Could Jack Dempsey Knock Out Sonny Liston?

[Hydraulix]

Is this possible? This is a hard fight to call. Sonny was so strong and could very possibly make quick work of Dempsey.

But on the other hand, Dempsey could easily make Sonny miss his blows by bobbing and weaving, and hurt the 'Big Ugly Bear' with thunderous shots to the body. Jack would also smash him with that hard left hook or pulverizing right hand.

Tough one to call, but I can guarantee that someone would get knocked out in this fight. Could Dempsey pull it off?

[McGrain]

I pick Liston, I don't like Jack's chances in this fight, but absolutely it could happen. Dempsey could knock almost anybody out.

[Muchmoore]

Unlikely. Dempsey would make things interesting as he is one of the greatest punchers ever, but Liston's jab would dominate and I'd favor Liston in a slugfest agaisnt a guy 20 pounds lighter. Dempsey definitly could KO Liston though, he's one of the three best punchers ever along with Louis, and Tyson. I think Liston by clear but tough UD.

[TheIronMan]

If the question is did he have the power or ability to knock out Liston then i would say yes.
As for a H2H, it would be a very tough fight for Dempsey but he was very good at avoiding shots (using the famous dempsey roll) so i would definatley give him a chance.

[Vanboxingfan]

There's a big difference between whether Dempsey could knock out Liston and whether or not he would. He most certain "could" knock him out, whether or not he would is debatable.

[biglads]

Of course Dempsey *could* knock out Liston, he was a ferocious puncher. I'd give Dempsey no more than a 1 in 4 or 5 chance of actually doing it in a matchup with Liston. Liston would control the outside with a heavy jab and make Jack pay too heavily when trying to get inside.

Liston TKO5 Dempsey. The ref stops it with Dempsey on his feet but getting a nasty beating.

[PowerPuncher]

Not if Listons actually trying to fight back

[Duodenum]

Whitehurst, Machen and Martin all proved that a heavyweight of Dempsey's size could compete with Liston. Jack hit harder than all three combined. Even in Sonny's title winning blowout of Patterson, Floyd had some fleeting success ducking under some shots in the opening moments.

On the inside, Machen was able to spin Liston around and rough him up a bit. Whitehurst demonstrated in their rematch that Sonny was not an infallible finisher when he had his man hurt. If stunned, Dempsey was far more dangerous.

Jack had the speed to nail him, the power to hurt him, the elusiveness to make him miss, and the toughness to withstand his attack. "These big slow guys are easy meat for me."

[OuterDrake]

Dempsey would have to train for Liston's era.

Dempsey was a brawler, he would have gotten out witted with Liston.

[janitor]

Dempsey is a serious issue for anybody willing to stand in front of him.

I dont think that anybody in history would be much better than even money against him in this scenario.

[he grant]

Machen boxed Sonny ... Dempsey could not ... I think Sonny flattens him early ... bad style match up for Jack ...

[rm36]

I think it depends on whether or not Sonny could weather Jack's early assault. Dempsey would likely edge the early rounds, but I think Sonny's got more than enough fire power and game on the inside to match Jack. It's not at all a sure thing. We tend to look at Sonny as almost invincible due to the aura surrounding him, but he could be hurt by a game fighter. I just think it's a bad style match-up for Jack, and I would favor Liston to get to him towards the middle rounds.

[Hank]

Liston was more hype than anything else, Dempsey would tear him up. Marty Marshall, a light heavy, broke Liston' s jaw in one fight, (win over liston) floored him in another. (loss to Liston)

[TheGreatA]

Liston was more hype than anything else, Dempsey would tear him up. Marty Marshall, a light heavy, broke Liston' s jaw in one fight, (win over liston) floored him in another. (loss to Liston)

And Dempsey got knocked out in one by Fireman Flynn.

[Bummy Davis]

I rate Dempsey higher than Liston but head to head it would not be an easy fight , then again it would not be an easy fight for Sonny.Dempsey had power and fast hands. This one is a KNockout for sure but Dempsey could score a KO

[Hydraulix]

And Dempsey got knocked out in one by Fireman Flynn.

I heard that Dempsey hadn't eaten in 4 days when he fought that fight. But I don't know how true that is. :?

[Longhhorn71]

And Dempsey got knocked out in one by Fireman Flynn.

I remember Ali standing over Liston yelling at him to get up and fight in a bout that ended in one round too.

[mcvey]

Dempsey would have to train for Liston's era.

Dempsey was a brawler, he would have gotten out witted with Liston.
Well , I feel Dempsey was a better all round ring mechanic than Liston he was quicker ,with his hands and feet, more elusive with his body and head ,and threw shorter punches ,I dont see your view at all here.

[DamonD]

Hell yes.

Whether he actually would be able to land those shots is another issue, but definitely he could knock out Liston given the chance.

[TheGreatA]

I heard that Dempsey hadn't eaten in 4 days when he fought that fight. But I don't know how true that is. :?

Not true according to the newspaper articles which were posted here earlier.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

I remember Ali standing over Liston yelling at him to get up and fight in a bout that ended in one round too.

I'd rather be KO'd by arguably the greatest heavyweight of all time than a journeyman.

The point is that if you're going to start digging up Liston's early career losses (his 8th bout against Marty Marshall) then it's fair game to point out Dempsey's struggles as well.

[GPater11093]

Dempsey is a serious issue for anybody willing to stand in front of him.

I dont think that anybody in history would be much better than even money against him in this scenario.

no doubting that. But it is a bad stylisitc match up for Dempsey. The swarmer vs the slugger

(obviously both guys are very skilled but at the top level that is there styles)

[spittle8]

He COULD KO Liston, by all means, but unless he gets past the jab I think he'll be fucked up. Stopped on cuts perhaps. If it gets wild I think he can Firpo his way to hurting Liston, honestly. If Liston stays away and jabs jabs jabs and throws straight punches, Dempsey might be poleaxed or perhaps he'll spirit himself past the jabs and get to Liston.

I can't really say. If it's an old Dempsey, I'd favor Liston massively. If it's a young, prime, HUNGRY Dempsey, I wouldn't bet. If I had to, I'd always favor Liston. Stylistically this isn't good for Jack

Unlikely. Dempsey would make things interesting as he is one of the greatest punchers ever, but Liston's jab would dominate and I'd favor Liston in a slugfest agaisnt a guy 20 pounds lighter. Dempsey definitly could KO Liston though, he's one of the three best punchers ever along with Louis, and Tyson. I think Liston by clear but tough UD.
Pretty much my thoughts.

[kolcade4]

I rate Dempsey higher than Liston but head to head it would not be an easy fight , then again it would not be an easy fight for Sonny.Dempsey had power and fast hands. This one is a KNockout for sure but Dempsey could score a KO
Bummy, why dont you have an avatar for yourself ? Just curious.

[Hydraulix]

I heard that Dempsey hadn't eaten in 4 days when he fought that fight. But I don't know how true that is. :?

Not true according to the newspaper articles which were posted here earlier.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]




Thanx for that. Bert Sugar was the one who said that Dempsey hadn't eaten in 4 days, which is why he was so easily knocked out. :patsch

[Bokaj]

For me, the crucial thing is that Dempsey never defeated an opponent that was even close to ATG standard in convincing fashion. The best man he beat was Sharkey, and that was under somewhat controversial circumstances after being outboxed. The guys that Dempsey fought were in general quite crude compared to the opponents Liston made his name on. I mean, compare Firpo to Williams. Williams was never known for any outstanding skill, but compared to Firpo he comes off as a prime Duran or even better.

We know that Liston easily defeated an opponent that wasn't too dissimilar to Dempsey, but Dempsey never got tested by anything like Liston. It certainly takes a leap off faith to say that Dempsey could defeat that caliber of opponent.

[Bokaj]

Thanx for that. Bert Sugar was the one who said that Dempsey hadn't eaten in 4 days, which is why he was so easily knocked out. :patsch

A perfect illustration as to why what the "experts" says about Dempsey should be taken with a grain of salt. It also undermines Sugar's standing as a historian. What legit historian would go public with a claim like that when it's contradicted in contemprorary newspaper reports that are easy to find?

