Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
21 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Urban Legend
We saw what happened when he fought Willard. We know Willard was out of shape, older and rusty. But the point is that his size didn't matter to Jack.

Does Jack pull it off against the K-Bros? I actually doubt it, considering they know how to use their jabs and reach to full advantage. I don't see Jack getting close enough to Wlad to land something big enough to stop him. As for Vitali, he also had great defense like his brother but a chin of stone. Even if Jack landed a great shot, Vitali would take it right on the chin and pay him back for it.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Courtney
Jack had questionable stamina. He could go the distance but was at his peak early. Maybe in a series of fights he kayos Wladimir once early. But both brothers would use their boxing prowess to outbox him over the fight and stop him in the latter rounds. Willard was not half as good as the Klitsckos.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Zombies Ate Me
In reply to this post by Urban Legend
Urban Legend wrote

Does Jack pull it off against the K-Bros? I actually doubt it, considering they know how to use their jabs and reach to full advantage. I don't see Jack getting close enough to Wlad to land something big enough to stop him. As for Vitali, he also had great defense like his brother but a chin of stone. Even if Jack landed a great shot, Vitali would take it right on the chin and pay him back for it.
Don't count Jack out just yet. Remember he sparred with Big Bill Tate to prepare for Willard, and Tate was twice as good and skilled as Willard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvBXligl6YI

I haven't seen enough footage of Tate to see how he compares to the Klitschkos but its worth mentioning that he was a sharp big man and Dempsey did well.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Zorro
The Klitsckhos are too cautious to get beat up by Dempsey. They also edge him in stamina. Willard left one careless opening and Dempsey jumped him. You could argue that the mauler has a puncher's chance against Wlad but its a slim one. Wlad is just too careful to get in the way of Dempsey's speeding left hook. Dempsey had a great chin but both Klitsckhos would wear him down and stop him after he tires from his typical opening round blitz.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Duggerman
Administrator
It's hard to say. Seeing Wladimir get laid out by Brewster and Sanders leads me to believe that Dempsey could hurt Wlad bad if he catches him by surprise. Wlad was also briefly stunned by Alex Leapai. He got lazy for a few seconds and Leapai caught him good. There is a chance of Dempsey winning by knockout, (most likely early) but it depends on Wladimir's level of focus. If Emanuel Steward was in Wlad's corner, I don't see Dempsey winning. Without Steward around, Dempsey may capitalize on Wlad's occasional lazy mistakes. Wlad should be the favorite but Dempsey winning by knockout should not be considered an upset.

Vitali has a chin of iron. I don't see Dempsey dropping him unless maybe he lands a big folley of hooks. I'd like to see how Vitali stands up to the Dempsey Roll. But because of Vitali's chin and ability to brawl if needed, I can't favor Dempsey over him.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

RICKY TAN
In reply to this post by Urban Legend
The minute people see BIG, they want to think "Jess Willard".  The Willard comparisons aren't exactly fair to the big Russians, but it's the only comparisons we have to make, and well, good ole' Jack proved he could rough up guys their size. That's what makes a fantasy fight like this one interesting.

Jack Dempsey is one of the most over-rated and protected fighters in history. I give him some credit for his accomplishments but, when you compare him to fighters after 1930, he suffers in some glaring categories. Dempsey scored many first round KOs but people fail to note that the rules were different. There was no standing 8 count.

Dempsey refused to face the best fighters of his era, not just Black fighters but White fighters too. Harry Greb lobbied for years for a fight with Dempsey. He reportedly handled Dempsey in sparring rather easily. His style was suited to trouble Dempsey so Jack's manager politely asked Harry not to return to camp.

I can give Dempsey some credit but I can not forgive his reluctance to face the best. That would be the TRUE definition of Champion and he falls short of this, as does his over-rated contemporary, Gene Tunney.

Both were "good" champions, great for the time but their "greatness" diminishes as time progresses.

Both Vitali and Wladimir would beat Jack Dempsey. His best chance would be to score a shot against the occasionally sloppy Vitaly. Wladimir is too careful and technical for Dempsey. Jack wouldn't get the chance to land before Wladimir gets to him first. Wladimir is too skilled and there is no way he would fail to land first. I don't think Dempsey would survive.

If you could bring things closer to even, by training Dempsey by today's training and nutrition standards, he would have a better chance to capitalize on Vitali's flaws and Wladimir's caution. He would come in at about 208 and still be effective. Any higher than that and he sacrifices speed. He would still have trouble with Wladimir because Dempsey doesn't have the best foot work. His best chance would be against Vitali.

As they are, both Vitali and Wladimir would beat Dempsey. Wladimir would time Dempsey up everytime he tries to get inside. After 3 rounds, it becomes clear that Dempsey has trouble landing any telling blows. He gets caught with too many accurate punches.

