Will people ever STOP OVERRATING old primitive era boxers with little skill?

[Earl-Hickey]

he would be a light-heavyweight/cruiser... and no, he would not be outmatched... he would adapt/develop accordingly

we know that by what he achieved... he rose to the top and ruled

casual fans are dumb as shlt

but great post, good one !

Lmao idiotic, Usyk would stand him on his head and no amount of "adaption" would help him.

[aboutfkntime]

Lmao idiotic, Usyk would stand him on his head and no amount of "adaption" would help him.

just another dumb casual who does not realize that Dempsey would develop/adapt today, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE DID

the SAME conditions would apply if he were fighting today

and just another dumb casual who does not realize that ATG ranking is determined by how a fighter compared to his peers, and what he achieved historically

Dempsey > Usyk... who will get sparked at heavyweight as soon as he fights someone decent

[Quaccey]

just another dumb casual who does not realize that Dempsey would develop/adapt today, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE DID

the SAME conditions would apply if he were fighting today

and just another dumb casual who does not realize that ATG ranking is determined by how a fighter compared to his peers, and what he achieved historically

Dempsey > Usyk... who will get sparked at heavyweight as soon as he fights someone decent

Thank you, truly are some smart people on this forum. Keep dropping gems on em'

[Earl-Hickey]

just another dumb casual who does not realize that Dempsey would develop/adapt today, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE DID

the SAME conditions would apply if he were fighting today

and just another dumb casual who does not realize that ATG ranking is determined by how a fighter compared to his peers, and what he achieved historically

Dempsey > Usyk... who will get sparked at heavyweight as soon as he fights someone decent

Theres only one dumb casual round here mate and you see him when you look in the mirror

[Clegg]

I don't consider Dempsey top 10 of all time but almost everything else you wrote was dumber than the article you're criticising.

The eye test matters but so does the fact that film of guys like Dempsey is very poor compared to current standards, the low frame rate, grainy image, only one camera angle. Jack Johnson was a master of inside fighting but a lot of that is not fully captured on film because of the video quality. Johnson was perhaps a better inside fighter than anybody of the last 20 years. But if a young boxer wanted to study an ATG they would pick somebody more recent because the camera picks up so much more these days.

People say 'Jack Johnson wasn't that skilled, only beat smaller men' but when you point to Dempsey wins against big guys 'yeah they were big but ******'. So there always an argument against the achievements of the older era. It's always hard to compare people a century apart so you have to put a lot of consideration on if they beat the best of their era and how dominant they were.

I think Dempsey would KO AJ. Dempsey was a huge star, especially in New York. AJ would have to go there and have a panic attack even worse because the crowd would be heavily against him, and his opponent even more aggressive. Dempsey hit harder than Ruiz, fought with more ferocity, and had quicker feet. Fury would beat Dempsey, but likely it would be through using his size, strength, unpredictability. Clinch when they expect a punch, punch when they expect you to clinch. Feints, unorthodox angles, taunting the opponent. Which are all the exact same tactics that Jack Johnson developed, perfected, and influenced the entire sport with. So old fighters obviously had some skill...

[Lomadeaux]

I just got finished reading a RING ****ZINE article from a few years in degust, for several different reasons. One being how ring ****zine and many boxing fans/journalist/critiques, disregard the EYE TEST.

For example, this particular had Jack Dempsey as the 5th greatest heavyweight of all time . Dempsey in his prime was 190 pounds, had no skill (neither did his opponents) and would get CRUSHED by an average amateur middleweight of today?

I recall one idiot (FROM THIS MESSAGE BOARD) saying how fighters were so great back then "because they fought 30-40 rounds". The reason they were able to fight all those rounds was because they didn't do anything but circle each other and hold. If you fight 30 rounds in a Boxing match that means your not doing anything.

Logic gets thrown out the window when it comes to old primitive boxers.

Will people ever stop overrating old fighters from the past?

You literally know NOTHING about boxing...

[Lomadeaux]

I don't consider Dempsey top 10 of all time but almost everything else you wrote was dumber than the article you're criticizing.

Absolutely....

[JakeTheBoxer]

They were far better fighters.

You had to be special to be a world champ while there were only 8 divisions with 1 title in each.

Now you have 16 divisions with 4 titles in each division. No **** boxing is dying.

[TonyGe]

They were far better fighters.

You had to be special to be a world champ while there were only 8 divisions with 1 title in each.

Now you have 16 divisions with 4 titles in each division. No **** boxing is dying.

Yeah that's a big problem for the sport.

[removed]

I tend to agree, i mean, this guy is supposed to be the GOAT, right?