[Bokaj]

Liston was more hype than anything else, Dempsey would tear him up. Marty Marshall, a light heavy, broke Liston' s jaw in one fight, (win over liston) floored him in another. (loss to Liston)

Liston beat the best around (mostly in convincing fashion) until Ali arrived on the scene. Dempsey ducked everything black and didn't even fight the best white contender of the early 20's (Greb). Dempsey made his name on Willard, Liston made his on Patterson - who without a doubt in my mind would beat that same Willard to a pulp.

As for embarassing losses, Dempsey looks far worse than Liston. He had quite a few draws, lost his series to Meehan and was, as stated, KO'd in 1 by Flynn.

[janitor]

no doubting that. But it is a bad stylisitc match up for Dempsey. The swarmer vs the slugger

(obviously both guys are very skilled but at the top level that is there styles)

I would say that you are half right.

Dempsey is not a slugger in the conventional sense or even necisarily a come forward fighter in the conventional sense.

Dempsey used movment to outflank larger oponents and definitely had a reverse gear when he chose to use it. He could play the counterpuncher as well as the attacker and often did. Dempsey played the chameleon somtimes switching between an attacking aproach and a mobile counterpunching aproach.

These factors combined with his hand speed advantage over Liston make this match up a lot more complex than most people on this site believe.

Ultimately however Dempsey single greatest weakness was that he could get caught coming in and was liable to be going in the wrong direction if it happened. This almost cost him the match against Luis Firpo a fighter who he was otherwise dominating. To that extent the dynamic of the swarmer vs the slugger could be his undoing.

[janitor]

We know that Liston easily defeated an opponent that wasn't too dissimilar to Dempsey, but Dempsey never got tested by anything like Liston. It certainly takes a leap off faith to say that Dempsey could defeat that caliber of opponent.

By that logic Larry Holmes would loose to every all time great and most lineal champions.

[janitor]

Dempsey made his name on Willard, Liston made his on Patterson - who without a doubt in my mind would beat that same Willard to a pulp.


What exactly makes you so sure that Patterson would beat Willard to a pulp?

We are talking about a 245 lb power puncher with an all time chin against a blown up light heavyweight with a questionable chin under a rule set that you have not specified.

If you dont have serious doubts about Patterson winning this never mind winning easily then you are being a bit niaeve.

[GPater11093]

I would say that you are half right.

Dempsey is not a slugger in the conventional sense or even necisarily a come forward fighter in the conventional sense.

Dempsey used movment to outflank larger oponents and definitely had a reverse gear when he chose to use it. He could play the counterpuncher as well as the attacker and often did. Dempsey played the chameleon somtimes switching between an attacking aproach and a mobile counterpunching aproach.

These factors combined with his hand speed advantage over Liston make this match up a lot more complex than most people on this site believe.

Ultimately however Dempsey single greatest weakness was that he could get caught coming in and was liable to be going in the wrong direction if it happened. This almost cost him the match against Luis Firpo a fighter who he was otherwise dominating. To that extent the dynamic of the swarmer vs the slugger could be his undoing.

you summed it up brillaintly. He can box but at the top level is his boxing skills good enough?

[Bokaj]

By that logic Larry Holmes would loose to every all time great and most lineal champions.

I think guys like Norton, Witherspoon, Cooney, Mercer etc are a lot closer in quality (not that much more stylistically similar, though) to Liston than anyone Dempsey beat. By the way, Evangelista would be the best Holmes had beaten if he had made the same distinctions concerning opponents that Dempsey did (only whites, except the best one of them). I know that's not a perfect comparison, but it does give us some perspective.

[janitor]

you summed it up brillaintly. He can box but at the top level is his boxing skills good enough?

Hard to say given what we have to go on. In the footage we have Dempsey either easily outboxes big but limited fighters or outslugs small technical boxers.

Tommy Gibbons who was a superior technician claimed that Dempsey was a good boxer:

"Don't let anybody tell you that Jack Dempsey can't box"

Gibbons could probably be compared to sombody like Eddie Machen and it apears that Dempsey has some success in outboxing him. Of course the acid test would be if you reduce Dempsey's power to the level of Gibbons and then see what happens.

It is hard to be certain whether Dempsey could outbox Liston who had verry good fundamentals but he would have held an edge in both hand speed and speed of head movment so at the verry least he would have been a constant threat to catch Liston with a nasty countercombo.

[Bokaj]

What exactly makes you so sure that Patterson would beat Willard to a pulp?

We are talking about a 245 lb power puncher with an all time chin against a blown up light heavyweight with a questionable chin under a rule set that you have not specified.

If you dont have serious doubts about Patterson winning this never mind winning easily then you are being a bit niaeve.

How did Willard prove he had an "all time chin"?

Willard was totally open against Dempsey, with a very limited arsenal. Patterson would land at him at will, and even though he wasn't at Dempsey's level as a puncher, he packed a nice wallop. I don't see Willard landing too much on him, either. Under the ruleset of 1919 it would turn out very bloody indeed for Willard.

And Patterson's questionable chin stood up for everyone except Liston and Ingo. Dempsey's stood up for everyone except Flynn.

I respect your knowledge Janitor, but I actually thinks it's you who is naive here. How in earth would Willard stand up to Patterson's speed and skill? The Archie Moore of 1956 was far superior to the Willard of 1919, but...

[janitor]

[quote=Bokaj;4377311]I think guys like Norton, Witherspoon, Cooney, Mercer etc are a lot closer in quality (not that much more stylistically similar, though) to Liston than anyone Dempsey beat.

How so?

Norton had seen better days and not everybody agrees that it was a convincing win (one of your criteria).

Witherspood did not do enough to difarentiate himself from Dempsey's best oponents on paper and again it was a controvertial win.

If I held up some fighter on Dempsey's record with Conneys record vs curently ranked opposition he would be imidiately dismissed as a nobody.

The Mercer win is awsome given the circumstances but his limitations are obvious.

All of these guys were either beaten controvertialy or are only ranked above people Dempsey beat based on theoretical potential that they did not realise in the ring.

By the way, Evangelista would be the best Holmes had beaten if he had made the same distinctions concerning opponents that Dempsey did (only whites, except the best one of them). I know that's not a perfect comparison, but it does give us some perspective.

Not really.

The reality is that Dempsey fought in an era where the overwhelming majority of the top contenders were white. A better analogy would be if Holmes had fought most of the top black contenders but drawn the colour line against Gerry Cooney if he had actualy been good.

Look at the rankings from Dempsey's era.

[janitor]

[quote=Bokaj;4377357]How did Willard prove he had an "all time chin"?

He was never off his feet before he fought Dempsey and he was matched prety hard from the start.

Willard was totally open against Dempsey, with a very limited arsenal. Patterson would land at him at will

Like he would against Vitally Klitschko who is open and has a limited arsenal?

You have to be realistic here.


and even though he wasn't at Dempsey's level as a puncher, he packed a nice wallop. I don't see Willard landing too much on him, either. Under the ruleset of 1919 it would turn out very bloody indeed for Willard.


The bottom line is that Patterson dosnt hit hard enough to stop Willard and probably can't hurt him. He might have his moments but he is going to be coming in towards a much bigger heavyweight with comparable power to Johansen and Liston and it the fight is scheduled for 15 rounds or more he is highly likley to come unstuck.

Again you have to be realistic here.

Whatever som people her might try to make out Willard is a verry big worrld class heavyweight with top end power and durability and he is not without his refiniments.

This is not going to be an easy asignement for an offensivley orientated light heavyweight however fast or powerfull he is.

And Patterson's questionable chin stood up for everyone except Liston and Ingo. Dempsey's stood up for everyone except Flynn.

Dempsey did not have the luxury of a long amateur career before he turned profesional and good managment from the outset.

The reality is that after the dubious knockout loss to Flyn nobody ever stopped Dempsey and for all we know nobody stopped him before.


