Who would win between Jack Dempsey and Vitali Klitschko

[bklynboy]

People here championing Vitali's chin...

when has it really been tested???

It was tested by LL who landed some real shots and VK took it well. I think VK's resume sucks but I think it's fair to say that he can take some good shots. (I'm not saying he can drop his gloves and tell Ernie Shavers to unload on him - but then who can?)

[bklynboy]

why on earth is this even being brought up?

dempsey is not flooring klitschko, cliff. christ almighty. vitali klitschko is about as durable a HW as we've seen. he is 250 lbs in supreme shape. you've seen the lewis fight. his chin is unreal. it's his eyes and body (hands, shoulders, back, and knee,) you've got to worry about, not his chin. he isn't getting dropped by jack f#cking dempsey. vitali has been down once in his fighting career, if my stats are correct. that was in a full contact kickboxing match, and it was a heelkick to the head. i cannot even picture him taking a count.


dempsey gets close and vitali d****s a shoulder on him. do you have any idea how easily a 6'8", 250 lb man could tie a 185 lb man up with a tiny little glove with an independent thumb? you know how much wrestling they used to allow. dempsey would gas from that in four rounds.

if he can't get close, dempsey is getting heavy hands put on him by a gigantic man for 12 rounds, and slowing down over the course of the fight the way any other human would.

dempsey would be absolutely exhausted if he got close. he'd get tied up and walked to the ropes easily. you're talking about a difference of half a foot in height, and more than 60 lbs of bone and muscle. yes willard was that big, but he was f#cking jess willard. he couldn't keep dempsey away, or tie him up when he got close. willard was big and brave, yes, but a dismal talent with very little boxing ability. a healthy vitali is one of the better ring generals in the last 10 years.


in short, there's no way dempsey keeps his hands free in close, and there's no way he wins on the outside.

there's no way he wins in any era.

I think a Dempsey or a Tyson can floor anyone. Your brain is not better able to handle the impact as you get bigger. The fact that Dempsey was able to so easily brutalize Willard shows that he can floor Klitschko. The point of contention is: "Is Dempsey a good enough fighter to hit Klitschko and not be hit in return.

The edge has to go to VK here. Vitali, of course, is going to try to grab Dempsey, lean on him and manhandle him. But I'm certain Dempsey can KO VK if he gets inside the jab and gets clean shots off.

[rightsideup]

Interesting thread we are comparing two men almost 100 yrs apart in terms of peak fighting ability. On one hand we have a 190 pound man who traditionally fought better against big men and had more trouble with smaller clever boxer's. I am going to go against my better judgement and pick the smaller faster puncher from the golden age of boxing.

[louis54]

the great dempsey would end up clobbering klit. size is great but talent and guts are everything, along with conditioning. klit seems to be a good guy but will be outclassed

[Ben Bolt]

I believe 2012 Olympic 100 meters champ Usain Bolt (9.6 sec) would outclass 1920 Olympic 100 meters champ Charley Paddock (10.6 sec).

I believe 2013 NHL champs Chicago Black Hawks would score a 75-0 victory over 1923 NHL champs Ottawa Senators.

I believe any version of 2013 Klitschko would destroy 1923 Jack Dempsey.

Still, nothing can take away, that Paddock, Senators and Dempsey were the greatest of their time.

[bklynboy]

I believe 2012 Olympic 100 meters champ Usain Bolt (9.6 sec) would outclass 1920 Olympic 100 meters champ Charley Paddock (10.6 sec).

I believe 2013 NHL champs Chicago Black Hawks would score a 75-0 victory over 1923 NHL champs Ottawa Senators.

I believe any version of 2013 Klitschko would destroy 1923 Jack Dempsey.

Still, nothing can take away, that Paddock, Senators and Dempsey were the greatest of their time.

Your example would make sense if-and-only-if the best athletes of the time were represented in the 1920 Olympics. They weren't. I bet there were many people in the US, Jamaica, Morocco and other places who would have run faster than the then current Olympic champion. It would make more sense to compare the best of today's Ivy League athletes (those without athletic scholarships) with the Olympic champions of the pre-WWII era.

