were not dumb as **** that'd be enough but since y'all are let me hold your hand. Let the kids grow the **** up and when they're the old men they too talk **** about the new champion. Duh. ****ing idiots using a widely known bias rag to prove a point won't even recognize the doubles on suspect-ability.




Let me see another ****ing Ring being posted. IDGF if your ***** ass doesn't say ****, you just post the rag. See if you don't ask me again to just leave your ***** ass alone you dumb *****.




Or let me be very direct Willie Pep 229 You are a racist and you glorify racist propaganda. You don't have **** to say because TF can you say? Nuh-uh? Exactly, your dumb ***** ass will ask to be left TF alone like the ****** ***** you are,

[Bronson66]

It frustrates me that it's so easy for people to see the Dempsey in Marciano and Dempsey and Marciano in Tyson but anything older is surely alien and there is no connection with this very visible style and the origins of the sport.

There is no deeper truth to be found in a set of tactics being so viable the people, the places, the equipment, the rules, even the food sources can be changed so much so that it is almost indiscernible and yet still this marvel of a style remains perfectly suited for creating champions at the highest level.

Please can we just once pause and rather pitting Dempsey, Marciano, and Tyson against one another in a vicarious **** measuring contest how about instead we take notice this style of fighting is actually special.


We can read through countless accounts and get all sorts of surprising styles through time. Plenty come and go and their viability is very much rules based. It does not take much research and involvement with history to run into the floppers does it? But that style is hella dead ain't it? Got ruled out didn't it? get me? Plenty of those, but, that sword and shield don't die. You can't make a fair rules system that can kill it. It has only one rival and that rival comes and goes with attitudes.

Isn't it cool? neat?




Instead we have these ****ty butthurt fanboy debates where we act like Nat and Tex are good sources, no one had a monetary reason to push Dempsey, Dempsey was not such a huge star because he was the first backed by a promotional media company, and that company did not push the Dempsey mystique long after his retirement for financial gains.




My point is I don't really like talking **** about Jack Dempsey all the ****ing time. I would like to praise him, but with Jack comes his semi-******ed fans who love to admit Nat was a conman but also a great source for who Jack was. I'm continuously pitted against Dempsey, a man I admire, a style I hold in the highest regard because You lot are too ****** to form an argument that does not 100% revolve around that trash ****zine.

Likewise, youse lot are old ****s who were sold the lie and even though the ****ing jury is out now and you know Nat was a CONMAN you STILL source him, his bull****, and business partners like as if he wasn't the prototype for Don ****ing King who, btw, still praises Tyson like a god.


There isn't a man here who will claim Nat was not a plagiarist but don't let that stop you from sourcing his mag doe and that's not ******.



There is Jack Dempsey without Ring ****zine. He doesn't need it. Your arguments are ******, and just because y'all circle jerk one another and give me the brush off doesn't mean I don't notice the fallout of my posts. You know damn well Nat = Conman is more than good enough reason to stop citing ****ing RING when dealing with Dempsey, a HOFer with plenty of HOF wins and praise from all over.





Take your Ring, shove it up your ass. It's worthless here and you ****ing know it. There is not a single habitual member here that does not know that mag especially in that era is bull**** to sell bull****. You all admit it and only ever argue against it when you're using ring in your fairy *** off contests.







additionally, you ****** ****s. Back To The Future is an 80s movies set in the 50s. Holmes is an 80s fighter compared to a 50s fighter. If you were not dumb as **** that'd be enough but since y'all are let me hold your hand. Let the kids grow the **** up and when they're the old men they too talk **** about the new champion. Duh. ****ing idiots using a widely known bias rag to prove a point won't even recognize the doubles on suspect-ability.




Let me see another ****ing Ring being posted. IDGF if your ***** ass doesn't say ****, you just post the rag. See if you don't ask me again to just leave your ***** ass alone you dumb *****.




Or let me be very direct Willie Pep 229 You are a racist and you glorify racist propaganda. You don't have **** to say because TF can you say? Nuh-uh? Exactly, your dumb ***** ass will ask to be left TF alone like the ****** ***** you are,

My two posts are pitting Dempsey and Marciano's against each others respective title challengers,rather than each other.
For the record I'd pick Dempsey to beat Rocky but I'm sure many ,many would choose Rocky ,it's just a bit of fun.

Nobody other than you mentioned Fleischer M.
As to Nat's preferences ,of his top ten , all time heavies,[1972,] below, only 3 would make my top ten.Johnson,Dempsey ,and Louis.So I think I can say Fleischer does not influence me one iota.