I respect your knowledge Janitor, but I actually thinks it's you who is naive here. How in earth would Willard stand up to Patterson's speed and skill? The Archie Moore of 1956 was far superior to the Willard of 1919, but...


Would you extend the same logic to say that Patterson or Moore could beat one of the Klitschko brothers?

Whatever anybody says, once you cut through the bad footage of Willard and look at what is actualy there he is not a lot more limited than they are.

[Bokaj]

[quote]

How so?

Norton had seen better days and not everybody agrees that it was a convincing win (one of your criteria).

Witherspood did not do enough to difarentiate himself from Dempsey's best oponents on paper and again it was a controvertial win.

If I held up some fighter on Dempsey's record with Conneys record vs curently ranked opposition he would be imidiately dismissed as a nobody.

The Mercer win is awsome given the circumstances but his limitations are obvious.

All of these guys were either beaten controvertialy or are only ranked above people Dempsey beat based on theoretical potential that they did not realise in the ring.



Not really.

The reality is that Dempsey fought in an era where the overwhelming majority of the top contenders were white. A better analogy would be if Holmes had fought most of the top black contenders but drawn the colour line against Gerry Cooney if he had actualy been good.

Look at the rankings from Dempsey's era.

While you do have some points, I think I can sum up my opinion by adressing this last one. THOSE RANKINGS DOESN'T MEAN MUCH BECAUSE THEY WERE TO A LARGE DEGREE A PRODUCT OF THE VERY DISCRIMINATION THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO DISPROVE.

Either you believe this, or you believe that black fighters magically improved in a heartbeat after WWII. If there were rankings in baseball, american football and baskeball in the 1920's how many blacks would be found on them? Is that also because blacks somehow was much inferior athletes compared to today, or because they were discriminated against in a very racist society? Come on, don't insult our collective intelligence.

The very unlevel playing field that was the reality of Dempsey's time means that very much is unanswered about the quality of many fighters. Greb being one of the main exceptions concerning white fighters.

[Bokaj]

[quote]

He was never off his feet before he fought Dempsey and he was matched prety hard from the start.



Like he would against Vitally Klitschko who is open and has a limited arsenal?

You have to be realistic here.

Willard didn't prove his chin against anyone even remotely close to Lewis in terms of power and precision.



The bottom line is that Patterson dosnt hit hard enough to stop Willard and probably can't hurt him. He might have his moments but he is going to be coming in towards a much bigger heavyweight with comparable power to Johansen and Liston and it the fight is scheduled for 15 rounds or more he is highly likley to come unstuck.

Again you have to be realistic here.

Whatever som people her might try to make out Willard is a verry big worrld class heavyweight with top end power and durability and he is not without his refiniments.

I don't think as highly of his power as you do. And his skills, as shown against Dempsey, are very unimpressive. With those skills he wouldn't land on Patterson to begin with. And Willard hasn't, unlike Vitaly K, stood up to the shots of anyone as sharp a puncher as Patterson. Patterson on the other hand have stood up to punchers that are in all likelyhood much more dangerous than Willard. Ali KO'd some very, very durable guys, but couldn't KO Patterson. Machen, Moore, Quarry and Bonavena were no slouches either.

Dempsey did not have the luxury of a long amateur career before he turned profesional and good managment from the outset.

The reality is that after the dubious knockout loss to Flyn nobody ever stopped Dempsey and for all we know nobody stopped him before.

Nothing is dubios about that KO except for some unsubstianted rumblings (has Bert Sugar decided on whether he was starving or if it was a fix?). In practicality you could say he was KO'd by Firpo as well.

Would you extend the same logic to say that Patterson or Moore could beat one of the Klitschko brothers?

Whatever anybody says, once you cut through the bad footage of Willard and look at what is actualy there he is not a lot more limited than they are.

See above.

[mcvey]

How did Willard prove he had an "all time chin"?

Willard was totally open against Dempsey, with a very limited arsenal. Patterson would land at him at will, and even though he wasn't at Dempsey's level as a puncher, he packed a nice wallop. I don't see Willard landing too much on him, either. Under the ruleset of 1919 it would turn out very bloody indeed for Willard.

And Patterson's questionable chin stood up for everyone except Liston and Ingo. Dempsey's stood up for everyone except Flynn.

I respect your knowledge Janitor, but I actually thinks it's you who is naive here. How in earth would Willard stand up to Patterson's speed and skill? The Archie Moore of 1956 was far superior to the Willard of 1919, but...
Gun boat Smith a very hard puncher commented on Willards chin, he said it was top class.

[janitor]

[quote=janitor;4377416]

While you do have some points, I think I can sum up my opinion by adressing this last one. THOSE RANKINGS DOESN'T MEAN MUCH BECAUSE THEY WERE TO A LARGE DEGREE A PRODUCT OF THE VERY DISCRIMINATION THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO DISPROVE.

Either you believe this, or you believe that black fighters magically improved in a heartbeat after WWII. If there were rankings in baseball, american football and baskeball in the 1920's how many blacks would be found on them? Is that also because blacks somehow was much inferior athletes compared to today, or because they were discriminated against in a very racist society? Come on, don't insult our collective intelligence.

The very unlevel playing field that was the reality of Dempsey's time means that very much is unanswered about the quality of many fighters. Greb being one of the main exceptions concerning white fighters.

Here I have to disagree.

The lower weight classes were wide open for black contenders in Dempsey's era and had been for some years. You still had white domination across the weight classes on weight of numbers.

It is not so much that black boxers improved after world war II as that the number of white men choosing boxing as a career declined dramaticaly owing to improving living standards.

Simply put boxing will always be dominated by the social groups who are at the bottom of the pile and in the 1920s being of Irish, or Jewish extraction was not a much better hand than being black. You didn't get lynched but you were still going to be dirt poor unless you were a good boxer or baseball player.

[spittle8]

It is not so much that black boxers improved after world war II as that the number of white men choosing boxing as a career declined dramaticaly owing to improving living standards.

Simply put boxing will always be dominated by the social groups who are at the bottom of the pile and in the 1920s being of Irish, or Jewish extraction was not a much better hand than being black. You didn't get lynched but you were still going to be dirt poor unless you were a good boxer or baseball player.
:deal:happy

[Bokaj]

[quote=Bokaj;4377671]

Here I have to disagree.

The lower weight classes were wide open for black contenders in Dempsey's era and had been for some years. You still had white domination across the weight classes on weight of numbers.

It is not so much that black boxers improved after world war II as that the number of white men choosing boxing as a career declined dramaticaly owing to improving living standards.

Simply put boxing will always be dominated by the social groups who are at the bottom of the pile and in the 1920s being of Irish, or Jewish extraction was not a much better hand than being black. You didn't get lynched but you were still going to be dirt poor unless you were a good boxer or baseball player.

To put it politely, this is bull.

To start with the fighters of the 40's and early 50's got into boxing before WWII. And even during the 40's and 50's guys like Walcott and Moore had a very hard way getting title shots, and Burley etc didn't even get them. You think they would have these problems being white?

In the 20's there was a clearly stated colour line in the HW division, the US was a very racist society, which was mirrored in every major sport (basketball, baseball and football), but this somehow wouldn't be reflected in the HW rankings? Ridicolous.

And if racism wasn't rife in sports, why was all the other major sports being totally dominated by whites, which they aren't today? Isn't it a pretty solid guess to say that boxing have had similar trajectory in racial terms to all other main American sports, or is it especially open minded?

[Bokaj]

Gun boat Smith a very hard puncher commented on Willards chin, he said it was top class.

So if a LHW today swore to the solidity of the chin of a HW he had fought we would put what value in that? Ruiz must have been a monster, taking Jones' best shots like that.

