Manassa Mauler V Brown Bomber

[walshb]

I hope this has not been discussed yet but here it goes!!!

Quite possibly the best fantasy match ever IMO....Two deadly fast and accurate punchers who aren't gonna' do anything but go for the KO due to their styles. Does Dempsey's 'better' chin give him victory by KO or can Louis KO Dempsey before he himself gets KO'd.

I am going with Dempsey due to chin and his better defense. He was harder to hit and was more mobile.

[kikibalt]

I'll go with the short puncher Louis over the wide puncher Dempsey.

[rocky111]

Frankie, Dempsey was only wide with Willard, but he was different in his other bouts. Short and hitting from a bob and weave. He was much harder to nail than Louis, although both guys would ko anybody.

[mike]

just to see these to guys meet in street clothes would be enough for me--which they did often. in the ring, id just have a heart attack after the first hard exchange. what great boxer punchers they were and they gave back to the game which made them living immortals ;real dignity. we will never see their like ,again.

[kikibalt]

Frankie, Dempsey was only wide with Willard, but he was different in his other bouts. Short and hitting from a bob and weave. He was much harder to nail than Louis, although both guys would ko anybody.

Rocky

In all the fights that I seen of Dempsey, his punches were wider there Louis's.
Imo No body could punch short like Louis.

[rocky111]

Agreed Frankie with a straight right or jab, but I think Jack had the shorter tighter hook. I also think Jack might have been harder to nail,although anybody coming in to ko can be nailed and we both know this. Joe Louis who fought Max and the Dempsey who fought Willard. Now thats a fight.

[walshb]

Both are supreme punchers but I think Jack's extra viciousness and wilder faster style will see him take Louis early, before Louis can set Jack up.

[langford]

Agreed Frankie with a straight right or jab, but I think Jack had the shorter tighter hook. I also think Jack might have been harder to nail,although anybody coming in to ko can be nailed and we both know this. Joe Louis who fought Max and the Dempsey who fought Willard. Now thats a fight.

agree here with the tighter hooks for dempsey-louis the shorter right--none shorter by anybody ive seen be it thier respective hooks and right. would never guess on the outcome, probably the fellow who is harder to nail. neither one of these guys wants to test their chins in this one -until they may realley have too.

[raylawpc]

If Louis had trouble with fighters who pressed him out of a crouch - a la Galento and Godoy (first fight) - isn't it reasonable to assume he would have had a much harder time with a guy like Dempsey?

[dongee]

That's one key, Tom. Another: I have always believed that in a match between two deadly punchers the one with the better chin wins it somewhere during the mix.

Yet another: I have never seen a shorter, deadlier hook to the face than the one that devastated Jack Sharkey in his careless moment against Dempsey.

Joe Louis had great, short handspeed; Dempsey's ability to find a way to hurt his opponent was just as great. Toe to toe, I think Jack counters to upset our Brown Bomber.

What a matchup!

h.n.

[raylawpc]

That's one key, Tom. Another: I have always believed that in a match between two deadly punchers the one with the better chin wins it somewhere during the mix.

Amen, Hap!

[dnahar]

I think Joe Louis wins it with his controlled aggression. Dempsey could get wild at times, especially after landing a big punch. Bill Brennan was up on points against Dempsey before he was KO'd as was Conn over Louis so both have had times when they were outboxed in their primes. I think over the 15 rounds, these greats would show respect for each other's power and a prime Joe Louis with his short, stinging punches, and using his jab with a slightly longer reach would win the decision in a good, but not great fight.

Deepak

[walshb]

I personally think if the fight goes the distance that a peak Dempsey is definitely the busier of the two landing more punches throughout. He had the wilder faster style. Louis I cannot see outboxing Jack. Joe needs the KO for victory. Joe was a lot more methodical in his approach. He waited longer and really picked his shots. How many can he really pick and land clean on Dempsey who was an all out attacker with precision, chin and very decent stamina

[hagler04]

In fights between a great swarmer and a great boxer, the boxer almost always wins. I think that trend continues in this matchup. Dempsey will not whirllwind as much after the first round once he feels Louis's retaliatory fire, and Louis was the best and hardest hitting counter-puncher in HW history, along with arguably Jack Johnson. Once Dempsey is forced to be more cautious, Louis's jab will be the key, and an increasingly frustrated Dempsey goes in once too many times and gets stopped before the 10th.

[Sharkey]

Jack Dempsey wasn't really a swarmer like Leon Spinks... and Joe Louis was not, to me, a great boxer. A great boxer does not get outboxed by Bob Pastor, who himself was a very good boxer. Louis was thoroughly outboxed by Billy COnn as well.

While Joe figured them out and got the job done, he did not exactly begin to outbox these guys before he turned the tide.

Just something to chew on I guess. Given that I am not certain the great boxer versus great swarmer debate usually tips to the boxer's advantage in anything other than retrospect when the boxer happens to win those matchups.

