Gene Tunney Versus

[ThatOne]

Michael Spinks
Roy Jones Jr.
James Toney
Bob Foster

[HomicideHenry]

Michael Spinks
Roy Jones Jr.
James Toney
Bob Foster

His best chance is against Foster. Outside of that, I think the rest beat him.

[gilgamesh]

I'd pick him to beat James and Bob Foster. Roy and Michael Spinks beat him though.

[Ambling Alp II]

Spinks would be 50-50.
He would more than likely beat Foster; though it would not be easy.
He actually was similar to Jones in some ways, but better and would win.
He would beat Toney fairly easy.

[ThatOne]

Spinks would be 50-50.
He would more than likely beat Foster; though it would not be easy.
He actually was similar to Jones in some ways, but better and would win.
He would beat Toney fairly easy.

Why would you say he was similar to RJJ?

To me Tunney won on technique while RJJ won on pure athleticism.

[Senya13]

Tunney was nothing similar to Jones. The number of times he looked unimpressive in his fights, and that is against poor opposition...

[Ambling Alp II]

Spinks would be 50-50.
He would more than likely beat Foster; though it would not be easy.
He actually was similar to Jones in some ways, but better and would win.
He would beat Toney fairly easy.

Why would you say he was similar to RJJ?

To me Tunney won on technique while RJJ won on pure athleticism.

Both often held their hands low, were fast, and threw a lot of good combinations.
Tunney had the better chin, and was smarter.
Tunney's competition was much better.

[Senya13]

Tunney may have been smarter out of the ring, but inside the ring ropes... Contemporary reports for how many Tunney fights have you seen? Obviously not many if any at all.

[Ambling Alp II]

Let me get this straight. Do you really think that Roy Jones fought better competition than Gene Tunney and that Roy Jones was the smarter fighter inside the ropes than Gene Tunney?

[Senya13]

Yes to both. I'll ask again, reports for how many Tunney fights have you read?

[DaveyMac]

I assume you mean at 175 for these guys?

I think Tunney was definitely a better fighter than these five, of course anyone could win on a given night with guys this quality.

I think Foster would have given Tunney the most trouble, but I'd hate to have to defend that position long.

Toney I think would be the biggest underdog.

[Ambling Alp II]

Yes to both. I'll ask again, reports for how many Tunney fights have you read?

I don't know how many reports I have read. Just some in various books that I have. Did Joe Blow from the Daily Bugle have something negative to say about how smart Tunney was? How many fights did this cost Tunney? He lost one in his entire career.


I have never heard anyone accuse Jones of being a particularly smart fighter. He pretty much got by on athletic ability and fighting wretched competition.

I am assuming we are talking about 175.

It's absolutely insane to think Jones fought better competition. McCallum and Hill were past it. Tarver and Johnson beat the crap out of him. Most of the fighters that Jones fought at 175 were mostly abysmal.

As you know, Tunney beat Greb, Carpentier, Gibbons,Levinsky. This would be the part where you go on to say that each of these guys lost to someone else and therefore were not that good; they weren't all in their absolute prime and that Greb was smaller than Tunney.
I say they were still a lot better than Jones' opponents. Then I say look at their overall career and compare that Jones' opponents. Then you ignore Jones opponents and go on again about how Tunney's opponents were not that good.etc. etc.

Lets move on.

[Senya13]

1921-07-02 Soldier Horace Jones W-TKO7
Tunney looked awful, he himself admitted that.

1921-08-04 Martin Burke W-PTS10
Reporters joked that it better been raining again and the fight would be delayed one more time, so that they don't have to sit through this terrible match.

1921-08-18 Eddie Josephs W-PTS12
One sided bout, but how did Josephs stay the whole 12 rounds? He was knocked down and out many-many times, was badly hurt by punches even in some of the bouts he won.

1921-10-14 Jack Burke W-TKO3
Stopped on cuts, and according to reporters Burke either held his own or had the better of it at the time of the stoppage.

1921-10-25 Magnus (Wolf) Larsen W-TKO7
One-sided fiasco, but Tunney disappointed the reporters when he had Larsen down 3 or 4 times in the 3rd round, and not only couldn't finish him, but got tired himself and was getting hit by slow, telegraphed punches of his poor opponent.

1921-12-22 Eddie O'Hare W-KO6
Again Tunney had an opponent down, but O'Hare came back and had the better of the 5th round and was ahead in the 6th.

And so on and so on.

[Ambling Alp II]

You can make those kind of criticisms of literally every fighter.
He lost the 5th round of a fight? Some reporters thought he was losing a fight that he won by TKO in the 3rd round? Didn't knock a guy out when he knocked him down 3 or 4 times in a round? Wow, how embarrassing.

None of this addresses whether Jones was smarter in the ring than Tunney and whether Jones fought better competition than Tunney.
In fact, as expected, you didn't even mention Jones at all.

[Senya13]

The point is Tunney wasn't a mega-skillful, ultra-clever boxing master that many people seem to think him to be. In fact, some reporters during his career questioned if he was of championship class at all, and not a second-rater. And I don't mean young Tunney by that, but the 1922-1923 version of him.

[Ambling Alp II]

I'm sure there were some reporters who thought Tunney was a 2nd rater. There are stupid reporters in every era. Just in the 1922-1923 years, Tunney beat Levinsky, Greb twice, and won a newspaper decision over Loughran. A second-rater does not do all that. It would take a very skillful fighter to do that.

[Senya13]

A first rater should be able to beat all second and third raters convincingly. Something Tunney often failed to do.