[spittle8]

And if racism wasn't rife in sports, why was all the other major sports being totally dominated by whites, which they aren't today? Isn't it a pretty solid guess to say that boxing have had similar trajectory in racial terms to all other main American sports, or is it especially open minded?
Maybe because.... white people played sports more back then? Lots have changed in sports. In some sports there is significant prejudice against white athletes, like in basketball and the skills positions in football. As Janitor already pointed out, the ghettoes were chock full of whites back then, which resulted in a greater number of white athletes with the necessary temperament. This isn't very hard to understand.

[Bummy Davis]

Bummy, why dont you have an avatar for yourself ? Just curious.


I tried to put one on once and it did not work, so I left it alone...I have no patience sometimes

[Bokaj]

Maybe because.... white people played sports more back then? Lots have changed in sports. In some sports there is significant prejudice against white athletes, like in basketball and the skills positions in football. As Janitor already pointed out, the ghettoes were chock full of whites back then, which resulted in a greater number of white athletes with the necessary temperament. This isn't very hard to understand.

It's not like every major sport is played in a ghetto. And it's funny how the "lessened participation of whites" as you call it coincided with the lessening of segregation. In HW boxing the change is very aligned with Joe Louis getting broad popular acception as a black champion, and in baseball I wouldn't be surprised if you can note a change after Jackie Robinson broke the colour line. Isn't that a nice coincidence?

Changing socioeconomic conditions can probably explain a part as to why blacks came to totally dominate the HW division from about 1960 to 2000, but it cannot explain the very rapid change that happened in the 1940's. Before WW2 a grand total of three title shots at been given to black fighters (two on American soil). The same number of title shots black fighters got in the latter half of the 1940's alone. Black fighters who started out their careers before WWII.

This isn't really rocket science. America was a racist society and the opportunities for success was very limited for blacks in ANY field, in and out of sports, but boxing would be the sole exception you mean? When the statistics clearly show otherwise? No one of sound intellect can seriously believe this.

[round15]

Maybe if he used the same gloves that he used against Jess Willard?!

[Ted Spoon]

Of course Jack could knock 'Sonny' out. When you can slug like that it could be curtains at any time.

What a great fight it would be. Liston's heavy jab was one heck a tool, but one that Dempsey's sweeping head would likely escape most of the time. One of Dempsey's best talents, slipping and ducking straight shots, and that's where he weaved out and would come back with some hell. Would be very interesting to see how Liston handled it - a full swing would likely stagger the man whom is mostly thought to be the sturdier of the two.

Liston checked himself nicely with forearms and elbows in tight up close, which would be vital in absorbing the assaults and countering with short hooks. This would be a mid-range bombing session after Dempsey made a sucker out of the jab. Dempsey was easier to 'move', so to speak, but then he was so very quick and resilient - hurt him and he'd fire back with interest.

The way Ted Spoon looks at it, Dempsey is a roaring blaze so Liston will have to be the best damn fireman on the night. It would be very hard to set Dempsey up, or control him to any degree. The way Dempsey is going is if Liston keeps everything nice and tight and waits for Dempsey's style to fall over itself, leaving the chin out for too long.

If not, Liston is unable to time him for the hammers and Dempsey persistently finds the target when Liston feels more compelled to impose himself, walking into plenty.

Tyson would likely be in better stead to contend with Dempsey because he could cut out more favourable angles and could pull the trigger quicker. The manner in which Liston conducted himself; exclusive with the jab, fairly straight-up posture helps Dempsey work a groove into him.

[janitor]

[quote=Bokaj;4377730][quote=janitor;4377518]
Willard didn't prove his chin against anyone even remotely close to Lewis in terms of power and precision.


I think it is debatable to what extent Vitally Klitschko proved his chin against Lewis.

He did get stopped inside a few rounds after all.

I don't think as highly of his power as you do.

Well he hit hard enough to break a fighters neck with a single uppercut.

Bull Young was about the samne size as Willard acording to some acounts incidentaly.

And his skills, as shown against Dempsey, are very unimpressive.

Perhaps if you viewed some of the time adjusted footage of the fight that has become available recently you would view it differently.

Either way you dont judge a fighters skills on a bout where he is blown out early. For example you would not asess Michael Spinks primarily on the Tyson fight. The Johnson Moran and Firpo fights would be a much better measure.

Nothing is dubios about that KO except for some unsubstianted rumblings

That is generaly accepted as grounds for a fight being dubious.

There is more evidence for Dempsey Flynn being not on the level than Clay Liston II.


In practicality you could say he was KO'd by Firpo as well.


On what basis?

[janitor]

[quote=bokaj;4378384][quote=janitor;4377911]

to put it politely, this is bull.

To start with the fighters of the 40's and early 50's got into boxing before wwii. And even during the 40's and 50's guys like walcott and moore had a very hard way getting title shots, and burley etc didn't even get them. You think they would have these problems being white?


most of them would not have had these problems had they been white but these men could clearly make far more money boxing than they could doing anything else. They could also progres further in boxing than any other sport.

The reality is that although black fighters have always been able to climb to the top of the rankings the majority of the ranked fighters have been white in many eras.

Simply put most of the top contenders were white with some dramatic exceptions.


in the 20's there was a clearly stated colour line in the hw division, the us was a very racist society, which was mirrored in every major sport (basketball, baseball and football), but this somehow wouldn't be reflected in the hw rankings? Ridicolous.


again a black athlete would not have been able to make more money outside of boxing or progress further in any other sport.

If he was a heavyweight he would never fight for the title but he copuld make enough money to retire on.

If he was a welterweight he could get multiple title shots if he needed them.

There are reasons why black fighters did not come to dominate in the 20s and it is not just related to the colour line.


And if racism wasn't rife in sports, why was all the other major sports being totally dominated by whites, which they aren't today? Isn't it a pretty solid guess to say that boxing have had similar trajectory in racial terms to all other main american sports, or is it especially open minded?


Put it this way.

Baseball was desegregated in the late 40s.

George Dixon was Featherweight champion in the 19thy century.

[Bokaj]

[quote]

most of them would not have had these problems had they been white but these men could clearly make far more money boxing than they could doing anything else. They could also progres further in boxing than any other sport.

The reality is that although black fighters have always been able to climb to the top of the rankings the majority of the ranked fighters have been white in many eras.

Simply put most of the top contenders were white with some dramatic exceptions.

Don't really know what you want to say here. Sure, it was not impossible for a black fighter to climb the rankings, but he'd would have an easier time if he was white. And getting a title shot was virtually impossible for a black fighter for a long time. The playing field was not level. The difficulties extremely talented black fighters encountered even decades after Dempsey is one testament to this.


again a black athlete would not have been able to make more money outside of boxing or progress further in any other sport.

If he was a heavyweight he would never fight for the title but he copuld make enough money to retire on.

If he was a welterweight he could get multiple title shots if he needed them.

Perhaps other sports were even more segragated, but it doesn't mean that boxing wasn't. It was.

There are reasons why black fighters did not come to dominate in the 20s and it is not just related to the colour line.

It was very much down to the colour line, which is shown by how very quickly things changed when the colour line started to dissipate. But I don't say the colour line was the only factor - reality is often more complex than that. But, again, it was a very important one.

Put it this way.

Baseball was desegregated in the late 40s.

George Dixon was Featherweight champion in the 19thy century.

Again, perhaps baseball was even more segregated, but it doesn't mean boxing wasn't.

There was after all a clearly stated colour line. And blacks started to become much more prominent in the rankings and getting many more title shots in a very short when this line started to dissipate.

Again: Black HWs had gotten a grand total of three title shots before WWII, and they got as many in the latter half of the 40's alone. Actually, if we (with a bit of speculation) use Louis' destruction of Schemling as the point where he, as the first black champion, got almost universal acceptance, then blacks had gotten only two title shots before that point, but got four in the following decade.

[Bokaj]

I think it is debatable to what extent Vitally Klitschko proved his chin against Lewis.

He did get stopped inside a few rounds after all.

Yeah, by a cut. He took some hellacious shots without going down.

Willard was also KO'd by Firpo, and stopped by Joe Cox. And in general he met men far smaller than Vitaly's opponents. If Vitaly mostly had proved his chin against LHWs, no one would be that impressed.


