Printable View
your whole argument is based on now versus then... now they're bigger stronger and better. if we equal the playing field by giving the fighters of yesteryear the same advantages that today's fighters have ie: nutrition, scientific training and steroids the old ones would destroy the new ones. pretty much everyone agrees with this but you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
you are a moron who just needs attention. i think you need either a girlfriend or boyfriend to pay you some attention.
Maxpower is a troll people...a wind up merchant who I 100% Guarantee is an existing member under a different name (I got a rough idea who ) ;)
I've already blown his bullshit theory out of the water by mentioning what the 'tiny' Jack Dempsey achieved time and time against bigger fighters.
Something he has no answer for/to and conveniently chose to ignore lt , strange for someone with an answer to every other post ;-)
Much like Ross he's a wanker.
Stop taking the bait and wise up people ;)
Who you think it is? I say it's that fag PremeQuote:
Originally Posted by smashup
@smashup
Stand down nutbag!
I'll did not overlook your post and you must know I would not be the first guy to claim that Dempsey's career was all smoke and mirrors. Sometimes even this "no-lifer" has to do other things you know!! :) lol
I'm no more of a troll you guys are when you post rubbish contrary to the ideas I'm putting forward. You might call me a "counter-troll" even!
loser
Alright, sit your asses down nutbags!
Let's compare your giant slayer with a modern fighter about the same size who was never considered a big whacker in modern times, Holyfield, the original modern trained boxer.
Holyfield dropped Bert Cooper and Mike Tyson with body shots... both 215-220 Lbs. at the time and just under 6'. Both big punchers. One an all-time great.
At CW he stopped Qawi (Foreman and Holyfield were the only 2 that stopped him, gave M. Spinks a tough fight), Ocasio, Tillman, DeLeon, and others. These guys had to cut down to make 190 Lbs... pretty big HWs in Dempsey's day. At HW Holyfield knocked out Tillis, Thomas, Dokes, Rodrigues, Stewart, Douglas, Cooper, Czyz, Tyson, Moorer, and others. None of these guys were small. He dropped Bowe, Mercer, Oquendo, Savarese, and others. He rocked Foreman, Lewis, Ruiz, Rahman, and others. He punched plenty hard compared to Dempsey for a modern featherfist.
Dempsey stopped a big and clumsy, 37 1/2 year old, part-time fighter named Jess Willard. Well, he really wasn't part-time but he turned pro in 1911 and retired in 1923... he had 34 pro fights. Willard went 25-7-2 (20) overall and 2-1 (1) in HW World Title fights. He beat Carl Morris W10, Jack Johnson (KO26), and Frank Moran W10. He was stopped 3 times.
Dempsey fouled Sharkey repeatedly prior to stopping him in the 7th... the fouls set up the stoppage. Dempsey and Jim Flynn took turns stopping each other in the 1st round... both fights may have been fixed. Firpo knocked Dempsey out of the ring prior to getting stopped in the 2nd. He failed to stop Meehan in 5 fights... Meehan went 2-1-2 vs. Dempsey. He fought Gunboat Smith and Carl Morris twice each... both went the distance the first time they fought Dempsey. He beat some guys who were considered good in those days like Battling Levinsky (who couldn't break wind with his best punch), Bill Brennan, Billy Miske, Georges Carpentier (who was small even at LHW), and Tommy Gibbons (W15) among others.
Dempsey wouldn't be able to hurt Holyfield. Holyfield would be able to hurt Dempsey. Holyfield is stronger, more durable, and the better boxer.
Jack Dempsey stopped like 2 or 3 bigger guys in a nutshell who were crap! And so much for that example! Your failing gentlemen. Would you'se all like to buy a bridge I'm selling? :D
Blah Blah Blah..... Moron.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
By now realisation must be kicking in for you all. I know it's hard when something you've believed in for so long... Turns out to be a big lie ;) But don't blame me I'm just delivering the news. It's the media and so called "boxing historians" with vested interests who like to carry on the idea that everything was golden in the past and today is weak. That story has been in circulation for a hundred years (the current era is crap, boxing is dying). The difference today is there is now a large group of people like me who have woken up BEFORE the era is way in the past enough to be considered a good era and viewing things for how they really are and not how we have been brainwashed to think they are!
suddenly i see your point... its all so clear to me now. i get it! your powers of persuasion have overcome my fear of change. overcome all the years of brainwashing... all the years of just believing, believing for no reason. i'm cured! i feel so good inside to know the truth. finally the truth!!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
you're an idiot.
did you really say that holmes, ali, and frazier were fat? haha! although most of your arguments arent good, i can at least see where you are coming from. then you throw in something completely insane that proves that you have no idea what you are talking about. haha.
i can sum up your argument very quickly. any fighter from the past that was big was an oaf. any fighter now that is big is good. any fighter from that past that was a small HW would get destroyed because HWs are bigger today. any fighter today that comes up to HW from a smaller weight class and is successful is good.
so you created an argument for yourself that you cant lose because the argument doesnt apply equally to old fighters and current fighters. is this correct?
Both of those guys hit all out on the move and get full weight and momentum behind their shots.Quote:
Originally Posted by imp
Are people retarded? Anyone can make the arguments max makes. All you have to do is watchthe fighters and make up your own mind. I think the Klits are great in any era. Outside that no one would beat a prime foreman, Fraizer, Ali etc. I don't believe Fury, Haye, Chisora, Arreola, Stiverne, Poverkin, Pulev, are the all time greats max believes them to be
Dempsey stood 6'¾" (185 cm). In his era, the average man stood 5'7" (170 cm) in the 19-teens and 1920s.
http://i338.photobucket.com/albums/n...mpsey_0101.jpg
Kind of implying Bradlee, that size did in fact matter even for Dempsey... But I do not wish to focus on size as an argument for anything as guys here to jump on that p4p thing immediately and nullify that argument. From the pic you provided you can see instantly that Dempsey has strong arms and shoulders but at his core he looks nothing like a modern boxer and you can tell that training regimes were way different back then.
Dempsey was one of those fighters who was not a "professional" athlete as we view them today. He worked a hard days work before hitting the gym.
There is far too much tolerance in the boxing world for the OTN... ("Old Time Nutbag").