Is Dempsey Overrated? Is his ATG status questionable

[LimeSucker]

Probably the best in his day...but by modern standards I doubt he would even get past Carlos Takam

[GhostofDempsey]

Im not making an argument against his ATG status. Im just considering the argument against his ATG status. If it doesnt work as an argument against his ATG status, then what are the implications? Do the points considered against him knock him down out of a top five HW champs list for example?

His wraps were never plastered against Willard, that has been argued and proven. Willard had a man in Dempsey's corner for the hand wrapping and walked Dempsey down to the ring to make sure gloves were not tampered with. Same with Willard. A guy by the name of Walter Monaghan stood over Dempsey while his hands were wrapped, he was from Willard's corner. Neither man had any illegal tape, metal bolts or plaster in their gloves.

There was such a thing as insulation tape used in the early 1900s, but it was not prohibited at that time, anyone could use it legally. However, there is no mention of either man using this tape and each man had a rep in the other man's locker room during taping and walking to the ring.

Dempsey haters get shook because he destroyed the guy who KO'd their hero Johnson. Made it look easy.

To say that Tunney was past his prime when they fought is a non-sequitur, Dempsey was two years older than Tunney. The long count cost him a win over one of the best fighters of his era.

Harry Wills ducked Tunney for a shot at Dempsey. A contract was also made for Dempsey/Wills, but the money never came through. He was given a bad check which wouldn't clear the bank, and when the money could not be produced to secure the fight Dempsey told them to take a walk. Wills was big and slow, tailor made for Dempsey. Wills already lost to Sharkey. Dempsey would have made easy work of Wills.

I started a thread that discusses Jack Johnson, and how he has long been overrated by media and romanticized by boxing fans, insiders and historians. Johnson was a good fighter for his time, but I wouldn't go so far as to call him the best of his era. That distinction belongs to Sam Langford. Even though Langford lost to Johnson, he was still on his way up and was refused a rematch, especially after Johnson drew the color line while champion and refused to fight any black fighters including Langford, MeVey, Jeanette, Blackburn, Wills, etc. Johnson also feasted on middle-weights for most of his career. He was considerably larger and stronger than his opponents. So if anyone was overrated or should have their ATG status questioned it is Johnson.

[Anthony342]

Dempsey was one of the toughest men to ever shít through a meat ăsshole, son.

This is my pick for "Line of the Day".

Although if you make it "through a meat hole" that would make it an even better line haha.

[HOUDINI563]

Johnson was one of boxing’s greatest classic boxers. He was used to fighting hwts who came to him. His ability to totally control these type fighters both in close and at distance was second to none. More than likely Johnson beats Dempsey via decision by shutting down Dempsey’s inside game.

No hwt champion is considered an ATG that isn’t an ATG. Johnson checks all the boxes.

[gurhar123]

ATG status has as much to do with what an athlete brings to the sport, as it has to do with actual ability. And there's no getting around the fact, that Dempsey is one of the most iconic boxers ever... like Sullivan before him and Louis after him.

So, yes... Dempsey is definitely/undeniably an ATG!


Whether he's one of the BEST fighters ever, is an entirely different discussion.

That might be the relevant distinction here actually. ATG vs. One of the P4P Best ever.

[gurhar123]

His wraps were never plastered against Willard, that has been argued and proven. Willard had a man in Dempsey's corner for the hand wrapping and walked Dempsey down to the ring to make sure gloves were not tampered with. Same with Willard. A guy by the name of Walter Monaghan stood over Dempsey while his hands were wrapped, he was from Willard's corner. Neither man had any illegal tape, metal bolts or plaster in their gloves.

There was such a thing as insulation tape used in the early 1900s, but it was not prohibited at that time, anyone could use it legally. However, there is no mention of either man using this tape and each man had a rep in the other man's locker room during taping and walking to the ring.

Dempsey haters get shook because he destroyed the guy who KO'd their hero Johnson. Made it look easy.

To say that Tunney was past his prime when they fought is a non-sequitur, Dempsey was two years older than Tunney. The long count cost him a win over one of the best fighters of his era.

Harry Wills ducked Tunney for a shot at Dempsey. A contract was also made for Dempsey/Wills, but the money never came through. He was given a bad check which wouldn't clear the bank, and when the money could not be produced to secure the fight Dempsey told them to take a walk. Wills was big and slow, tailor made for Dempsey. Wills already lost to Sharkey. Dempsey would have made easy work of Wills.

I started a thread that discusses Jack Johnson, and how he has long been overrated by media and romanticized by boxing fans, insiders and historians. Johnson was a good fighter for his time, but I wouldn't go so far as to call him the best of his era. That distinction belongs to Sam Langford. Even though Langford lost to Johnson, he was still on his way up and was refused a rematch, especially after Johnson drew the color line while champion and refused to fight any black fighters including Langford, MeVey, Jeanette, Blackburn, Wills, etc. Johnson also feasted on middle-weights for most of his career. He was considerably larger and stronger than his opponents. So if anyone was overrated or should have their ATG status questioned it is Johnson.