Well he hit hard enough to break a fighters neck with a single uppercut.

Bull Young was about the samne size as Willard acording to some acounts incidentaly.

Yeah, that says something.


Perhaps if you viewed some of the time adjusted footage of the fight that has become available recently you would view it differently.

Either way you dont judge a fighters skills on a bout where he is blown out early. For example you would not asess Michael Spinks primarily on the Tyson fight. The Johnson Moran and Firpo fights would be a much better measure.

You have a point here. But Willard didn't have that many victories over really good opposition. He has his win over a shot Johnson, but other than that Gunboat Smith should be his best opponent (after Dempsey), and he lost to him.

It should also be noted that Willard was almost 38 and had been inactive for 3 years when facing Dempsey. He probably was, by any reckoning, quite close to being shot.


That is generaly accepted as grounds for a fight being dubious.

Not by me. Certainly not when it concerns someone so shrouded in legend as Dempsey. It's telling that there are two different excuses for this loss: Dempsey not eating nor preparing properly, and him throwing the fight. This doesn't have the feel of seriousness. Certainly not when neither claim is backed up by ringside reports.

There is more evidence for Dempsey Flynn being not on the level than Clay Liston II.

I think Ali-Liston II gets dismissed as a fix a little to easily, but I still disagree here. The immediate reaction from many at ringside was to scream "fix", and even Ali screamed for Liston to get up. The footage of Liston rolling around on the canvas is not convincing either.

When it comes to Dempsey-Flynn the ringside reports show none of this. Two articles actually reports that Dempsey is gone for a minute and then is so confused and groggy that he tries to slug his handlers when they help him to his feet.

I think that Willard's victory over Johnson is more suspect if anything.


On what basis?

On the basis that he was hepled back into the ring illegaly. If he hadn't been it may very well have been KO, and as it was it should possibly be a DQ.

[janitor]

[quote=Bokaj;4383917]
Don't really know what you want to say here. Sure, it was not impossible for a black fighter to climb the rankings, but he'd would have an easier time if he was white. And getting a title shot was virtually impossible for a black fighter for a long time. The playing field was not level. The difficulties extremely talented black fighters encountered even decades after Dempsey is one testament to this.


I can certainly understand why you have issues with the social circumstances of this period.

I personaly did not become obsessed with Peter Jackson, George Dixon and Barbados Joe Walcott by watching their career boxed sets or knockout reels on youtube.

I do however think thatthe proportion of black fighters in the sport at the time broadly reflected the level of talent. Bobby Dobb is an all time great lightweight and he is not discussed on this site but he was part of the piucture.

Perhaps other sports were even more segragated, but it doesn't mean that boxing wasn't. It was.

I don't want to defend the way that black fighters of that era were treated on any level. But I have to say that virtualy all black contenders managed to establish a big money fight with a top white contender or indeed a top black contender.

Therfore the number of black fighters in the sport broadly reflected the talent pool.

It was very much down to the colour line, which is shown by how very quickly things changed when the colour line started to dissipate. But I don't say the colour line was the only factor - reality is often more complex than that. But, again, it was a very important one.

Nothing I can disagree with here.

I think that some eras were wrecked by the colour line and that the 20s wasnt one of them.

Compare the 20s to the Jack Johnson era or even the Louis era and you will see that the number of quality black contenders was in a bit of a dip.

Again: Black HWs had gotten a grand total of three title shots before WWII, and they got as many in the latter half of the 40's alone. Actually, if we (with a bit of speculation) use Louis' destruction of Schemling as the point where he, as the first black champion, got almost universal acceptance, then blacks had gotten only two title shots before that point, but got four in the following decade.

Compare the rankings before Louis went into the army to the rankings after Louis came out of the army.

Socio economic factors pushed the jewish/irish/ italian comunity away from boxing.

There was a sharp rise in living standards in the post war era and I think that black America got a small slice of it.

[Bokaj]

I can certainly understand why you have issues with the social circumstances of this period.

I personaly did not become obsessed with Peter Jackson, George Dixon and Barbados Joe Walcott by watching their career boxed sets or knockout reels on youtube.

I do however think thatthe proportion of black fighters in the sport at the time broadly reflected the level of talent. Bobby Dobb is an all time great lightweight and he is not discussed on this site but he was part of the piucture.

I don't want to defend the way that black fighters of that era were treated on any level. But I have to say that virtualy all black contenders managed to establish a big money fight with a top white contender or indeed a top black contender.

Therfore the number of black fighters in the sport broadly reflected the talent pool.

But there's so much we don't know. How many didn't even get to a contender level because of the conditions of the time? How many Walcotts were there who never got that second chance? We can never know for sure, but we can say with near certainity that white fighters in general had an easier time getting the right manager, the right fights, the right conditions for training and preparation etc than blacks. We know that the playing field wasn't level and this should in all likelihood have been reflected in the rankings.


Nothing I can disagree with here.

I think that some eras were wrecked by the colour line and that the 20s wasnt one of them.

Compare the 20s to the Jack Johnson era or even the Louis era and you will see that the number of quality black contenders was in a bit of a dip.

Well, was it? Louis was more or less the only elite black fighter of the 30's (and perhaps John Henry Lewis should get a mention). The 20's had both Wills and Godfrey. Sure, in the period 1905-1915 there seem to have been a surge in black talent (Johnson, Langford, McVey etc), but in the preceeding generation there was only Peter Jackson more or less. At HW that is.

Anyhow, my point that the playing field wasn't level still stands.

EDIT: In the late 40's you have all of a sudden (besides Joe Louis) guys like Bivins, Murray, Ray, Franklin, Bobo and of course Walcott and Charles. For me that's because of the colour line dissipating since they all started out before the end of the war more or less (see below).


Compare the rankings before Louis went into the army to the rankings after Louis came out of the army.

Socio economic factors pushed the jewish/irish/ italian comunity away from boxing.

There was a sharp rise in living standards in the post war era and I think that black America got a small slice of it.

Since almost all of the fighters active in the 40's and many of those active in the early 50's had started out in boxing before this rise in living standards, I don't think it had had that impact by then. Rather the change was a reflection of how Louis had increased the acceptance of black fighters on an elite level. I also think that the horrors of WWII had made outright discrimation that much more untenable. Jackie Robinson broke the colour barrier in baseball in 1947.

However, I do think that the changing socio-economic conditions was part of the reason as to why the sport started being totally dominated by blacks (and then also hispanics in the lower divisions) from the late 50's, early 60's onwards. It was a mix of both IMO.

[ChrisPontius]

The way Ted Spoon looks at it, Dempsey is a roaring blaze so Liston will have to be the best damn fireman on the night.

Someone make the appropriate pun here. I'm not gonna do it.

[spittle8]

It's not like every major sport is played in a ghetto. And it's funny how the "lessened participation of whites" as you call it coincided with the lessening of segregation. In HW boxing the change is very aligned with Joe Louis getting broad popular acception as a black champion, and in baseball I wouldn't be surprised if you can note a change after Jackie Robinson broke the colour line. Isn't that a nice coincidence?

Changing socioeconomic conditions can probably explain a part as to why blacks came to totally dominate the HW division from about 1960 to 2000, but it cannot explain the very rapid change that happened in the 1940's. Before WW2 a grand total of three title shots at been given to black fighters (two on American soil). The same number of title shots black fighters got in the latter half of the 1940's alone. Black fighters who started out their careers before WWII.

This isn't really rocket science. America was a racist society and the opportunities for success was very limited for blacks in ANY field, in and out of sports, but boxing would be the sole exception you mean? When the statistics clearly show otherwise? No one of sound intellect can seriously believe this.
Let me break this bitch down for you.

Blacks don't even account for 9% of MLB players today. Are they inferior baseball players? No. But they don't fucking play baseball. Not many white people play basketball. I've lived in a Navy town, I've lived in Texas and I've lived in Detroit... you know the difference between white and black basketball players? Aggression. Blacks play ball HARD from childhood, and it develops into a more competitive style. But no, it's genetics...