This one could go either way. I stand by my belief that there is no fighter in history who, if hit by Dempsey as often or more than he hits Jack, wins. Joe contering Jack will have to be done when Jack is inert and in range, and timing Dempsey is incredibly dangerous. I see Joe using the jab and due to this, Jack having hitting opportunities. Inside, in clinches Jack has a big advantage. If Louis can press the attack he will win, but I do not think that can or will be his modus operandi.

I'll take Dempsey...with the knowledge that betting wise he will probably be the 'dog and I think he has a better than even shot at winning this particular matchup.. in either's era under either era's rules.

[kikibalt]

Louis was not a great boxer per se, but he was a great counter puncher with power.

[fatcity]

Dempsey was hurt quite a few times in his career... personally I think this would be short and sweet... Dempsey getting the better start and hurting and perhaps flooring Louis early, but he would be coming right at Louis and once Joe started gtting his counters off I see Dempsey getting banged up and floored a number of times before being koed in about 5 or 6 rounds....

[PeteLeo]

Aside from the first Flynn bout (which, admittedly, is a stumbling point in evaluating Dempsey's career, as he either was taken out in quick order or went for a dive), Jack was never hurt as seriously as either the young Louis against Schmeling or the old Louis against Marciano. Dempsey appeared to have amazing recooperative abilities married with a rock solid chin. No matter what you think of Firpo otherwise, the man was big, strong, and could hit like a freight train, and he landed his money punch (the right) as cleanly as possible at least twice in the first round of their fight. On both occasions, Dempsey was as dangerous as ever following the count. In fact, the knockdown before the out-of-the-ring blow was a freaking monstrous shot that merely sent Dempsey to his glovetips before he scored his own KD a few seconds later.

I'm not saying Louis couldn't stop Dempsey (I think under the proper circumstances, Joe could have scored countouts over Ali and Chuvalo), but I do believe Dempsey's equal or better power would have been more likely to find and shatter Louis' somewhat less sturdy chin. Maybe as early as the first round. PeteLeo.

[walshb]

Does Dempsey have the better chin. From all accounts of both men I assumed he did. Who hits harder?...this is up for debate. Why would Louis be knocked down and get up, but Dempsey gets KO'd. I really think Jack would take Joe's shots better than Joe takes Jacks. Jackis faster from more angles and had the better mobility by far. He has too much offensive power and diversity as well as one hell of a hard punch for Louis to just take, get back up and win by KO. I could be wrong, but I think Dempsey's better chin, mobility, defense and footwork will see him beating Louis. Joe's lack of footwork, and the fact I think he is easier hit than Dempsey will see Dempsey tag him clean, hard and very often for an early KO

But what a scrap while it lasts!!!

[Sharkey]

Louis was not a great boxer per se, but he was a great counter puncher with power.

No doubt. I think Louis if he can sit and counter Jack will stop him or beat him if he doesn't KO him.

I also think Jack's in and out wil lbe tempered by Joe.

But. Joe, to counter Jack, has to be there, set and must deal with what is coming at him. Countering Braddock is one thing. Louis had to be in range to do damage. Jack will be in range when Jack is tossing stuff much different than the norm.

Joe also has to deal with a guy who when he is in close isn't Godoy muscling but is one of the premiere clinch and hit masters.

Both will disrupt the effectiveness of what either does really well. That said, I don't bet Joe sits and counters. I think he jabs and to win must not react but act....and yet Jack needs to be there for Joe's planted feet to support the body which the delivering arms are attached to.

All in all, I will take Jack with the pot-sweetner I believe being laying 5 bucks to win 6 or 7.

[langford]

Sharkey- nice analysis. I dont know who wins this all time favorite of mine. That said, Louis must mix his actions and reactions which I am sure he would do. From a trainers view, that has to happen, and would. Other than that , I dont know, still good insight !

[Roberto Aqui]

When 2 greats collide, anything can happen, but I tend to think that Dempsey is just the wrong style and fighter for Joe to beat. He was such a fast starter and finisher and maybe the most dangerous heavy ever when hurt. Joe hit the canvas too many times and getting up against a Dempsey is difficult to survive.

[jim]

Agree with Roberto. Dempsey was the most dangerous fighter I ever saw when hurt, and a terrific punishing finisher - Joe did hit the cnavas a bit too much and nobody was as dangerous when hurt as Jack , iimo.

[mike]

i was going though these hugh plies of notes of like ten full notebooks filled with phone interviews with arcel , hayes, bailey, dmato, jack sharkey , etc. i had found an interview with jim deforest, dempseys head trainer thru the willard fight. the interview was done in 1927. when deforest first worked with dempsey, he was astounded by restlessness of this kid. dempsey would litterralyy pace for hours, back and forth, back and forth in rooms or yards whatever. deforest would curuoisly look at this kid and said" he seemmed like something wild trapped in a cage;" deforest whom was older than dirt and saw nearly every tough badass since and including sullivan;, was concerned ... he once asked the kid after abit of time with him - to draw him out abit , and knowing his background, maybe he ,in self defese , might have killed a guy and asked-- " " you must have something very serious on your mind" , trying to bring him out. deforest was already in his mid fifties and pretty much knew the score. he said" dempsey just lauged; that he was always that way." before deforest died, he felt he always thought dempsey was the greatest heavy he ever saw- especilly after hed come roaring back from incridible odds to win-- and "dempsey was the most animalistic and natural fighter i personall ever saw , and there were a pretty good amount of those fellows!!" article sent to me by ted haye who explained to me some of this-, chief second for willard fight and later, trainer for dempsey. hope its of some interest.

