Jeffries, Tunney, Marciano

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

had these 3 not retired.........


A. who would have there next title defense been against?

B. how long would they have lasted? who would be the man to finally dethrone them and why?

[HomicideHenry]

Jefferies: Had faced virtually every white competitor imaginable, the only people who stick out in my mind, who would have been left, would have been "Bombardier" Billy Wells, Gunner Moir, Carl Morris, Tommy Burns, Marvin Hart---then of course the same men Johnson defeated as he reigned champion, depends really how long Jefferies would have stuck around. But in my opinion, the only one of the white contenders who would have given him problems would have been Burns and Hart, but not by much.

Tunney: After defending his title two times against Dempsey and Meehan, Tunney retired rather soon. If he stayed around in boxing, I think the desire to retire versus wins in the ring would have hampered his career, but let's say it wouldnt, just for the hell of it. Schmeling and Sharkey were on the rise at the time, so I think he would have ended up fighting Schmeling in a really good battle of skill, but would have edged the German on decision, as he would have on Sharkey, but SHarkey in my opinion was slightly better skill wise, he just lacked the mental make up, cus he was known for his whining and break downs.

Marciano: Who else was really left but the following: Tommy "Hurricane" Jackson, Floyd Patterson, Ingemar Johanson, Eddie Machen, Brian London, Nino Valdes, Willi Besmanoff, and Zora Folley.

The only ones in my mind who would have given Marciano trouble would have been Patterson (hand speed was phenomenal, chin of glass), Machen, Besmanoff and Folley. But Folley had faults, despite being a good boxer, Machen as good as he was always seemed to lack that edge when he tried to get to another level. Besmanoff was very crafty but he lost alot to some of the better fighters, and even to chumps in club fight venues.

Valdes is the question mark really, because he was slated to face Marciano, but it never happened. But Valdes lost to Machen, Liston, football player Charlie Powell, Folley...but beat men such as Cockell and Ezzard Charles. Valdes in my opinion, was much better than people credited him for, but against the true greats, he failed to make his mark. I think Marciano would have beaten him, possibly in the 8th-10th rounds.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

Marciano: Who else was really left but the following: Tommy "Hurricane" Jackson, Floyd Patterson, Ingemar Johanson, Eddie Machen, Brian London, Nino Valdes, Willi Besmanoff, and Zora Folley.

dont forget bob baker, who was better than most of these guys. baker beat nino valdes twice. baker was a big 6'2 215lb fighter who possesed incredible handspeed, and solid boxing skill. he beat nino by outboxing him.

- also bob satterfield and earl walls(though he retired)


- harold johnson would have been a great fight to take. outside of patterson and johansen, johnson was better than anyone ot those guys. however, johnson seemed to not be interested in a fight with the rock and was more interested at the 175lb crown.


-hurricane jackson once got in the ring with marciano in a sparring session. Marciano hit jackson with a shot to the body and hurricane jackson froze, dropped down and puked all over the ring. I guess someone at the scene threatened jackson that they would reveal this story if he ever claimed marciano was ducking him.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

Tunney: After defending his title two times against Dempsey and Meehan, Tunney retired rather soon. If he stayed around in boxing, I think the desire to retire versus wins in the ring would have hampered his career, but let's say it wouldnt, just for the hell of it. Schmeling and Sharkey were on the rise at the time, so I think he would have ended up fighting Schmeling in a really good battle of skill, but would have edged the German on decision, as he would have on Sharkey, but SHarkey in my opinion was slightly better skill wise, he just lacked the mental make up, cus he was known for his whining and break downs.

i agree,

but sharkey, schmeling, godfrey were all legit top contenders and very dangerous fighters who tunney should have fought. schmeling didnt come into his own until 1930 and that would have been a very tough fight for tunney. i think schmeling was better skill wise than tunney

- other challengers are guys like larry gains, uzcuden, risko, young stribling, tommy loughran.

Jefferies: Had faced virtually every white competitor imaginable, the only people who stick out in my mind, who would have been left, would have been "Bombardier" Billy Wells, Gunner Moir, Carl Morris, Tommy Burns, Marvin Hart---then of course the same men Johnson defeated as he reigned champion, depends really how long Jefferies would have stuck around. But in my opinion, the only one of the white contenders who would have given him problems would have been Burns and Hart, but not by much.

yea jeffries would have had to wait a couple years until jack johnson was ready to take on him. also mcvey and jeanette were still green at the time, and langford was just 150lb.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

come to think of it i think a marciano fight with hurricane jackson would be a competitive and interesting fight. jackson had the size 6'4 and reach 80" to have big advantages over marciano.

hurricane jackson was called

"the strongest heavyweight in the division outside of marciano."- new york times 1954


- hurricane also possesed incredible stamina and he put up huge punch rates, so marcianos strength and stamina might not have a much effect on jackson in this fight.