You know what's interesting? Right around the time that segregation fell, whites left the ghettos. Where I live today, 50 years ago this was a 100% Polish-German neighborhood. Crime was nonexistent, but income was similar to where it is today. Employment was very high and people worked hard for very little. Today, half the neighborhood is on welfare, it's ~90% black and crime is very, very high. White people bettered themselves and left the ghetto. My Uncle was a walkon for the Detroit Tigers, and he never played organized baseball in his life. He played stickball in the streets and baseball with some neighborhood kids when he could, but he was good enough to get a MiLB contract which he turned down. His son skates. Could this be.... a social trend? No, that's dumb...:lol:

You're so hungup on racism you can't see the forest for the trees. Are you an American, Bokaj? If not, then please STFU.

[Bokaj]

Let me break this bitch down for you.

Blacks don't even account for 9% of MLB players today. Are they inferior baseball players? No. But they don't fucking play baseball. Not many white people play basketball. I've lived in a Navy town, I've lived in Texas and I've lived in Detroit... you know the difference between white and black basketball players? Aggression. Blacks play ball HARD from childhood, and it develops into a more competitive style. But no, it's genetics...

You know what's interesting? Right around the time that segregation fell, whites left the ghettos. Where I live today, 50 years ago this was a 100% Polish-German neighborhood. Crime was nonexistent, but income was similar to where it is today. Employment was very high and people worked hard for very little. Today, half the neighborhood is on welfare, it's ~90% black and crime is very, very high. White people bettered themselves and left the ghetto. My Uncle was a walkon for the Detroit Tigers, and he never played organized baseball in his life. He played stickball in the streets and baseball with some neighborhood kids when he could, but he was good enough to get a MiLB contract which he turned down. His son skates. Could this be.... a social trend? No, that's dumb...:lol:

You're so hungup on racism you can't see the forest for the trees. Are you an American, Bokaj? If not, then please STFU.

I've adressed this several times, so I'm not going to do it again at any length. In short, I agree that social economic factors played a part, but it changed too quickly (over just a couple of years) for them to explain far from all of it. It's all in my previous posts. Try to read them through for once.

No, I'm not American, but what does that matter? None of us was around in the 20's, American or not, (hell, were you even around in the 80's?), so we can only go by secondary sources anyway. That can be done either side of the Atlantic.

As I said, everything is in my previous posts. I've said my piece, so if you're going to go on rambling, you're on your own.

[janitor]

[quote=Bokaj;4384781]But there's so much we don't know. How many didn't even get to a contender level because of the conditions of the time? How many Walcotts were there who never got that second chance? We can never know for sure, but we can say with near certainity that white fighters in general had an easier time getting the right manager, the right fights, the right conditions for training and preparation etc than blacks. We know that the playing field wasn't level and this should in all likelihood have been reflected in the rankings.

Well, was it? Louis was more or less the only elite black fighter of the 30's (and perhaps John Henry Lewis should get a mention). The 20's had both Wills and Godfrey. Sure, in the period 1905-1915 there seem to have been a surge in black talent (Johnson, Langford, McVey etc), but in the preceeding generation there was only Peter Jackson more or less. At HW that is.

Anyhow, my point that the playing field wasn't level still stands.

EDIT: In the late 40's you have all of a sudden (besides Joe Louis) guys like Bivins, Murray, Ray, Franklin, Bobo and of course Walcott and Charles. For me that's because of the colour line dissipating since they all started out before the end of the war more or less (see below).


You have rather made my point for me here.

There was a surge in black talent in the 40s which you atribute to the colour line disipating but then you also have a surge in talenta decade before Dempseys era when the situation for black fighters was even worse.

Dosn't this simply suggest that there were less talented black fighters in Dempsey's era than in the teens before and the 40s after?

Of course you will always get the exception that proves the rule e.g. Harry Wills but the fact is that a great fighter can spring up from any ethnic group or nationality at any time however well or poorly represented it is in the sport. I do not expect that Barbados will produce another pound for pound great but of course it produced Joe Walcott.

[Bokaj]

There was a surge in black talent in the 40s which you atribute to the colour line disipating but then you also have a surge in talenta decade before Dempseys era when the situation for black fighters was even worse.

But what you call "the talent surge in the late 40's" was there to stay, which implies it was more than simply a talent surge. That's the difference. And to explain away that with that the socio-economic shift then took over, is making it a bit simple for oneself considering that we know there was open discrimination and racism in boxing and in society in general.

Even though I respect you and always enjoy discussing with you (FAR more than with the ocassional stray from General) I really feel I've made my point here. We all know that there was a colour line in Dempsey's time and that even extremely talented black fighters (Walcott, Moore, Williams, Burley etc) had trouble getting the right management and the right fights as late as 20 years later. So saying that the playing field wasn't level during Dempsey's era and that this fact had an effect on the competition is for me such a given that it's kind of a waste time arguing about it for too long.

So this is what I'll say about the subject, and then everyone else can make up their own minds.

[janitor]

But what you call "the talent surge in the late 40's" was there to stay, which implies it was more than simply a talent surge. That's the difference. And to explain away that with that the socio-economic shift then took over, is making it a bit simple for oneself considering that we know there was open discrimination and racism in boxing and in society in general.

Even though I respect you and always enjoy discussing with you (FAR more than with the ocassional stray from General) I really feel I've made my point here. We all know that there was a colour line in Dempsey's time and that even extremely talented black fighters (Walcott, Moore, Williams, Burley etc) had trouble getting the right management and the right fights as late as 20 years later. So saying that the playing field wasn't level during Dempsey's era and that this fact had an effect on the competition is for me such a given that it's kind of a waste time arguing about it for too long.

So this is what I'll say about the subject, and then everyone else can make up their own minds.

Fair call.

I am not saying that you are way out of line here with what you are saying and you always make good points.

One point that I should make is that the black dynamite era before Dempsey was one of the richest eras of black talent that we have ever seen. Whether we are talking about the Jack Johnsons and Sam Langfors of the heavyweight divison, the Jeff Clarks of the middleweight division, The Joe Walcotts and Dixie Kids of th welterweight division or the Joe Gans's Jack Blackburns, Dave Holly's and Bobby Dobbs's of the lightweight division, there was all time great talent at every level.

I don't think that there was that kind of talent in the black divisons of Dempseys era.

[Bokaj]

Fair call.

I am not saying that you are way out of line here with what you are saying and you always make good points.

One point that I should make is that the black dynamite era before Dempsey was one of the richest eras of black talent that we have ever seen. Whether we are talking about the Jack Johnsons and Sam Langfors of the heavyweight divison, the Jeff Clarks of the middleweight division, The Joe Walcotts and Dixie Kids of th welterweight division or the Joe Gans's Jack Blackburns, Dave Holly's and Bobby Dobbs's of the lightweight division, there was all time great talent at every level.

I don't think that there was that kind of talent in the black divisons of Dempseys era.

I agree with you.

[Mr Butt]

could dempsey knock out liston ,yes

[janitor]

I agree with you.

On a side note you could go through the rankings in the black dynamite era and find two all time great black dynamos (I mean all time greats in the pound for pound sense) in every weight class from heavyweight to lightweight and possibly twice that in at lightweight.

[Hydraulix]

This is a fight I'd love to see. I definitely think Jack has a chance if he lands that left hook flush.

[Unforgiven]

The thing is, too many people are under the impression that Dempsey was a one-dimensional swarmer with no boxing brain.

But if you watch Dempsey against big strong Willard you'll see how cautious and elusive he is when faced with a bigger stronger man. That's prime Dempsey. And he himself said, "You cant fight a man like Willard, you have to box him !", and that's what Dempsey did, he moved in and out, attack, retreat, circle, until he had Jess in trouble .... he didn't just chug forward like Frazier did against Foreman, that would be suicide, against a Willard or a Liston.

Could Dempsey knock Liston out ? Yes, of course.
But Liston could knock Dempsey out too.

I'd pick Dempsey myself. I feel Liston is a bit too slow and less reliable, and he's become vastly overrated on this board.

