Bottom 10 Heavyweight Champions

[Dempsey-Louis]

[HOUDINI563]

The films clearly show the first two body blows. Both obviously not low but on the beltline. The third you can't see. However these were three rapidly thrown body blows one after the other. There is no indication that the third body blow was any different from the first two. One must read all the evidence. The ref DID SAY there was a right hand by Dempsey earlier in round seven that accidentally hit Sharkey low. Had nothing to do with the three uppercuts to the body that preceded the KO blow. Further several days after the fight Richard screened the film at Yankee stadium for reporters. From that screening headlines the next day read "Film of fight shows body blows were legal".

[Dempsey-Louis]

You sure you want to argue about this? It may get out of hand.

[Dempsey-Louis]

Uh! Sharkey-Dempsey: Jimmy Braddock fought on the under card, a six round UD over George LaRocco whoever he was.

[HOUDINI563]

No argument. The punches, at least two of three, are clearly not low. There is no evidence I can see that indicates the third body blow was any different from the first two.

The ref indicated Sharkey wore his trunks high making bodyblows appear lower then they actually were. There was also talk that there was a concern Sharkey would pull low blow claim prior to the fight. Sharkey, it appeared, had a history of such claims.

The doctor assigned to the bout examined Sharkey afterwards and found no evidence of a low blow.

Have to be careful concerning the refs comments. He clearly stated BOTH fighters were throwing low blows but nothing purposeful. He stated Sharkey nor his corner complained about low blows during the fight. He stated Dempsey DID land a low blow earlier in round seven but this was not the three blows in question. This low blow glanced off Sharkeys arm and landed on his leg. A glancing and unintended blow.

Bottom line it was not ever decided back in 1927 that those blows were indeed low. Close scrutiny of a clear version of the film shows quite clearly these were not punches to Sharkeys balls as some have claimed. They were beltline very hard consecutive body blows. As Sharkey stated years later:

"I never thought anyone could hit that hard". Continuing...."when Dempsey hit you to the body it felt as if his fist came out your back"

[OctoberRed]

No argument. The punches, at least two of three, are clearly not low. There is no evidence I can see that indicates the third body blow was any different from the first two.

The ref indicated Sharkey wore his trunks high making bodyblows appear lower then they actually were. There was also talk that there was a concern Sharkey would pull low blow claim prior to the fight. Sharkey, it appeared, had a history of such claims.

The doctor assigned to the bout examined Sharkey afterwards and found no evidence of a low blow.

Have to be careful concerning the refs comments. He clearly stated BOTH fighters were throwing low blows but nothing purposeful. He stated Sharkey nor his corner complained about low blows during the fight. He stated Dempsey DID land a low blow earlier in round seven but this was not the three blows in question. This low blow glanced off Sharkeys arm and landed on his leg. A glancing and unintended blow.

Bottom line it was not ever decided back in 1927 that those blows were indeed low. Close scrutiny of a clear version of the film shows quite clearly these were not punches to Sharkeys balls as some have claimed. They were beltline very hard consecutive body blows. As Sharkey stated years later:

"I never thought anyone could hit that hard". Continuing...."when Dempsey hit you to the body it felt as if his fist came out your back"

Sounds like the body attack of a prime Chavez Sr. Not that many sound body hitters these days.

[The Old LefHook]

Would a lot of people vote for Charles Martin as the absolute historical nadir of the so-called heavyweight championship? In other words, is any so-called champion worse that ever was?