- if you knew hurricane jackson, you would know one word to describe him as a fighter is CRAZY. he was a whacko!

[Ezzard]

Tunney would have ebaten Sharkey and Schmeling in close competitive fights and his stock would be much higher today.

Guys liek Marciano, Frazier, Tyson fight at a pace that often means that they can burn out quickly or demand a bit too much from their bodies. They can go from invincible to broken very quickly. I don't imagine any of the guys on the list beating a prime Rocky but a Rocky with a bad back carrying a few extra pounds, who knows.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

Tunney would have ebaten Sharkey and Schmeling in close competitive fights and his stock would be much higher today.

Guys liek Marciano, Frazier, Tyson fight at a pace that often means that they can burn out quickly or demand a bit too much from their bodies. They can go from invincible to broken very quickly. I don't imagine any of the guys on the list beating a prime Rocky but a Rocky with a bad back carrying a few extra pounds, who knows.

agreed, tunney's stock would DEFINTLEY be rated higher. i would rate him higher if he beat those schmeling, sharkey. i would also like to see tunney fight george godfrey or larry gains.


- i agree on rocky. who knows how long he would have lasted. in 1956 when he officially retired, he was 33 years old. i still think he would have beat floyd in 56 or 57 but he would have struggled with floyds speed and youthness, enough that rocky would realize its time for retirement. if he lasted till 1958, a 35 year old over the hill rocky would have been slaughtered by liston

[Ezzard]

Tunney would have ebaten Sharkey and Schmeling in close competitive fights and his stock would be much higher today.

Guys liek Marciano, Frazier, Tyson fight at a pace that often means that they can burn out quickly or demand a bit too much from their bodies. They can go from invincible to broken very quickly. I don't imagine any of the guys on the list beating a prime Rocky but a Rocky with a bad back carrying a few extra pounds, who knows.

agreed, tunney's stock would DEFINTLEY be rated higher. i would rate him higher if he beat those schmeling, sharkey. i would also like to see tunney fight george godfrey or larry gains.


- i agree on rocky. who knows how long he would have lasted. in 1956 when he officially retired, he was 33 years old. i still think he would have beat floyd in 56 or 57 but he would have struggled with floyds speed and youthness, enough that rocky would realize its time for retirement. if he lasted till 1958, a 35 year old over the hill rocky would have been slaughtered by liston

Fair assessment. Floyd would have messed rocky up but at soem point over 15 Rocky lands and it's goodnight. Marciano did the right thing for his health and his career. Tunney should have had a fight or two more. I can't imagine he'd have given the balck foghters a shot but if he ahd, and if he'd have won then he would be seen as much better fighter at HW than he currently is.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

jeffries, marciano really had no one to fight when they retired. floyd patterson at the time was still unproven and no one knew how good he really was until he knocked out moore. when marciano retired, archie was considered the clear # 1 heavyweight in the division and marciano had destroyed archie. in jeffries case, the good black fighters were still to green(johnson, mcvey, jeanette,) , langford was only 160lb then, and the only guys that could give him a fight tommy burns, marvin hart just werent good enough.

[Ambling Alp]

This is an interesting topic.

Jeffires probably would have fought Hart or Root next since they were the top challengers. Jeffries would have beaten either handily. He would have also easily beaten Burns.
If he wouldn't have defended against any black challengers, he could have been the champion for several more years.
If he would have fought black challengers, he wouldn't have had the title for that many years becaue he probably would have lost to Johnson.

As for Tunney, he really didn't have serious challengers either. No one stood out at all, no one was considered in tunney's class.

Tunney had just easily beaten Heeney. In recent fights, Sharkey only had a draw against Heeny, lost to Dempsey, and lost to Risko.

Schmeling hadn't beaten any top heavyweights, and recently been ko'd in one round by Gypsy Daniels.

Godfrey had recently lost to Risko.

Risko had also recently lost to Heeney, and Tunney himself had easily won a newspaper decison against him.

Uzcudun lost to Godgrey.
Gains lost to Bill Hartwell.

After Tunney had easily beaten Heeney in 1928, he was considered to be by far the best in the world. No one at the time thought that Tunney was ducking anyone or anything like that.
In fact it would be two years before Schmeling and Sharkey had emerged as the two best and fought each other for the vacant title. Each had to win 5 fights in that time.

How long could Tunney have continued to be the champion? Who would have eventually beaten him? That is really hard to say. He was 31 when he retired. We don't know how much he would have slowed down as he got older.

I'm guessing that he would have had the title for atleast another two or three years and then eventually lost to Sharkey or Schmeling. But who knows? He may have been able to stay the champion for longer.

