Dempsey Overrated?

[joseph5620]

Dempsey's resume is excellent. But to make a judgement of a fighter by his resume is laughable, just take a look at Ezzard Charles and Matthew Saad Muhammad's resumes which are littered with defeats. Dempsey it is known had at least 140 fights with half not recorded. He scored more first round knock outs than any fighter in boxing history. Fighters records back in those days were simply not that important, with no commission keeping log of fighters records or Ring ****zines for boxing fans to rely on. Those historians, Trainers, Reporters and boxing people from the early part of the last century, all claimed right up to their dying day that Dempsey was the greatest fighting machine ever. Right up to the 1960/70s and as late as Ray Arcel's death in 1994 their claims of him being the greatest were still spoken. Arcel is universally known as the greatest trainer of all times. training legends like Benny Leonard, Ezzard Charles, Jim Braddock, Barney Ross, Bob Olin, Tony Zale, Billy Soose, Ceferino Garcia, Lou Brouillard, Teddy Yarosz, Freddie Steele, Jackie Kid Berg, Alfonso Frazier, Abe Goldstein, Frankie Genaro, Sixto Escobar, Charley Phil Rosenberg, Roberto Durán and Larry Holmes. So for boxing fans writing here on this forum, many who have never seen a live` boxing fight in their lives. To claim all those people to be lying, wrong and not knowing what they are all talking about. is simply laughable.

We're not talking about Saad Muhammed or Charles. Nobody is calling Saad the greatest ever like you did with Dempsey.

Charles resume craps all over Dempsey's.


Tunney's comments about Holmes and Norton were idiotic. I stand by that.

[joseph5620]

claiming Gene Tunney spoke "Hyperbolic Idiotic comments" is simply laughable. Gene Tunney was a very close friend and confidant of none other than George Bernard Shaw. Tunney claimed to his final days that "Dempsey was the greatest fighter who ever lived."...it's similar to Joe Frazier claiming Muhammad Ali to be the greatest, yet you calling Frazier, "An exaggerating idiot".

Joe Frazier never claimed Ali was the greatest. That's just another one of your typical lies.

[Scott9945]

Joe Frazier never claimed Ali was the greatest. That's just another one of your typical lies.

Even if he did, it's typical for a fighter would want to enhance his best win by flattering his opponent. If Tunney had said that Dempsey was crap, what would that say about his biggest career win?

[sonnyboyx2]

We're not talking about Saad Muhammed or Charles. Nobody is calling Saad the greatest ever like you did with Dempsey.

Charles resume craps all over Dempsey's.


Tunney's comments about Holmes and Norton were idiotic. I stand by that.

So Gene Tunney who twice fought and defeated an old Jack Dempsey, who sat ringside at Holmes vs Norton and when asked his opinion was in your view talking like an idiot?... Tunney who fought Dempsey as well as Harry Grebb on no less than five occasions, was in your opinion an exaggerating idiot who was wrong?...i am calling Dempsey the greatest because that is my opinion and i am entitled to my opinion. Tunney is calling Dempsey the "Greatest of all time" as that his his opinion and him being in such a position of actually seeing all World Heavyweight Champions right up to 1976 and knowing the sport like he did, would have a very valid opinion to give. Yet you who most likely have never seen any Heavyweight boxer in your entire life, calls the great Gene Tunney an idiot. Gene Tunney a man known for his "Intelligence" was in your eyes "A Hyperbolic Idiot"...well what can i say. How on earth can you ever be taken seriously. It is clear your knowledge of this sport is very limited, your objective on this forum is and always has been to Troll. Otherwise you would not have made these posts calling Heavyweight great Gene Tunney an idiot. Once again, just like you did in the past you are calling and rubbishing All time great fighters as idiots and rubbishing their achievements. The sooner you are taken to task by the moderators the better.

[billeau2]

Even if he did, it's typical for a fighter would want to enhance his best win by flattering his opponent. If Tunney had said that Dempsey was crap, what would that say about his biggest career win?

What you guys are missing here is actual information there is proof of. Tunney lived to a ripe old age and was very well known. It is common knowledge that psychologically he was a certain type of individual. Some people are Brian Williams types and tell you they were shot down in helicopters, others just don't fit that profile.

Also yu have trainers all the way up to the seventies weighing in.

These instances are anecdotal but they are proof. To compare Dempsey to Gatti is ridiculous....I won't even respond to that idiocy but you didn't say that and seemed not as eager to ride the short bus on this one... i.e. yeah fighters might want to enhance, but even if that were so, there is other proof including guys who actually saw a lot of the heavyweights fight during several generations of gifted fighters.

[sonnyboyx2]

Even if he did, it's typical for a fighter would want to enhance his best win by flattering his opponent. If Tunney had said that Dempsey was crap, what would that say about his biggest career win?

