Dempsey Gives His Opinion Of Marciano

[BKM-]

Personally, I think he has a few on his list Marciano would beat. Willard, Sharkey and Schmeling would also be beaten by the Rock, and probably Fitz as well, and maybe Baer. Dempsey had to make Willard look tough. Maybe he was tough, but I don't think he beats Marciano; his offense was a slow jab and occasionally something else.. Hell, Rock likely would beat feather-fisted Braddock too.

Wow! He even has Sullivan ahead of the Rock. In other words, he has virtually every champion who is any good at all ahead of the Rock, feather fists and all--that is old timer bias, isn't it? He never saw Sullivan fight. He is going strictly by reputation. The only thing he gives Rocky credit for is being a nice guy who lives clean. He even calls him a second rater.

Dempsey's perception is very good for the Rock's faults but blind to his merits. Very interesting to know Jack's point of view though. It is a tradition for old timers to slander the champions that come after.

That's where you can tell he's full of it. He's got all this criticism for Marciano but then he says he wasn't as great as the likes of Sharkey and Baer? I mean Max Baer? clumsy footwork and lack of boxing skill is a much better description for that champ instead of Rocky. You should see his circus act in the Primo Carnera and Braddock fights. A very sloppy and wild slugger who makes Rocky look like a sweet scientist.

I will ignore the names of the old school, that could have something to do with the rules pre marquess of queensberry. I don't mind the Schmeling mention, he was barely 190+ but very crafty and underestimated. I don't mind Willard either because in his prime he was better than his loss to Dempsey, for a big man he could stick and move, extremely durable with a killer 1-2.

[billeau2]

The best heavyweight I have laid my eyes upon was either Lennox lewis or Muhammad Ali, and the latter had nothing but positive things to say about the man. Whether that was influenced by other factors at the time is up for debate, but Ali called it like he saw it as he had criticism for certain greats(Louis, Baer, Dempsey) and compliments for others like Rocky, Tunny, Johnson, Liston etc.

Jack Dempsey comes across very poorly in this statement. Partly because he should have been able to spot Marciano's techniques as he was good at some of those skills himself. The crouching and the angles, and the so called 'clumsy footwork' was actually him always planting his feet well to deliver his power punches. The famous Suzie Q had great form.

These debates are more prevalent in martial arts, things like how one should punch, the form one uses... It's debatable but I would tend to agree that Marciano had technique and was very smart how he executed.

[billeau2]

That's where you can tell he's full of it. He's got all this criticism for Marciano but then he says he wasn't as great as the likes of Sharkey and Baer? I mean Max Baer? clumsy footwork and lack of boxing skill is a much better description for that champ instead of Rocky. You should see his circus act in the Primo Carnera and Braddock fights. A very sloppy and wild slugger who makes Rocky look like a sweet scientist.

I will ignore the names of the old school, that could have something to do with the rules pre marquess of queensberry. I don't mind the Schmeling mention, he was barely 190+ but very crafty and underestimated. I don't mind Willard either because in his prime he was better than his loss to Dempsey, for a big man he could stick and move, extremely durable with a killer 1-2.

Dempsey helped train Max. So he had some insight and perhaps his own bias. But there are a lot of elements to look at so to say Dempsey missed something? He just had his own opinion. Fighters look at things differently. Trainers were very on the Marciano train! For whatever that is worth.

[BKM-]

These debates are more prevalent in martial arts, things like how one should punch, the form one uses... It's debatable but I would tend to agree that Marciano had technique and was very smart how he executed.

With all due respect billeau I think in this case it's not really debatable when you have a wild caveman like Baer which Dempsey holds higher in terms of skill than Marciano. Baer was horrendous technically and there were plenty of skilled boxer during and before his time. It looks very bad on Dempsey to make a statement like that, It's either bias, bitterness, maybe a brain issue in his later age.

[QueensburyRules]

Copied from a friends post on another forum..

An interesting quote by Jack Dempsey:

'Though he has whipped everyone he has faced, compared with the champions of the past, Rocky Marciano is hardly more than a second-rater. I don't think Marciano is great. I hate to say so because The Rock is a fine man, honest, clean-living, ambitious, one of the nicest guys you want to meet. But in my book he couldn't carry the bucket for some champions of the past.'

“Dempsey told Kofoed that he thinks John L. Sullivan would have beaten Marciano, Jim Corbett would have outpointed Rocky, Bob Fitzsimmons would have scored a technical knockout, Jim Jeffries would have flattened Marciano, Jack Johnson would have KO’d Rocky, Jess Willard would have outpointed Rocky, Gene Tunney would have won on technical knockout, Max Schmeling would have beaten Marciano, so would Jack Sharkey, while Max Baer would have KO’d Rocky. Joe Louis, in his prime, would have stopped Marciano.”

