Kimura77
Orange Belt
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2010
- Messages
- 368
- Reaction score
- 0
I don't understand the logic of this.
Dempsey fought Tunney old and disinterested. He was busy being a movie star and idol. And Tunney was a slick as hell guy. It's not like Tunney lost a lot of fights; he's an all-time great himself.
Dempsey truly was a pioneer; a mix of fluidity and savagery unlike any before him.
No disrespect to Johnson, he is an all-time great, had better longevity than Dempsey, and I don't have any gripes if someone ranked them higher than Dempsey on their all-time great type lists, but at their best The Mauler > Galveston Giant.
He was disinterested ill concede to that but there was only 2 years difference in age between the two and i agree he was the first "effective brawler" but he was too inactive when he held the strap(would be stripped in modern era)and no i wouldnt put tunney ahead of dempsey just noting that a much smaller boxer gave him trouble and Galveston Giant was larger than most men dempsey fought(MOST) and had more than enough skill to go with it