Jack Dempsey vs Today's Heavyweights

[Sheldon312]

Crawford, Pacqiuao & Floyd would beat any one from their weight class in Dempseys era. Does that put what I'm saying into perspective?.

What makes you think that boxing has advanced so much compared to other sports. Hell, looking at Dempsey and Tunney they are more skilled than every heavy weight in this era. Th'r defense and footwork is rare compared to what we see from today's heavyweights. Lennox was the last great heavyweight when it comes to "skills" and maybe prime Tyson.

[REMOVE SHARK 55]

What makes you think that boxing has advanced so much compared to other sports. Hell, looking at Dempsey and Tunney they are more skilled than every heavy weight in this era. Th'r defense and footwork is rare compared to what we see from today's heavyweights. Lennox was the last great heavyweight when it comes to "skills" and maybe prime Tyson.

The onus isn't on me anymore because I don't think there's much else to add. I've given my reasoning.

Every aspect of life has improved including life expectancy itself. Every sport has improved from it's invention with or without the help of technology/equipment. Can you and other nostalgic fans explain why Boxing hasn't improved over time?.

[Mr.MojoRisin']

Please embed a fight of his on here for the people to decide if he was crude compared to todays Boxers.

Dempsey would walk directly on to a right/left straight as he gets square on how many times??. At the top level in this day & age you'll get punished in any weight class unless you could transition seamlessly between stances like Terence Crawford.

Another reason why I think this is the case is simply down to evolution. Techniques get refined over time especially in sport. We're human we get smarter as time goes on. It's not some magical concept as to why I consider Dempsey crude. Countries such as the USA, Russia(Soviet) & UK have been breeding (see Olympic squad average age) for well over half a century. If you've ever worked in a company with a research & development department you'd get where I'm coming from.

We have the IPhone 7 because we had the IPhone 6. We had the IPhone 6 because we had the IPhone 5. Do you understand this analogy?. It's as layman as I'm going to get.

Dempsey would be considered crude because his techniques have been improved & refined over TIME.

He has multiple fights on youtube. If I have to post them for people that just tells me they are stuck in there ways and don't intend on changing there minds anyway.

"Dempsey would walk directly on to a right/left straight as he gets square on how many times??"

When?

I understand what your'e saying as far as "evolution" but what I am asking is, what are these more refined skills that you so talk about? What are specific things that fighters do in the ring today that are better than what they did in Dempsey's era?

I can name things they DON'T do today.

-They don't use a lot of head movement generally.
-They don't parry as much.
-They don't feint as much.
-They don't have as good of stamina anymore.
-They don't fight on the inside scientifically.
-They don't shift.

Tunney said that Dempsey was nearly impossible to hit clean. He never hit him square on the chin in two fights because Dempsey had such good defense. What do you think of that?

[Sheldon312]

The onus isn't on me anymore because I don't think there's much else to add. I've given my reasoning.

Every aspect of life has improved including life expectancy itself. Every sport has improved from it's invention with or without the help of technology/equipment. Can you and other nostalgic fans explain why Boxing hasn't improved over time?.

Ok, so Crawford > Duran
Thurman > Ray Robinson

[Mr.MojoRisin']

The onus isn't on me anymore because I don't think there's much else to add. I've given my reasoning.

Every aspect of life has improved including life expectancy itself. Every sport has improved from it's invention with or without the help of technology/equipment. Can you and other nostalgic fans explain why Boxing hasn't improved over time?.

Actually people are still suffering from famine, lack of clean drinking water, deadly illnesses (Ebola, Aids, etc), in some cases worse now than 100 years ago.

100 years ago it was much easier to rise from the lower tier of society and rise to a respectable level. Today, not so much.

The effect that colonialism has had on the world isn't a good one.

[Sheldon312]

Actually people are still suffering from famine, lack of clean drinking water, deadly illnesses (Ebola, Aids, etc), in some cases worse now than 100 years ago.

100 years ago it was much easier to rise from the lower tier of society and rise to a respectable level. Today, not so much.

The effect that colonialism has had on the world isn't a good one.

I could understand if someone used the arguement of evolution for basketball and football. I don't see how in hell you could say the same thing for boxing. Boxers back in the day just seemed more fundementally sound. I mean look at Crawford, he has skills, but would he be top 5 P4P in an era with Wilfred, Duran, Oscar, Tito, Jones, Mayweather, Prime Pac, Tszu? I think not.

[FinitoxDinamita]

Jack Dempsey wouldnt beat Toney Bellew..

[REMOVE SHARK 55]

He has multiple fights on youtube. If I have to post them for people that just tells me they are stuck in there ways and don't intend on changing there minds anyway.

"Dempsey would walk directly on to a right/left straight as he gets square on how many times??"

When?

I understand what your'e saying as far as "evolution" but what I am asking is, what are these more refined skills that you so talk about? What are specific things that fighters do in the ring today that are better than what they did in Dempsey's era?

I can name things they DON'T do today.

-They don't use a lot of head movement generally.
-They don't parry as much.
-They don't feint as much.
-They don't have as good of stamina anymore.
-They don't fight on the inside scientifically.
-They don't shift.

Regarding Dempsey being square on, it's similar to you not posting the videos. Boxing was what it was back then. Every fight I've seen contains numerous moments of him square on exchanging punches, so it would be pointless me picking just one fight.

Fighters pivot more than shift. Shifting is considered a lost art to some but rigid to others. Think of a square or circle. Shifting enables you to go left or right of the circle/square, while pivoting enables you to go round the full square/circle.

I disagree with all of your points you bullet pointed because I could assign a Boxer from the modern era who possessed better traits than any Boxers from Dempseys era. Feint, parry, head movement. This era may not do it as much but with the technique & efficiency elite Boxers throw their punches they sure as hell move their head, parry & feint better. When the talent pool isn't as good as yourself it's easy to display these 'skills' & look like a Boxing God in the process.

[Kigali]

Crawford, Pacqiuao & Floyd would beat any one from their weight class in Dempseys era. Does that put what I'm saying into perspective?.

[Kigali]

Jack Dempsey wouldnt beat Toney Bellew..