“Of the former champions Marciano would have beaten, Dempsey lists Marvin Hart, Tommy Burns, Primo Carnera and Jim Braddock.”

“Dempsey lists the faults which he thinks detracts from Marciano. Among them are Rocky’s clumsy footwork and lack of boxing skill. Rocky’s build; 5’10 and a reach of only 68 inches, is against him, Dempsey says, and he has to get in close for a punch. Having no boxing skill, he is easy to hit as he wades in, Dempsey points out.”

“All in all, it is not a very complimentary picture which Dempsey paints of Marciano, but observers will agree that most of it is true.”

- Jack Dempsey
St Louis Post-Dispatch (Missouri) - Tuesday 23rd August 1955

- - Su****iously fraudulent script. Dempsey was incredibly generous in his comments on fighters and was around Rocky a lot.

[billeau2]

With all due respect billeau I think in this case it's not really debatable when you have a wild caveman like Baer which Dempsey holds higher in terms of skill than Marciano. Baer was horrendous technically and there were plenty of skilled boxer during and before his time. It looks very bad on Dempsey to make a statement like that, It's either bias, bitterness, maybe a brain issue in his later age.

Bauer was in fact a "Corrie Sanders" type... He just wasn't disciplined but had an incredible punch... Weaver another one. Mike Weaver had a natural and fluid delivery that really makes me think of Louis. So as far as hitting Maxy was excellent. It is conceviable that this is what Dempsey was impressed with. Marciano violated Dempsey's principles of punching. He did not set, or use slipping movements so much as he leapt, swung from the fences and (like Dempsey later in his career ironickly!) would set inside and simply b ang away from a crouch. Watch Dempsey versus Sharkey to see Dempsey doing a lot of things inside that he seemed not to like Marciano doing.

But I do not agree with the general tone of Dempsey's critique either. I am however sympathetic because I recognize a fellow Hopology nerd. Hopology being a term coined by Donn Draeger for the science of combat arts. Dempsey had a very specific prescription for how to throw a punch properly.

[solidman]

I think Dempsey was jealous of Marciano because Marciano retired unbeaten. He was also a white heavyweight, like himself.

[billeau2]

With all due respect billeau I think in this case it's not really debatable when you have a wild caveman like Baer which Dempsey holds higher in terms of skill than Marciano. Baer was horrendous technically and there were plenty of skilled boxer during and before his time. It looks very bad on Dempsey to make a statement like that, It's either bias, bitterness, maybe a brain issue in his later age.

Interesting aside. There was a lot of clickishness and clannishness if you want to call it that. Tunney call Dempsey the best and would downgrade other fighters. It's funny because they were all very opinionated. I do think some of it might have been the Irish angle.

The pattern that seems to be a constant though. You have Nat Fleisher downgrading Muhammad Ali. I know we also do it here in this section and I'm probably one of the most guilty of it lol.

[BKM-]

Interesting aside. There was a lot of clickishness and clannishness if you want to call it that. Tunney call Dempsey the best and would downgrade other fighters. It's funny because they were all very opinionated. I do think some of it might have been the Irish angle.

The pattern that seems to be a constant though. You have Nat Fleisher downgrading Muhammad Ali. I know we also do it here in this section and I'm probably one of the most guilty of it lol.

Understandable I guess, more so in that era. The rules of boxing had changed a lot more over those years and so did the evolving styles. Since the sport changed a lot more in those decades than for example the 90s up to the 2020s it would make highly combative and conflicting opinions more likely.

Another important issue is the fact that boxing footage was not as available back then. I mentioned earlier in this thread Muhammad Ali's comments on past champion. I actually got almost all of his opinions from a TV show he did with Cus(or some other boxing historian who was the host) where Ali actually laid his eyes on all of those boxing champions for the first time in his life So even if you were a notable figure in the sport you didn't exactly have access to a vast library of boxing footage.

Mike Tyson of course did through Cus' connections, and he did a similar tv show back then and I would say he had a very balanced and objective opinion on past champions. Another one was the late George Foreman who gave credit to pretty much everyone before him.

But today we have Mayweather Jr. who has had less flattering to say about past greats and it would seem based on his ego most of the time.

[The D3vil]

I'm not sure I see what the problem is.

He was mostly right.

Marciano was in the right place at the right time.

He got Walcott, Charles, & Moore when they were old as dirt.

He just missed prime Joe Louis & Sonny Liston & didn't stick around for Ali or Patterson.

I'd have a hard time picking Rocky Marciano over 90% of the top 20 HWs of all-time.

You think he'd beat Tyson Fury? Rid**** Bowe? Oleksandr Usyk? Ken Norton? The Klitschko Brothers?

I just don't see how he does.