Wladimir by KO in 3

Dempsey would have considerably more success against Vitali, who is rather robotic and sloppy. Vitali would not be as successful against many of the later day champions. He's tougher than Wladimir but he also possess more tactical weaknesses. His defense is sloppy at best and Dempsey gets a few good shots in, getting Vitali's attention. Vitali would not tie Demspey up as easily as Wladimir could but he'd succeed, none the less. After a few shaky moments, Vitali emerges victorious.

Vitali by TKO in 9
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Duggerman
Administrator
The Governor wrote
Dempsey scored many first round KOs but people fail to note that the rules were different. There was no standing 8 count.
That is true and I'd forgotten about that. That makes a difference. Maybe Willard would have recovered had he been given a standing 8-count after the initial knockdown. Dempsey never gave guys a chance to breathe or recover once he hurt them.

I disagree with some things though. I see Vitali doing better against Dempsey than his brother. Wlad is technically better but avoids brawls and fights backing up. This works to Dempsey's advantage, plus Wlad's chin could be cracked by an explosive slugger like Dempsey.

Vitali would stand his ground and wouldn't have to just box Dempsey with the jab and straights, but he could duke it out with him too.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Entaowed
Banned User
This post was updated on .
In reply to this post by RICKY TAN
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Friday The 13th...
The Governor wrote
Jack Dempsey is one of the most over-rated and protected fighters in history.
Jack Dempsey is my favorite boxer of all time so I hope I don't sound biased here. But he wasn't over-rated and protected. When I think of guys who are over-rated and protected I think of Mike Tyson (who fumbled each time someone wasn't scared of him and ducked most top contenders of the '90s) and Primo Carnera, who was controlled by the mob. Jack Dempsey's manager drew the colorline and that's unfortuneate. But we saw how good Jack was. He was the most exciting boxer in history up to that point. The fights with Willard and Firpo alone are ring classics and exciting to watch even today. Jack was a beast. Mike Tyson's hero!


Entaowed wrote
had damning defeats like vs. Fireman Flynn KO 1,
Jack hadn't eaten in 4 days before that fight so I don't think it's fair to hold that against him. Plus he destroyed Flynn quickly and easily in their rematches.

Entaowed wrote
So we cannot expect him to be able to win against ATGs the better part of a century later even IF he kept the work ethic of a Marciano.
Think about that for a second. IMAGINE Jack with Rocky's work ethic. Jack was already more talented than Rocky naturally but if he had Rocky's focus and determination, he would have went undefeated too.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

RICKY TAN
Friday The 13th... wrote
The Governor wrote
Jack Dempsey is one of the most over-rated and protected fighters in history.
Jack Dempsey is my favorite boxer of all time so I hope I don't sound biased here. But he wasn't over-rated and protected. When I think of guys who are over-rated and protected I think of Mike Tyson (who fumbled each time someone wasn't scared of him and ducked most top contenders of the '90s) and Primo Carnera, who was controlled by the mob. Jack Dempsey's manager drew the colorline and that's unfortuneate. But we saw how good Jack was. He was the most exciting boxer in history up to that point. The fights with Willard and Firpo alone are ring classics and exciting to watch even today. Jack was a beast. Mike Tyson's hero!



Entaowed wrote
So we cannot expect him to be able to win against ATGs the better part of a century later even IF he kept the work ethic of a Marciano.
Think about that for a second. IMAGINE Jack with Rocky's work ethic. Jack was already more talented than Rocky naturally but if he had Rocky's focus and determination, he would have went undefeated too.
I know you love Jack but the truth is the truth. He wasn't FORCED to draw the color line. Jack was racist anyway, despite using black sparring partners. Jack didn't want to give black men a shot at his title. He was a man of his time. If he really objected to Doc Kearns drawing the color line, he could have found another manager who wouldn't have.

Secondly, Jack was very exciting but a coward in some ways too. Take a look at this link about his confrontations with Harry Greb, who was a WHITE man deserving of a shot at Dempsey. Jack wanted no part of him. FACT.

http://www.harrygreb.com/dempsey_greb.html

I agree with Entaowed. Even if Jack was as hard working as Marciano someone would beat him. It's likely that prime Tunney loses to prime Dempsey, but given Dempsey's front runner attitude and crudeness, I just don't see him going undefeated. Someone would have surprised him, especially if he had given a title opportunity to all of the deserving contenders of the time.

I heard Dempsey hadn't eaten before he fought Flynn the first time, but I also heard he took a dive for more money. I'm not sure what the truth is. There's conflicting reports of that fight. But what we know for a fact is that Dempsey went down and out, and he went out surprisingly early.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Left Hook From Hell...
I've lost a lot of respect for Jack Dempsey after reading The Governor's posts.

As for him facing the current champion and his brother I pick the big guys.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Friday The 13th...
In reply to this post by RICKY TAN
Jack was as rough and tumble as it gets. He never lost a saloon fight. He proved his chin when he fought giants like Willard and Firpo. He could take a punch. Because of his aggression and toughness you gotta give him a chance against the Klitschkos.