Heavyweights:
1 - Jack Johnson
2 - James J. Jeffries
3 - Bob Fitzsimmons
4 - Jack Dempsey
5 - James J. Corbett
6 - Joe Louis
7 - Sam Langford
8 - Gene Tunney
9 - Max Schmeling
10- Rocky Marciano

I may not be as familiar with all posters here as some,but I haven't noticed Willie Pep229 being racist myself,in fact I can only think of one bigot here and he knows who he is.
I'm not too sure how much of your post is meant for me,but it does come across as rather "over the top." Mate.

[Dr Z]

[QUOTE=Willie Pep 229;n32401447]

Dr. Z wrote:

Gibbons. Shelby's residents walked away disappointed and angry.

...................................

God no!

The Shelby fans were ecstatic. Gibbons went the distance, something no one had done since Miske. (And even Miske had been KOed in the interim.)

From 1918 and Homer Smith to Gibbons in summer '23 Dempsey recorded 22 KOs over 25 fights.*

Only friend Billy Miske was allowed to surrive the distance (10 and 6 rounds) the other 20 fighters couldn't go the distance. Many going down in one or two rounds, with much violence.

Fans today don't realize Dempsey was more feared and dominating than Tyson was in 1989.

When it (Gibbons) was over, the fans rushed the ring and carried the challenger around the ring.

Going the distance with the feared Dempsey left no one angry or disappointed except Dempsey, who in fact was very rusty, having not fought in 24 months.

*And of course another four round decision loss to Willie Mehan snuck in there, which seemed to be a Dempsey tradition.

Personally, I believe, during Dempsey's run to the title he carried both Miske and Mehan because they were friends.[/QUOTE


I summed up his title defenses which was rather poor in his opponents health ( Miske ) as he had Bright's disease and died three years later. Carpentier suffered an injured hand in round two leading to his fourth round defeat.

Now Gibbons was not paid and IMO ran / did not try to win the entire fight and Dempsey made a poor showing while his manager / promoted bankrupt the town.

This leaves us with two title defenses vs. opponents who were not dying, were paid, and uninjured. In these matches Dempsey was hurt, floored more than once and IMO there was skullduggery for him.

Being hurt and out pointed by Beennan who is a mere solid contender and has no wins vs. quality opponents until the KO in round 12 is a real hmmm... at least it is for those who hold Dempsey in high esteem. Going up and down like a yo-yo vs. the no defense or unskilled Fripo shows how easy Demspey was to hit as well as put into question his durability vs. a puncher. Personally I think Dempsey should have been DQ'd or the bout should have been a NC. A re-match was in other as he did not follow the rules. And that one would have made a lot of money! So why not? Hmmmm ...



Of course neither Greb nor Wiills was selected for title defenses. Both men were Dempsey #1 and #2 contenders with clear wins over Brennan and Fripo. Hmmmm....



A wise promoter and manager does not risk his cash cow in a fight that he thinks is dangerous until it is time to cash out. Does he? Nope.


Dempsey had another title defense which he did not win ...that is kind! He did not win a round clean age age 31 vs. Tunnney. Had this fight been 15 rounds I think Tunney would have stopped a cut up and weary Dempsey as he had to be escorted to his corner in round 10 by his corner as the fight ended. Here is a good round by round write up..


https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1876&dat=19260923&id=KT0sAAAAIBAJ&s jid=UcoEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4321,2425341

[QueensburyRules]

Of course neither Greb nor Wiills was selected for title defenses. Both men were Dempsey #1 and #2 contenders with clear wins over Brennan and Fripo. Hmmmm....

[/SIZE]

- - Wills was selected multi X as I have proven multiple X, but clearly the governing States and Cities would not allow another Coast to Coast Rioting as happened with Johnson/Jeffries.

Can't make a Big $$$ title fight when no big venues and no big politicians forbid it.

Nobody but a few Greb supporters wanted to see 170 lb Greb who had been whooped by Tunney multi x go against Dempsey.

Grab a clue...

[Willie Pep 229]

- - Wills was selected multi X as I have proven multiple X, but clearly the governing States and Cities would not allow another Coast to Coast Rioting as happened with Johnson/Jeffries.

Can't make a Big $$$ title fight when no big venues and no big politicians forbid it.

Nobody but a few Greb supporters wanted to see 170 lb Greb who had been whooped by Tunney multi x go against Dempsey.

Grab a clue...

There was no coast to coast rioting. There was White on Black violence, mostly in the South and West.

Whites tried to shut down the film presentations and silence the celebration.

"Riots" was a White euphemism; same BS, as T-rump trying to claim there is violence on both sides.

Nah! Those were not riots. You read about the violence in detail and what you find is Whites attacking Blacks and movie theaters being set on fire. All one side.

The Blacks just wanted to dance in the street. Whites weren't having it.