Goodnight, Irene wrote:
I look forward to Skelp's next thread..."Is The Sky Blue? I Vote No. Discuss."
Pathetic. Why you can't seperate your emotions from such discussions just shows how purile you are. Your occupation as a Bouncer tells me everything about you from an intelligence point of view.
Are you stalking me? That occupation write-up is three years old, mate
Just read the thread. We all agree who's challenged --- it ain't me, padre. I think even you can guess what your posts tell the rest of us about you 8)
dempseyfire wrote:"struggled to win on points" in their first fight?
It seems like we've met the Sarah Palin of boxrec, you just made that up . . .Tunney won their first fight easily.
He also lost the rematch. Tunney took advantage of Dempsey's mistake and got the extra time, but he was NOT knocked out for 10 seconds.
Tunney also beat HOFers Greb, Gibbons, Levinsky, & Carpentier and other excellent fighters such as Weinert and Reinault. Plus two wins over Jack Dempsey.
He's an ATG by any rational person's definition.
Maybe instead of saying he is the Sarah Palin of boxrec (a lady who you may not like but seems pretty honest as far as politicians go), you should have said he is the Barack Obama of Boxrec, because THERE is a true liar!
I personally don't rate Tunney as an all-time great Heavyweight, just as I don't rate Calzaghe as an all-time great Light Heavyweight. Tunney is however, undeniably a HOF boxer and an all-time great.
In my opinion there is no question that Tunney was an all-time great. In accord with a comment granberry made in another thread (I forget which), I think Tunney was a big-boned guy who was not ultimately a natural light-heavyweight, meaning I think he got better pound-for-pound (stronger without losing his speed) when he allowed himself to get up in the 186-191 range. He beat a bunch of hall-of-famer/ATGs, most of whom weighed about the same as he did at the time he fought them, including Tommy Gibbons, Battling Levinsky, Harry Greb, Jeff Smith, Tommy Loughran, Georges Carpentier, and, obviously, Jack Dempsey. Erminio Spalla, Charlie Weinert, Johnny Risko, and Tom Heeney were servicable contenders (not bums by any means) whom Tunney completely dominated. He had something like 80-90 fights and was never stopped and knocked down only once-- by Dempsey.
IMO, Dempsey was among the really elite fighters of all-time and one does not have to believe that he was at his best to be impressed by Tunney's victories over him. The first fight, Dempsey was, by all accounts, comparatively out of condition and seriously rusty, leaving him slow and well off the form he showed earlier in his career. Tunney pitched a shut out, dominating nearly every minute of the fight, the lone exception being when Dempsey rung his bell in the 4th.
After that, though, Dempsey went right back into training and trained hard for the next year, and had one fight against a top guy (Sharkey). For the rematch, I believe that, though Dempsey was significantly slower of hand and foot than he had been in his prime, he was STILL a great fighter. I submit that reasonable minds can differ as to whether Dempsey knocked Tunney out in the 7th, and I accept that it's an exaggeration to say that Tunney won every round except the 7th (a common myth not borne out by the scorecards), but Tunney nevertheless clearly out-fought a great fighter that night, showing skill, brains, tactics, and heart. So, yes, I believe that his two wins over Dempsey establish Tunney as an all-time great heavyweight, as most boxing pundits/historians/experts have believed over the course of the last 90 years.
It's an all-time great debate for mine --- the old chestnut of whether Tunney would've bested the Dempsey of his heyday?
On a wing & a prayer, I would've gone with Dempsey to stop him. Maybe even KO him. & I think most people on this board by now would know the extremely high regard I have for Tunney. Would be close, though.
William Brady, Jim Corbett's manager, was once asked to compare Tunney with Corbett. Brady was quoted as saying that Corbett would have defeated even a prime Sullivan under MQ rules, but that Tunney would have never defeated a prime Jack Dempsey.
Jim Jeffries also said that Tunney would not have beaten a prime Dempsey. (But one can perhaps discount Jeffries' opinion: he and Tunney had a intense dislike for each other.)
raylawpc wrote:Jim Jeffries also said that Tunney would not have beaten a prime Dempsey. (But one can perhaps discount Jeffries' opinion: he and Tunney had a intense dislike for each other.)
Ray, can you elaborate on the Jeffries-Tunney fued? I've picked up indications from time to time of their mutual disregard for one another but I've never come across any details. I'm curious!
raylawpc wrote:Jim Jeffries also said that Tunney would not have beaten a prime Dempsey. (But one can perhaps discount Jeffries' opinion: he and Tunney had a intense dislike for each other.)
Ray, can you elaborate on the Jeffries-Tunney fued? I've picked up indications from time to time of their mutual disregard for one another but I've never come across any details. I'm curious!
It was basically a problem between two thin-skinned egos. In the late 1920s, Jeffries authored an "as told to" autobiography with Hugh Fullerton in which he wrote some unkind words about Tunney's abilities - basically, as I recall, he said Tunney was a light punching fancy dan who was lucky he never met the real Jack Dempsey - something like that. Shortly thereafter, Tunney wrote that Jeffries was basically an unskilled, human punching bag who won after his opponents had punched themselves out, and collapsed more from exhaustion than Jeffries' punches. Neither appreciated the other's comments . . .
raylawpc wrote:Jim Jeffries also said that Tunney would not have beaten a prime Dempsey. (But one can perhaps discount Jeffries' opinion: he and Tunney had a intense dislike for each other.)
Ray, can you elaborate on the Jeffries-Tunney fued? I've picked up indications from time to time of their mutual disregard for one another but I've never come across any details. I'm curious!
It was basically a problem between two thin-skinned egos. In the late 1920s, Jeffries authored an "as told to" autobiography with Hugh Fullerton in which he wrote some unkind words about Tunney's abilities - basically, as I recall, he said Tunney was a light punching fancy dan who was lucky he never met the real Jack Dempsey - something like that. Shortly thereafter, Tunney wrote that Jeffries was basically an unskilled, human punching bag who won after his opponents had punched themselves out, and collapsed more from exhaustion than Jeffries' punches. Neither appreciated the other's comments . . .
Tunney himself said that he believed a prime Jack Dempsey would have knocked out Louis in 2-3 rounds.
He also seemed to hold Jeffries in high regard as a fighter.
Panzerfaust wrote:Tunney himself said that he believed a prime Jack Dempsey would have knocked out Louis in 2-3 rounds.
He also seemed to hold Jeffries in high regard as a fighter.
I saw one article in which Tunney actually picked Dempsey to stop Louis in one!!
Can you share the source of yoiur statement that he held Jeffries in high regard? Every quote I've seen from Tunney's mouth about Jeffries (at least post-1928) was less than complimentary. I'd love to have a complimentary quote for my Jeffries files.