Firstly, in my original post I said that Dempsey was past his prime against Tunney, as a point in Dempsey's favor, for the argument that Dempsey deserves top level ATG status.

Secondly, both Johnson and Dempsey could be overrated. Johnson being overrated might affect Dempsey's atg status, since you could count that as a knock against Willard, who beat Johnson, and in turn a knock against one of Dempsey's biggest wins.

However, Im not sure thats a great argument.

I think that I might have not been entirely clear in my original post. I think the question should be: does Dempsey deserve a spot higher or lower on a P4P list, or best heavyweights ever list?

I am not trying to diminish his obvious greatness, just questioning the degree in which he is praised as one of the top P4P or best heavyweights ever. Looking at the evidence for and against, and then asking what you guys think.

[GhostofDempsey]

Firstly, in my original post I said that Dempsey was past his prime against Tunney, as a point in Dempsey's favor, for the argument that Dempsey deserves top level ATG status.

Secondly, both Johnson and Dempsey could be overrated. Johnson being overrated might affect Dempsey's atg status, since you could count that as a knock against Willard, who beat Johnson, and in turn a knock against one of Dempsey's biggest wins.

However, Im not sure thats a great argument.

I think that I might have not been entirely clear in my original post. I think the question should be: does Dempsey deserve a spot higher or lower on a P4P list, or best heavyweights ever list?

I am not trying to diminish his obvious greatness, just questioning the degree in which he is praised as one of the top P4P or best heavyweights ever. Looking at the evidence for and against, and then asking what you guys think.

Your question is subjective. P4P lists are opinionated. So whose opinion holds more weight when it is all said and done? One fan/historian/fighter might rank Dempsey in the top 5, another might not rank him in the top 10 at all. Nat Fleischer, Bert Sugar, ESPN, Ring, Sports Illustrated...none of them are the end all, be all on boxing and where particular fighters rank in history.

Another aspect to P4P rankings is how would the fighter actually carry his strengths, weaknesses and skills across the board among HWs of other eras. Resume doesn't tell the whole story. Some names in boxing were built on the popularity of who they fought. A lot of Ali's opponents weren't all that great, but their status was elevated to promote those fights.

Holmes resume isn't chock full of ATGs, but he passes the eyeball test. If we put Larry Holmes in any era of HWs he would likely still be a champion at some point, despite not having that big signature win or impressive resume.

By today's standards, Dempsey is a LHW or CW. Given his skills, and in a P4P match-up, he would destroy every HW in this current era. Though that probably speaks more to the weakness of this current crop of HWs. Still, Dempsey would be competitive in any P4P HW match up, and to me deserves to be in the top 5 P4P HW rankings. Notice I said, HW, not overall P4P, there is a distinction.

My apologies for being salty with you in my opening post.

[Bundana]

By today's standards, Dempsey is a LHW or CW. Given his skills, and in a P4P match-up, he would destroy every HW in this current era. Though that probably speaks more to the weakness of this current crop of HWs. Still, Dempsey would be competitive in any P4P HW match up, and to me deserves to be in the top 5 P4P HW rankings. Notice I said, HW, not overall P4P, there is a distinction.

That's an interesting thought: A P4P ranking of the HW champions. I don't think, I've ever seen someone attempt this!

Who do you think should be in the Top-5 on such a list?

[GhostofDempsey]

That's an interesting thought: A P4P ranking of the HW champions. I don't think, I've ever seen someone attempt this!

Who do you think should be in the Top-5 on such a list?

As P4P HW, in no particular order I would say:

Louis
Dempsey
Charles
Langford
Liston

Like I said, they are opinionated.

[Bundana]

As P4P HW, in no particular order I would say:

Louis
Dempsey
Charles
Langford
Liston

Like I said, they are opinionated.

If we make all heavyweights the same size (weight), and aim for, say, 200lbs (a nice round figure), then:

Louis will remain unchanged.
Liston will have to be shrunk a little.
Dempsey must be enlarged a little…
while Langford and Charles need to be enlarged a bit more.

Because of his size, I normally wouldn't even think of Langford as a Top-10 heavyweight - but the thought of a prime 26-27 year old (where he in real life weighed around 165lbs) Langford enlarged to a trim 200lbs, is almost scary!

Your top-5 makes a lot of sense... though I would personally put in Ali instead of Charles. After all, he was about the same weight as Liston in the real world, and would therefore "suffer" the same amount of shrinkage.

Anyway, a fun way to think about the heavyweights.