We never saw Jack fight Harry Greb obviously, or Sam Langford. We can only speculate. But we DID see him destroy Willard. We know what Jack could do. Let's throw out the "would've, could've, should've" debates and focus on what we SAW Jack do to folks in the ring. He was one of the best ever regardless of size and the first boxer to show that a great little guy can beat a good big man.

Imagine if Jack never existed. There'd be no Tyson, Marciano, Frazier, Tua, or any of those others who were inspired by his ruthless style. Boxing would not be what it is now.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

RICKY TAN
Saloon fights are not professional fights. Its beating up drunk guys at bars. My uncle could do that. Hey I'm not knocking JD. He was the most exciting boxer of his time and packed a dynamite left hook.  But that's about it. He was overrated and protected.

Answer me this: What major accomplishments did Dempsey have? Did he have 25 title defenses? Was he champ for 11 years? Was he the youngest or oldest heavyweight champ? Did he retire undefeated? Did he fight and/or defeat ALL of the great fighters of his time? No but other boxers accomplished these things. Dempsey didn't. He was exciting I know. But that doesn't make him an atg.

Based on his refusal to fight other top guys (black AND white) and him sitting on the title for so many years I can only rate him as an atg of the cowards.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

MAGUIRE
In reply to this post by Urban Legend
The Klitschkos may be robotic but they're skilled enough to halt Dempsey in his tracks and stop him. Dempsey might get lucky and stop Wlad once in a series of three fights. He never beats Vitali though. Overall the Klitschkos are just too big and good. Dempsey would beat Primo Carnera and Buddy Baer though. The Klitsckos are just on a whole nother level.
 photo lennox-hair_3476731_GIFSoupcom_zps919d29c7.gif
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Entaowed
Banned User
This post was updated on .
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

It's Dale
Entaowed wrote
The vast majority of us overwhelmingly agree.  
but it is unreasonable to expect a much smaller ATG from close to a century ago to defeat a giant modern ATG.
That's what makes this interesting. If Jack fought today he'd be a cruiserweight. He'd have to bulk up to become a heavyweight and this might affect his speed and tenacity. It wouldn't be the Jack Dempsey of 1919 if he fought today. Willard would probably be more muscular too.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Friday The 13th...
This post was updated on .
In reply to this post by RICKY TAN
The Governor wrote
Saloon fights are not professional fights. Its beating up drunk guys at bars. My uncle could do that. Hey I'm not knocking JD. He was the most exciting boxer of his time and packed a dynamite left hook.  But that's about it. He was overrated and protected.

Answer me this: What major accomplishments did Dempsey have? Did he have 25 title defenses? Was he champ for 11 years? Was he the youngest or oldest heavyweight champ? Did he retire undefeated? Did he fight and/or defeat ALL of the great fighters of his time? No but other boxers accomplished these things. Dempsey didn't. He was exciting I know. But that doesn't make him an atg.

Based on his refusal to fight other top guys (black AND white) and him sitting on the title for so many years I can only rate him as an atg of the cowards.
Governor I applaud (some) of your comments. You're making me think here and somewhat reevaluate Dempsey. To answer your question, other than being the attraction of boxing's first million dollar gate, Dempsey had no real accomplishment.

But still. The brutal beatdown of a 6'6 1/2 heavyweight champion and having the record of the most first round kayos should be a testament of how great he was.

I agree that Dempsey should have fought more guys and been a more active heavyweight champion. All we can go by is what we saw. And we SAW what he did to Willard and Firpo. I think Dempsey lost his hunger literally. When he was a starving hobo he was knocking out everyone fast regardless of color or size. If he didn't fight he wouldn't eat. He wanted to end fights quickly. A man who's hungry will fight with aggressive desperation. Dempsey lost that after he won the title and was living wealthy.

That's why I say a peak Dempsey, maybe from 1917-1919 would give the Klitschkos or any ATG heavyweight something to think about.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Phantom Punch
Dempsey could take out anyone if he got the jump on them. He may lack major ring accomplishments but head to head he was a beast. Great left hook and offensive attacks.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Evan Fields
Phantom Punch wrote
Dempsey could take out anyone if he got the jump on them.
He couldn't take out Willard. In fact he couldn't even floor him after the first round. Willard quit on his stool.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Jack Dempsey v. The Klitschko Bros.

Duggerman
Administrator
In reply to this post by Friday The 13th...
I don't think Dempsey himself felt that he was that good. If you look online you'll find many quotes of him saying he couldn't beat so and so. In one thread here, for example, Entoawed had a quote of Dempsey saying Jim Jeffries was better and would beat him, or something along those lines.

There is info near the bottom of this page that Dempsey expressed that he was glad he never had to fight Louis. I've also read quotes where he said Marciano punched harder and a friend of his commented online once saying that Dempsey said, "I could have never beat him (Marciano)."
12