Sam Langford who never fought Dempsey said,"Dempsey was the greatest fighter he ever seen in his life".. Langford & Tunney a pair of "Hyperbolic Idiots"

Well it seems i have been proven correct with the proof here for all to see. i made the claim only a couple of weeks ago, that Joseph & Scott their sole mission on this forum was to "Rubbish the careers & accomplishments of most legendary all time great fighters"... Gene Tunney, along with Sam Langford, Ray Arcel and every boxing historian in history are all wrong, and a bunch of "Hyperbolic Idiots". because Joseph & Scott are "standing by what they said". FFS

[sonnyboyx2]

What you guys are missing here is actual information there is proof of. Tunney lived to a ripe old age and was very well known. It is common knowledge that psychologically he was a certain type of individual. Some people are Brian Williams types and tell you they were shot down in helicopters, others just don't fit that profile.

Also yu have trainers all the way up to the seventies weighing in.

These instances are anecdotal but they are proof. To compare Dempsey to Gatti is ridiculous....I won't even respond to that idiocy but you didn't say that and seemed not as eager to ride the short bus on this one... i.e. yeah fighters might want to enhance, but even if that were so, there is other proof including guys who actually saw a lot of the heavyweights fight during several generations of gifted fighters.

Thankyou Bill.. i couldn't have said it better.

[billeau2]

I see a lot of hypotheticals and what if's but the bottom line is that Dempsey's resume doesn't match up to the hyperbolic idiotic comments from Gene Tunney.

I know what I see when I look at films of his fights and I know what I'm reading when I see his resume doesn't match his hype. I don't need to just rely on another person's opinion when there are resources to find them on my own.

If Floyd Mayweather or Larry Holmes had a resume like Dempsey's they wouldn't even be mentioned as an all time great.

No disresrespect but lets be clear. What you hear is anecdotal evidence. It comes from people who in many cases are expert trainers who had worked with fighters...depending from Jack Johnon up to Dempsey and, from Dempsey to Holmes...speaking roughly with respect to range. There is nothing hypothetical about this and none of these men (save Tunney) have any reason motivating them to praise 'Dempsey as the best.

The resume point is valid, It might actually be why Dempsey does not get mentioned like Louis and Ali....thats conjecture on my part. Tyson also runs into this problem. he is often spoken of as being incredible in his prime, but his resume makes it prohibitive at times compared to others with similar level skills. But resume is one of many categories, it is not a final say in the matter.

[joseph5620]

No disresrespect but lets be clear. What you hear is anecdotal evidence. It comes from people who in many cases are expert trainers who had worked with fighters...depending from Jack Johnon up to Dempsey and, from Dempsey to Holmes...speaking roughly with respect to range. There is nothing hypothetical about this and none of these men (save Tunney) have any reason motivating them to praise 'Dempsey as the best.

The resume point is valid, It might actually be why Dempsey does not get mentioned like Louis and Ali....thats conjecture on my part. Tyson also runs into this problem. he is often spoken of as being incredible in his prime, but his resume makes it prohibitive at times compared to others with similar level skills. But resume is one of many categories, it is not a final say in the matter.

In most cases, resume plays a big part for me. Which is why I am quick to point it out with fighters like Tyson or Dempsey. I can't go by what if, hypotheticals, or biased opinions.

Someone can overrate these fighters until they turn blue in the face. I can only go by what they actually did in their career.

In the case of Dempsey, five title defenses in seven years leaves him nowhere near a greatest of all time discussion.

Arcel or whoever else can offer their opinions but unless Dempsey actually rolled through every fighter in the history of the division, they have nothing factual to make me believe it.


Tunney has plenty of reasons to overrate Dempsey because it makes his career look better. I'm not buying that Tunney was so modest that he would never do that.

Most boxer's and athletes are competitive by nature when it comes to their careers. They might try to hide it but it always slips out.

[joseph5620]

Sam Langford who never fought Dempsey said,"Dempsey was the greatest fighter he ever seen in his life".. Langford & Tunney a pair of "Hyperbolic Idiots"

Well it seems i have been proven correct with the proof here for all to see. i made the claim only a couple of weeks ago, that Joseph & Scott their sole mission on this forum was to "Rubbish the careers & accomplishments of most legendary all time great fighters"... Gene Tunney, along with Sam Langford, Ray Arcel and every boxing historian in history are all wrong, and a bunch of "Hyperbolic Idiots". because Joseph & Scott are "standing by what they said". FFS

You should shut the hell up with this transparent agenda of yours. Why don't you debate like a man without whining like a prissy little girl whenever your opinions are challenged.

Yes, I sure do stand by my comments. Tunney downplayed Holmes and Norton as easy first round knockouts for Dempsey. Idiotic and hyperbolic.

Better yet, find a quote where Frazier called Ali the greatest fighter ever. Link please. Frazier hated Ali after their fights and the two made peace not too long before Fraziers death. Bring it.