[Sharkey]

Mike,

throw those interviews in a thread if you can. Would be excellent reading.

[mike casey]

I rate Jack the greatest heavyweight and Joe a close number two, and that's taking all factors into consideration. In a straight head-to-head, however, I have always believed that Dempsey would overwhelm Louis very quickly.

Mike has kindly shared his notes with me during our collaborations, and the theme is always the same from the likes of Arcel, Hayes, Stillman etc - they talk of Dempsey as a man apart, an absolute one-off who didn't have any discernible weaknesses at his best.

[sr71ko]

I respectfully disagree with the panel in the Jack Dempsey vs. Joe Louis dream fight. In my opinion, Dempsey's chin is somewhat overrated while Louis's chin is underrated. Joe Louis was floored 10 times, while Dempsey was down at least 8 times in his career. Both Luis Firpo and Andre "Agile" Anderson had floored Dempsey twice, Gene Tunney once, and Fireman Flynn had Dempsey down at least 3 times (perhaps even more) before Bernie Dempsey had threw in the towel. Also, according to Randy Robert's bio on Jack Dempsey, Dempsey had 2 knockdown drag out fignts with Johnny Sudenberg in 1915 in which both fighters were down several times. In addition, Bill Brennan, George Carpentier, and Jack Sharkey had Dempsey hurt in their fights against Dempsey. The point that I'm trying to make is if Dempsey's chin is better than Louis's chin, it was not that much better. It also could be possible that Dempsey may have been down more times than Louis. Last week on ESPN Classic, I had watched a young Rocky Marciano struggle with a 37 year old Louis for 7 rounds before he kayoed Louis's shadow in the 8th round. If a better conditioned and physically stronger Marciano had struggled with a faded Louis, than how could either Marciano or Dempsey had beaten a prime Joe Louis? Dempsey may hurt, stun, and may even deck Louis, but he would not kayo him. Instead, Louis would counterpunch with pin point accuracy and devastating power. Dempsey aggressive style would be suicide. Joe Louis would stop a game Jack Dempsey inside of 7 or 8 rounds.

[Elwill7847]

Love Dempsey and he would have been hell for Louis. But, both in thier primes, I'd have to lean towards Louis prevailing in a hell of a fight.

I rate Dempsey 3rd all time behind Louis and Ali. He is very close to those two guys and I wouldnt argue anyone making Dempsey #1.

[raylawpc]

When analysizing whether a fighter had a "good chin," the key isn't how many times he was down; the key is how many times he stayed down. Dempsey was stopped once - under dubious circumstances - and Louis twice, both by fighters who themselves either had been, or would become, all-time great heavyweight champions. In my judgment, both Dempsey and Louis had excellent chins.

[Sharkey]

I respectfully disagree with the panel in the Jack Dempsey vs. Joe Louis dream fight. In my opinion, Dempsey's chin is somewhat overrated while Louis's chin is underrated. Joe Louis was floored 10 times, while Dempsey was down at least 8 times in his career. Both Luis Firpo and Andre "Agile" Anderson had floored Dempsey twice, Gene Tunney once, and Fireman Flynn had Dempsey down at least 3 times (perhaps even more) before Bernie Dempsey had threw in the towel. Also, according to Randy Robert's bio on Jack Dempsey, Dempsey had 2 knockdown drag out fignts with Johnny Sudenberg in 1915 in which both fighters were down several times. In addition, Bill Brennan, George Carpentier, and Jack Sharkey had Dempsey hurt in their fights against Dempsey. The point that I'm trying to make is if Dempsey's chin is better than Louis's chin, it was not that much better. It also could be possible that Dempsey may have been down more times than Louis. Last week on ESPN Classic, I had watched a young Rocky Marciano struggle with a 37 year old Louis for 7 rounds before he kayoed Louis's shadow in the 8th round. If a better conditioned and physically stronger Marciano had struggled with a faded Louis, than how could either Marciano or Dempsey had beaten a prime Joe Louis? Dempsey may hurt, stun, and may even deck Louis, but he would not kayo him. Instead, Louis would counterpunch with pin point accuracy and devastating power. Dempsey aggressive style would be suicide. Joe Louis would stop a game Jack Dempsey inside of 7 or 8 rounds.

I am confused by one point in the above. Marciano's 'struggle' with old Joe Louis means what exactly when we speak about prime joe Louis against Jack Dempsey?

Maybe it means more about not only Rocky against prime Joe Louis, but Rocky against the men who gave prime Joe Louis tough battles...or Max Schmeling specifically and Billy Conn.

Rocky and Jack are different guys, and if they are lumped together by default and said to be so similar they are virtually identical in analysis.... that's news to me. It would be as easy to state that Brennan would have KO'd Joe then if he had prime Jack as hurt as is made to be believed.