Prime Jack Johnson vs Jack Dempsey

[zuffa zack**]

Lol they did fight a lot compared to today

From my understanding tho modern guys make up for it in sparring

 

[Breakfast Bar]

I favor Dempsey but I think people are being a bit too dismissive of Johnson's technique and it's lack of modern refinement. Yes, Jack Dempsey seemed to be "evolved" as far as HWs go and Louis was even more evolved. But what about Max Baer or Mohammed Ali or Vitali Klitshko? I can only imagine the latter two in choppy, grainy films that were attributed to the early 20th century--people would immediately rip into their hands-at-waist stance and their defensive tendencies, including leaning straight back to avoid punches.

Some boxers have always had the physical tools to fight in an nontraditional manner. That isn't just the case 100 years ago, it happens in the modern game with guys like Hamed and RJJ. Jack Johnson struck me as a guy with so much size, speed and ring generalship versus his opponents that he could get away with a style that allowed him to exert very little energy and still control a fight. I don't think he could control Dempsey's pace and speed with that style, but it's debatable. I definitely think he could have fought at a higher level than his opponents forced him to in his prime.

 

[mozfonky]

I favor Dempsey but I think people are being a bit too dismissive of Johnson's technique and it's lack of modern refinement. Yes, Jack Dempsey seemed to be "evolved" as far as HWs go and Louis was even more evolved. But what about Max Baer or Mohammed Ali or Vitali Klitshko? I can only imagine the latter two in choppy, grainy films that were attributed to the early 20th century--people would immediately rip into their hands-at-waist stance and their defensive tendencies, including leaning straight back to avoid punches.

Some boxers have always had the physical tools to fight in an nontraditional manner. That isn't just the case 100 years ago, it happens in the modern game with guys like Hamed and RJJ. Jack Johnson struck me as a guy with so much size, speed and ring generalship versus his opponents that he could get away with a style that allowed him to exert very little energy and still control a fight. I don't think he could control Dempsey's pace and speed with that style, but it's debatable. I definitely think he could have fought at a higher level than his opponents forced him to in his prime.

The older guys look plain atrocious no matter how you cut it, in comparison to the later fighters. Not much footage of many of them but I've seen Corbett who if he showed up in a gym today he'd get laughed out of it. Benny Leonard looks horrible, it ain't just when these fighters lean back, stand straight up, it's when they have their chins up in the air, Ali leaned back but you'd never see him fighting like some of those guys. Dempsey in the Willard fight looks primitive too, and also, in the footage of him in the other thread with Joe Louis, he throws a left hook the same way he did in the films, it doesn't look right, he throws it with his whole body, no real advanced body mechanics (at least to my eye) Like I said, if anyone knows of those fighters throwing a punch with good shoulder snap show me. However, Dempsey must be respected in his context, he singlehandedly changed the sport and brought all the things we do today, chin tucked, rolling, slipping, you add to that his books on the sport and we have not only a fighter but a genius fighter bordering on artist. Dempsey takes Johnson.

 

[Err]

I favor Dempsey but I think people are being a bit too dismissive of Johnson's technique and it's lack of modern refinement. Yes, Jack Dempsey seemed to be "evolved" as far as HWs go and Louis was even more evolved. But what about Max Baer or Mohammed Ali or Vitali Klitshko? I can only imagine the latter two in choppy, grainy films that were attributed to the early 20th century--people would immediately rip into their hands-at-waist stance and their defensive tendencies, including leaning straight back to avoid punches.

Some boxers have always had the physical tools to fight in an nontraditional manner. That isn't just the case 100 years ago, it happens in the modern game with guys like Hamed and RJJ. Jack Johnson struck me as a guy with so much size, speed and ring generalship versus his opponents that he could get away with a style that allowed him to exert very little energy and still control a fight. I don't think he could control Dempsey's pace and speed with that style, but it's debatable. I definitely think he could have fought at a higher level than his opponents forced him to in his prime.

 

[mozfonky]

seen that before, makes a point but the klitchkos and the heavyweights of the last ten years are really lacking. I don't tell other people how to rank fighters but the klitschkos aren't great in my opinion. It's always been an axiom that european fighters stand up too straight, it hasn't changed. When I was growing up the european heavyweights were a joke, a real joke. Ali fought Cooper, Mildenburger, Richard Dunn, Jurgen Blin, Brian London in those days they weren't considered worthy comp, Holmes fought a few too I think and no one took them seriously. Now, all the sudden they are the best, well, if you want to call them that go ahead but I'm not impressed.

 

[Breakfast Bar]

There is a difference between fighting the Western European fighters of the 70s and 80s who were worse as amateurs and pros than their American counterparts and fighting the Soviet block fighters of the 2000s, who are a force not only in the pros but also on the amateur level.

Eastern European (and Cuban) fighters weren't considered a joke as amateurs even in the days of Ali and Holmes.

 

[mozfonky]

There is a difference between fighting the Western European fighters of the 70s and 80s who were worse as amateurs and pros than their American counterparts and fighting the Soviet block fighters of the 2000s, who are a force not only in the pros but also on the amateur level.

Eastern European (and Cuban) fighters weren't considered a joke as amateurs even in the days of Ali and Holmes.

Naw, I don't see it, if i did, I would admit it. Not impressed one bit by the hw's these days. I'm not saying that from an america-centric view, but what i see. Pacquiao is a very technically flawed fighter, some of the stuff he does is beyond amateurish, but he's still a helluva great fighter. Not so with the klitschkos. boring, passionless, pointless to watch. Anyway what was the point of the video? That the klitshkos are taking the sport back a hundred years?