[burt bienstock]

Which Jack Dempsey are you matching against Sonny Liston? There are two Dempsey's...The past prime Dempsey seen ad nauseam of the Tunney fights on film, or the great tiger of Willard [1919] and before,who has never to my knowledge ben seen on youtube? The real young Dempsey who kod such large men as Willard, Carl Morris, Fred Fulton, Arthur Pelkey,Bill Brennan, all the size of Liston, in short order,was a larger edition of Roberto Duran, of recent years...That Dempsey was described at that time as "fast as a welterweight", hard to hit solidly,and a pulverizing puncher with both hands..That Dempsey, I believe would have ko'd Liston most certainly...Speed kills. is the old adage, and Dempsey in prime would get there "Fustess With The Mostess". Dempsey by Ko...

[burt bienstock]

P.S. Why do some always inject race in every post...We have changed as a society,thank goodness...These politically correct moralists,spout nonsense most of the time...Do they not realize that we, and yes THEM ALSO, are products of our times...Were these ,todays critics of our ancestors of the past, have acted much different, than our forebearers of yesterday did ? I doubt it..We all grow from experiences, and so should todays, so called moral gatekeepers...

[turpinr]

an easy night for sonny. ko in 2 rounds

[choklab]

Liston was spectacular to watch against guys who had been Ko'd before. a lot of lively, mauling fighters gave sonny trouble until he cut them and as burt says peak jack was like duran. fast hands, all movement and footwork with a radar for openings. dempsey was beter than marshal, faster than wiliams, stronger mentaly than floyd and harder hitting than ali. even if dempsey only landed half the punches on liston that ali did the fight would last half as long.
Liston was a great on top fighter. his jab was a weapon and evrything he did hurt.
admitedly liston had power at any range and was very hard to hit since most fighters couldnt get past his jab and got hurt trying. but you could unsettle liston if you could hit him even if you had to be good to land. dempsey would land. fighters who could land gave liston trouble. sonny could beat anything that froze in front in front of him. dempsey would not freeze. dempsey had too much fire, speed and heart for liston.

[djanders]

"Could Jack Dempsey Knock Out Sonny Liston?" Of course he could.

Dempsey hit very hard, and often, with power shots...and...in his prime, would be too fast for Sonny Liston. And Jack would not fold up his tent the first time Liston connected with something hard...quite the opposite, in fact. Sonny is perfect for Jack and I would pick Jack to win this fight, without hesitation.

[tommygun711]

He could of course knock him out. Weather he WOULD is a different story.I think Sonny is too big and too strong for jack dempsey. he is also smarter and hits a little harder.
i think liston takes this one by knockout

[guilalah]

Certainly Dempsey could KO Liston.

I think the fight's a toss-up. :think

[frankenfrank]

And Dempsey got knocked out in one by Fireman Flynn.
wasn't that fight fixed for gambling purposes ?

to the subject : dempsey ducked black fighters.
liston is mainly a hype , true , but he also had ability.
how much ablity ? i don't know , i guess less than what most in here think.

[Bummy Davis]

Yes

[Stevie G]

Is this possible? This is a hard fight to call. Sonny was so strong and could very possibly make quick work of Dempsey.

But on the other hand, Dempsey could easily make Sonny miss his blows by bobbing and weaving, and hurt the 'Big Ugly Bear' with thunderous shots to the body. Jack would also smash him with that hard left hook or pulverizing right hand.

Tough one to call, but I can guarantee that someone would get knocked out in this fight. Could Dempsey pull it off?
I feel that Liston would get his jab and heavy artillery in before Dempsey could set himself. I envisage an early knockout in Sonny's favour. Of course,if Dempsey is somehow still there after the halfway mark,he'd have a great chance in outlasting Liston,but I can't see it.

[Stevie G]

I heard that Dempsey hadn't eaten in 4 days when he fought that fight. But I don't know how true that is. :?
Dempsey was very badly off financially intil he made it big. It's quite feasible. Hard times to live in back then.

[Unforgiven]

The Fireman Jim Flynn fight, I think Dempsey was just up against a good rough veteran who caught him cold.
The only excuse Dempsey ever made to my knowledge is that he injured his hand working in a bowling alley before the fight and he couldn't train.

The reports of the time and the years close afterwards just seem to think it was a learning process fight and it happened in the days before Dempsey resembled the controlled refined attacker he became later, when he teamed up with Doc Kearns.

Dempsey was very raw back then, not even a contender, and probably ill-prepared, up against a fearless old veteran who'd been in with Tommy Burns, Jack Johnson and Sam Langford. Got rushed and caught cold, no mystery, no fix.

[Kalasinn]

Yes he could.
Someone will get stopped in this fight, prime for prime I'd give (188lb) Dempsey a 40% chance against (212lb) Liston, however with a theoretical modern Dempsey at 210lbs it's a 50/50 bout imo.

[Raging B(_)LL]

Could Manassa Jack knock out Sonny? Sure he can, the real question is would he? My bet is no, he wouldn`t. Jack was the quicker more mobile of the two, but Sonny has the edge in power, size, strenght and reach and combined with his own skillset it doesn`t bode well for Jack imo.

He would have to bob and weave his way inside and under Liston`s jab to get his own offense going in close as he wouldn`t get much done from the outside. But this is dangerous for Dempsey as Sonny has a clear edge in physical strenght and he could have easily manhandled the Manassa Mauler in close quarters.

I don`t see Jack outboxing Sonny from a distance and I don`t see him getting inside and doing any significant work in close either, I don`t give Jack much of a chance in this matchup to be honest. He may well go the distance, but I doubt he takes it on points let alone flattens his man, Sonny by decision would be my guess.

[he grant]

Which Jack Dempsey are you matching against Sonny Liston? There are two Dempsey's...The past prime Dempsey seen ad nauseam of the Tunney fights on film, or the great tiger of Willard [1919] and before,who has never to my knowledge ben seen on youtube? The real young Dempsey who kod such large men as Willard, Carl Morris, Fred Fulton, Arthur Pelkey,Bill Brennan, all the size of Liston, in short order,was a larger edition of Roberto Duran, of recent years...That Dempsey was described at that time as "fast as a welterweight", hard to hit solidly,and a pulverizing puncher with both hands..That Dempsey, I believe would have ko'd Liston most certainly...Speed kills. is the old adage, and Dempsey in prime would get there "Fustess With The Mostess". Dempsey by Ko...

You know I've read about the prime 1919 version of Dempsey being a young Duran or Manny Paq but I really have never sen it other than round one against Willard who at 37 and coming off huge inactivity was not the best barametor ... Liston was more than size he was exceptional talent ... Dempsey definately has a shot but I'd bet Liston ..

[RockysSplitNose]

I actually see this one playing out with Liston trying to walk Dempsey down and and getting somewhat bamboozled by Dempsey's constant quick motion - and being shocked and shaken by Dempsey's brand of punching - Dempsey would be constantly moving - shifting direction to throw Liston and i think would make Liston look quite slow and ponderous darting in and out when ever Jack cut loose at full pelt with his blazing shots Liston would be blinking and backing up - Jack was as cruel a finisher as there ever has been and I think he would do whatever it took to finish him - because the longer Liston is marching in on Dempsey behind his heavy punishing jabs the more the danger increases for Dempsey - Liston wasn't invincible and did feel pain and shock and fear like every other fighter and he would feel it all against Dempsey because when Dempsey was worried about whether he could cope with someone the longer a fight went on that was when he would be at his most venomous every chance he got - Dempsey I think would be looking for the KO from the get-go but wouldn't stop moving for a second - he would probably have to weather some very shakey moments himself when the bear did close in but I think Dempsey would eventually stop Liston about the 5th or 6th rounds .

