Jack Johnson or Jack Dempsey

[Barn]

Jack Johnson rates higher as a champion. He took on anyone anytime and against all odds. While, Dempsey ducked a lot of strong black contenders during his reign. However, I think if it were a head to head battle, Dempsey would take this, because his ferocious attacks would be too much for johnson to handle. Keep in mind that Jack Johnson had probably the best defensive technique in heavyweight history, so I say it will be a UD to Dempsey, simply because of the enormous number of punches he'll throw at him.

He didn't take on Prime Langford who chased him for years.

[JAB5239]

Both had tremendous physiques and conditioning. Jack Johnson was probably stronger, but Dempsey was no slouch himself. Dempsey has more speed, power, defense. Johnson had that unbearable to watch style of moving and clinching, making it very hard to hit him.

I would take Dempsey to beat him up but as far as who is greater that is just something that nobody is in a good position to answer. I think it was Dempsey, but if somebody said Jack Johnson I could not make a good argument against him in favor of the Jack that I chose.

Two all time great heavyweights.

Dempsey had more defense? I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thought that.

[Scott9945]

Dempsey had more defense? I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thought that.

I've heard it said that Johnson was the greatest defensive heavyweight champion ever.

[CarlosG815]

Dempsey had more defense? I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thought that.

That does not strengthen your argument in Johnson's defense. Nobody is an authority. To me, Dempsey was better at slipping punches and moving out of the way and counter punching.

Jack Johnson was more in the business of clinching and pulling back. He was a grappler more so than a defensive master, although I do admit his defense was his strong point.

I still think that Dempsey had a better defensive skillset.

[katjack]

Would be one of the greatest fights ever if they fought each other in their prime.

[louis54]

both were great but i like dempsey in this one as i think he would simply land alttle more than johnson and take the match, johnson could be too stiff and cautious.

[Bolo Punch]

I think Dempsey's greater. I also think H2H Dempsey wins.

[JAB5239]

That does not strengthen your argument in Johnson's defense. Nobody is an authority. To me, Dempsey was better at slipping punches and moving out of the way and counter punching.

Jack Johnson was more in the business of clinching and pulling back. He was a grappler more so than a defensive master, although I do admit his defense was his strong point.

I still think that Dempsey had a better defensive skillset.

How is nobody an authority but you have the ability to deduce Dempsey was defensively more skilled? And if you think Johnson just clinched, pulled back and grappled rhan you are woefully out of your depth here my friend.

Does this strengthen my point?

"Consider that Nat Fleischer, the founder of Ring ****zine, who saw Johnson fight and those up to the Ali era, said, in his book Black Dynamite Vol 4., p. 6), “Jack Johnson boxed on his toes, could block from most any angle, was lightning fast on his feet, could feint an opponent into knots…he possessed everything a champion could hope for punch, speed, brains, cleverness, boxing ability and sharp-shooting.”

"Fleischer also reported in 1958, that Johnson’s “mastery of ring science, his ability to block, counter, and feint, are still unexcelled.”
John Durant wrote in The Heavyweight Champions of Johnson, “He was a genius in the ring. He was a flawless boxer with an almost perfect defense, and he could hit hard with either hand. A superb counter puncher, he was never off balance, always in position to hit, and he was a master of the art of feinting."

Jack Dempsey said of Johnson, “He was the greatest catcher of punches that ever lived (glove blocker). And he could fight all night. He was a combination of Jim Corbett and Louis. I’m glad I didn’t have to fight him.”

Jack Johnson was called by veterans Nat Fleischer, Charley Rose and others as the "greatest defensive heavyweight" because of his skillful glove blocking.

Former Middleweight Champion Stanley Ketchel, who fought and lost to Johnson, agrees that Johnson was unparalleled as a defensive fighter. Writing before the Johnson-Jeffries fight in the July 2, 1910 San Francisco Chronicle Ketchel described Johnson as “clever, fast, and the best blocker the pugilistic world has ever seen.” Those who saw him always described Johnson's defensive skills in this manner.

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/heavyweightchart.html

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/johnson.html

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/boxingskill.html

[The Iron Man]

Have to agree with JAB here, Johnson was a defensive master. I also rate him above Dempsey in my ATG heavyweight list.

[The_Demon]

How is nobody an authority but you have the ability to deduce Dempsey was defensively more skilled? And if you think Johnson just clinched, pulled back and grappled rhan you are woefully out of your depth here my friend.

Does this strengthen my point?

"Consider that Nat Fleischer, the founder of Ring ****zine, who saw Johnson fight and those up to the Ali era, said, in his book Black Dynamite Vol 4., p. 6), “Jack Johnson boxed on his toes, could block from most any angle, was lightning fast on his feet, could feint an opponent into knots…he possessed everything a champion could hope for punch, speed, brains, cleverness, boxing ability and sharp-shooting.”

"Fleischer also reported in 1958, that Johnson’s “mastery of ring science, his ability to block, counter, and feint, are still unexcelled.”
John Durant wrote in The Heavyweight Champions of Johnson, “He was a genius in the ring. He was a flawless boxer with an almost perfect defense, and he could hit hard with either hand. A superb counter puncher, he was never off balance, always in position to hit, and he was a master of the art of feinting."

Jack Dempsey said of Johnson, “He was the greatest catcher of punches that ever lived (glove blocker). And he could fight all night. He was a combination of Jim Corbett and Louis. I’m glad I didn’t have to fight him.”

Jack Johnson was called by veterans Nat Fleischer, Charley Rose and others as the "greatest defensive heavyweight" because of his skillful glove blocking.

Former Middleweight Champion Stanley Ketchel, who fought and lost to Johnson, agrees that Johnson was unparalleled as a defensive fighter. Writing before the Johnson-Jeffries fight in the July 2, 1910 San Francisco Chronicle Ketchel described Johnson as “clever, fast, and the best blocker the pugilistic world has ever seen.” Those who saw him always described Johnson's defensive skills in this manner.

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/heavyweightchart.html

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/johnson.html

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/boxingskill.html

Good post,as far as who was greater,thats debatable,but Johnson was clearly the better defensive fighter,i think CarlosG needs to re-watch some footage and do some research