Today, 2013, the best runners in the world most probably compete in the Olympics. In 1920 that was not the case. The Olympics didn't really begin to be a "big" deal with governments until the 1950s when the USSR wanted to show the superiority of the Soviet system.

For god's sake Cassius Clay (Mohammad Ali) almost didn't make the
Olympics due to lack of funds.

Going back to your example - I'm sure there were many, many, many Kenyans and Ethiopians in 1920 who could have easily beaten the Olympian marathon champion. I'm sure there were Jamaicans who could have beaten the 100 meter dash champion. The only thing is they didn't know about the Olympics; didn't have the money to go there; had no incentive (ie money or fame) to go there; and no one else thought about looking around for great athletes in Kenya or Ethiopia or Jamaica.

[Cardinal Buck]

People here championing Vitali's chin...

when has it really been tested???

You have no idea how hard Corrie Sanders could punch.

[bklynboy]

Re the hockey champions. Again you can't compare the two. There was little financial reward to be a professional hockey player and second hockey is not a fighting art. ( no pun intended ) The sport had to be learned and developed.

Fighting has always been around. Boxing is not simply fighting (it's a sport, there are rules: no elbows, no head butts, no back-fists, no open-hand strikes; no grabbing, no hitting below the belt, no kicking, etc...) Of course the sport has evolved as has the referring and judging but many things related to fighting remain the same whether it's boxing or London Prize Rules or Muay Thai. Knowing how to throw a punch is one of them. Hooks, jabs, crosses have been around since forever.

The Ali rope-a-dope is particular to boxing. A Muay Thai boxer faced with Ali doing the rope-a-dope would have kicked his knees, swept him, and done some serious f**king damage. But Ali was a boxer facing a boxer.

Dempsey was a boxer. If he was able to hit Klitschko he would destroy him the same way he destroyed Willard. However I think that Klitschko would be able tie him up and push him off. I also think that VK's jab is good enough to put some punishment on Dempsey as he tried to get in. All-in-all VK has to be given the advantage here - but to think that Dempsey couldn't hurt VK if he hit him is crazy.

[GeneralZod]

Re the hockey champions. Again you can't compare the two. There was little financial reward to be a professional hockey player and second hockey is not a fighting art. ( no pun intended ) The sport had to be learned and developed.

Fighting has always been around. Boxing is not simply fighting (it's a sport, there are rules: no elbows, no head butts, no back-fists, no open-hand strikes; no grabbing, no hitting below the belt, no kicking, etc...) Of course the sport has evolved as has the referring and judging but many things related to fighting remain the same whether it's boxing or London Prize Rules or Muay Thai. Knowing how to throw a punch is one of them. Hooks, jabs, crosses have been around since forever.

The Ali rope-a-dope is particular to boxing. A Muay Thai boxer faced with Ali doing the rope-a-dope would have kicked his knees, swept him, and done some serious f**king damage. But Ali was a boxer facing a boxer.

Dempsey was a boxer. If he was able to hit Klitschko he would destroy him the same way he destroyed Willard. However I think that Klitschko would be able tie him up and push him off. I also think that VK's jab is good enough to put some punishment on Dempsey as he tried to get in. All-in-all VK has to be given the advantage here - but to think that Dempsey couldn't hurt VK if he hit him is crazy.

Well no one in the right mind would do anything that ****** in a Muay Thai fight.

[bklynboy]

Well no one in the right mind would do anything that ****** in a Muay Thai fight.

No. No one would.

I just pointed it out to separate the fighting skills from the sport of boxing. The sport has evolved from the 1920s to today but how much has to do with the sport being "legitimized"; with it being on TV; with the public's (the non-fan) distaste of violence and blood; and with everyone's clear understanding that even the best defensive fighters often suffer from dementia and other related diseases.

The fighting skills - slipping and parrying punches, jabs, hooks - have been around since before Plato and Aristotle's grand-parents were around.

Would Martinez be able to take on Harry Greb in 1919? Would Harry Greb, if he fought now, manage to make it through the third round before getting disqualified?