[burt bienstock]

Today some fans are unaware of Dempsey's deceptive vweight of 188-193 lbs...He was described by boxing scribes of his day as " amazingly strong ".Dempsey had tremendous deltoids, powerful shoulders and biceps, atop a small waist. and slender legs..Accounting for his 190 lbs...Dempsey had what was described as having " fast twitching " muscles too.At his peak his greatest assets were his speed and killer instinct, along with a strong chin...For a heavyweight at his prime I feel he was along with Joe Louis, the two best and hardest hitting heavyweights of alltime...Weight be damned...

[reznick]

Yes

But he wouldnt

[Hydraulix]

Thought I'd bump this. People generally think Marciano stands no chance against Sonny in my other thread. Does Dempsey do any better?

[reznick]

Was thinking about this fight earlier



Too tough to call for me


If I had to pick, I would say Dempsey

[Hydraulix]

Dempsey was faster and more explosive than Rocky. Perhaps this would improve his chances against the man Ali called "The Big Ugly Bear."

[SuzieQ49]

Dempsey was faster and more explosive than Rocky. Perhaps this would improve his chances against the man Ali called "The Big Ugly Bear."

Sure. But Rocky hit slightly harder, had a better chin, and was physically stronger than Dempsey. He also fought out of a crouch while dempsey was more accustomed to bob and weave with fancy footwork. I don't think Dempsey matches up better. I think Dempsey's superior aggresion would be his downfall here. His Bobbing and Weaving was nice, until Liston sticks his long left jab in his face.

[Stevie G]

Is this possible? This is a hard fight to call. Sonny was so strong and could very possibly make quick work of Dempsey.

But on the other hand, Dempsey could easily make Sonny miss his blows by bobbing and weaving, and hurt the 'Big Ugly Bear' with thunderous shots to the body. Jack would also smash him with that hard left hook or pulverizing right hand.

Tough one to call, but I can guarantee that someone would get knocked out in this fight. Could Dempsey pull it off?
This one would be a thriller,Hydraulix ! I lean towards Liston because of his jab,primarily. It would keep Jack on the backfoot during lengthy intervals,before Sonny takes him out. Dempsey would also inflict pain on Liston before he gets taken out.

[mcvey]

Is this possible? This is a hard fight to call. Sonny was so strong and could very possibly make quick work of Dempsey.

But on the other hand, Dempsey could easily make Sonny miss his blows by bobbing and weaving, and hurt the 'Big Ugly Bear' with thunderous shots to the body. Jack would also smash him with that hard left hook or pulverizing right hand.

Tough one to call, but I can guarantee that someone would get knocked out in this fight. Could Dempsey pull it off?

I think Dempsey has the potential to ko any man he can hit , then again the same goes for Liston.

His results against big sparring partners bear testimony to his ferocity.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[burt bienstock]

The question should be restated to "could sonny Liston knock out Jack Dempsey " ?
And the logical answer should be "of course'. But would that have happened, I say NO !
Most posters visualize Jack Dempsey from film of him against Gene Tunney, when Jack
did not fight for over THREE YEARS,without a tune-up bout. And he no longer had mgr
Jack Kearns,his close brother JUST committed suicide,and Dempsey was 32 years old,
and a shell of his former self,who possessed panther-like speed.
Just watch with open eyes, his two punch kayo of Firpo in the second round, so fast that
the camera shows a BLURR, and Firpo drops like a fallen log. That was the Dempsey of his
prime,who was considered the greatest fighter from 1900-50 in a poll taken in 1950.
One other thing Dempsey though about 190-93,was from the waist up as big as a 210-15
pound heavyweight, with inordinate strength for his size. Dempsey with his great two handed power,combined with middleweight speed and reflexis,along with a toughness
moulded from his hobo days,made him a scary opponent for any heavyweight who ever lived,of that I'm convinced...

[RockysSplitNose]

I think the searing blazing handspeed and power would be the thing which would rattle Sonny Liston - big Sonny could really take a heavy shot - but the 22 year old skinny Clay rattled and shook Liston - it looked to me like it was the speed of the shots caught him a little unawares - if Dempsey could lash him with some lightning fast blazing counters a la the combo that put Willard down for the first time ever (and broke his jaw) then he could have Liston's eye's popping out and backing up very quickly - great fighter Liston but he could be and was rattled and KO'd by much lesser fighters and hitters than Dempsey so Dempsey no doubt about could do the same - I don't really imagine there isn't anyone Dempsey couldn't KO if he timed his shots right like he did against Willard (who himself had one of the greatest chins in history IMO)

[mcvey]

The question should be restated to "could sonny Liston knock out Jack Dempsey " ?
And the logical answer should be "of course'. But would that have happened, I say NO !
Most posters visualize Jack Dempsey from film of him against Gene Tunney, when Jack
did not fight for over THREE YEARS,without a tune-up bout. And he no longer had mgr
Jack Kearns,his close brother JUST committed suicide,and Dempsey was 32 years old,
and a shell of his former self,who possessed panther-like speed.
Just watch with open eyes, his two punch kayo of Firpo in the second round, so fast that
the camera shows a BLURR, and Firpo drops like a fallen log. That was the Dempsey of his
prime,who was considered the greatest fighter from 1900-50 in a poll taken in 1950.
One other thing Dempsey though about 190-93,was from the waist up as big as a 210-15
pound heavyweight, with inordinate strength for his size. Dempsey with his great two handed power,combined with middleweight speed and reflexis,along with a toughness
moulded from his hobo days,made him a scary opponent for any heavyweight who ever lived,of that I'm convinced...

Dempsey was light in the legs ,but had the same biceps as Liston , he was a man killer no question.
As to his strength ? Anyone doubting it should view him picking a prostrate Firpo up off the canvas.

[junior-soprano]

Liston was more hype than anything else, Dempsey would tear him up. Marty Marshall, a light heavy, broke Liston' s jaw in one fight, (win over liston) floored him in another. (loss to Liston)

a hype ?? not on this board but by the common man sonny is one of the most under estimated HW champs ever. he should have gotten a title shot much earlier and wasn't it for ali he would have been champ for a few more years no other contender up untill the late sixties would have beaten sonny.
i agree that dempsey had the power to ko sonny.
but not likely i think. 8 out of 10 times sonny beats dempsey

[ticar]

sonny liston would wipe the floor with jack dempsey.

[KO KIDD]

Could he knock out Liston? OF COURSE HE IS ONE OF THE HARDER HITTING HEAVYWEIGHTS OF ALL TIME

[ticar]

Could he knock out Liston? OF COURSE HE IS ONE OF THE HARDER HITTING HEAVYWEIGHTS OF ALL TIME
imo cleve wiliiams was a harder hitter than dempsey,and sonny didin't even buckle on his left hooks..

[RockyJim]

Could Dempsey KO Liston?....if Ali could in 1965 up in Maine...

[burt bienstock]

imo cleve wiliiams was a harder hitter than dempsey,and sonny didin't even buckle on his left hooks..
T, Cleveland Williams was a "shot" fighter when he fought Clay[Ali]. He had a bullet in him that couldn't be removed. Williams was a shell of himself by then...

[burt bienstock]

T, Cleveland Williams was a "shot" fighter when he fought Clay [Ali]. He had a bullet in him
that couldn't be removed. Williams was a shell of himself by then,,,

[mcvey]

T, Cleveland Williams was a "shot" fighter when he fought Clay [Ali]. He had a bullet in him
that couldn't be removed. Williams was a shell of himself by then,,,
Burt ,by definition you would have to have a bullet in you, to qualify as having been " shot".:lol:




Only joking, we all know what you mean.

[chancery]

Jack dempsy was tougher than most and had REAL skill and could break BONES with his fists. the guy hit harder than most. Dempsy could knock anybody out, but could be outboxed. so yes Dempsey COULD knock out listion, especially if the fight lasts longer than 2 rounds. liston better finish it quick. dempsey KOed willard, who had a 70 pound weight advantage.

[burt bienstock]

Burt ,by definition you would have to have a bullet in you, to qualify as having been " shot".:lol:




Only joking, we all know what you mean.
mc, I work alone...:happy:happy:happy

[dpw417]

I would have to pick Liston...But could Dempsey do it???...Sure could.