As for Marciano, he was also well above the rest of the contenders when he retired. Moore, Patterson and Jackson were considered the top challengers (They were the challengers in the 3 man tournament that decided Marciano's successor), and it's hard to imagine him losing to to anyone of them at this time. He probably could have been the champion for another 3 years or so, and then as his skills declined, probably would have lost to several guys, such as Patterson, Johansson, Machen, or certainly Liston.

It is interesting to speculate. However, you can't really blame Jeffries, Tunney or Marciano for retiring when they did.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

It is interesting to speculate. However, you can't really blame Jeffries, Tunney or Marciano for retiring when they did.

jeffries and marciano had no one to fight. tunney had plenty of good to great fighters that he could fight

As for Tunney, he really didn't have serious challengers either. No one stood out at all, no one was considered in tunney's class.

no one stood out? i would give jack sharkey a good chance at beating gene tunney. sharkey should have fought tunney in 27 and was going to until dempsey cheated but sharkey was better than dempsey at that point of his career. sharkey was on his way to a points win over jack.


- sharkey was inconsistent but he would have brought his A game to a big fight like the tunney fight. sharkey is a top 25 heavyweight of all time in his prime when tunney retired. yet he doesnt stand out? sharkey years later talked about how he was still pissed off tunney retired before fighting him

- george godfrey top 40 heavyweight of all time in his prime. tunney retired before facing him. yet he doent stand out?


- Maax schmeling top 20 heavyweight of all time. this is not tunneys fault as max didnt earn a shot or begin to enter his prime until 1929 or 1930. still, had tunney not retired in 1928, he could have defended his title and then had a huge fight with max schmeling in 1929 or 1930. this fight would most likely take place in 1930, and i would give max a good chance at beating tunney.

all 3 of these are VERY dangerous fights for tunney, and sharkey and schmeling fights would be very close decisisions.

- and then you got guys like larry gains who when he is ALLOWED to try his best, was a very good fighter and would be a dangerous fight for tunney.

other challengers like tommy loughran, johnny risko, young stribling would be legit fights for tunney.


so how did no one stick out even though u had a division full of dangerous top contenders and great fighters?


- had tunney fought some of these guys, we would fight out how good he really was. tunney was very untested as a heavyweight.

so tunney could have fought godfrey or sharkey in 1929, and then schmeling in 1930. and then he would have a case of being a top 10 heavyweight of all time.



at tunneys peak, i would pick him over all of the above, but some of them would be very tough matches for him and if tunney did not bring his A game, he would get beaten!

[pundit]

All three could have stayed champs for a couple of more years or so. Jeffries and Tunney are likely to have won their next defense; Marciano may have met Patterson. Patterson was quite green at the time, but he may have had an outsiders' chance.

Who is most likely to have ended their streak? I reckon:

Jeffries: Jackson (for sure)
Tunney: Schmeling (perhaps)
Marciano: Patterson (perhaps)

Cheers,
P

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

- at least in tunneys last fight, he could have taken on jack sharkey or george godfrey instead of tom heeney. your last fight of ur career is always an important one. marciano retired having demolished the clear # 1 contender.

IMO i think rocky should have defended his title in 1956 right before he retired. he didnt announce his retirement till so there a a good cap between moore fight and retirement call 1956. rocky actually had a scheduled bout jan. 2 1956 with nino valdes, but valdes lost to baker and then to satterfield so it eliminated the much. they then tried for a june match but valdes continued to lose so that one was out of the picture. rocky had legit reasons for retiring though.

- cus D amato wasnt going to send patterson in vs marciano anyway until he noticed slight signs of aging. in 1956 he declined offers for a match saying patterson was a year away. cus D amato knew what he was doing though, and a he knew how vunerable a marciano in decline would be considering marciano relied on being 100% every fight.

[surf-bat]

All three could have stayed champs for a couple of more years or so. Jeffries and Tunney are likely to have won their next defense; Marciano may have met Patterson. Patterson was quite green at the time, but he may have had an outsiders' chance.

Who is most likely to have ended their streak? I reckon:

Jeffries: Jackson (for sure)
Tunney: Schmeling (perhaps)
Marciano: Patterson (perhaps)

Cheers,
P

I don't know that Johnson would have beaten Jeffries for sure. Jeff at his peak was as strong as a bull and could hit like hell. I would favor Johnson, but would never disregard Jeff's chances of beating him. He was a great fighter.

Some have said that Jeff wouldn't have been champ as long as he did if he'd have faced black challengers. I disagree. He KO'd the experienced Hank Griffin in his PRO DEBUT. This is the same Hank Griffin whom Jack Johnson couldn't beat in 3 fights and later claimed was the first man to really hurt him in the ring. In fact Hank beat Johnson in one of their 3 "draws".

Sam Langford wanted no part of Jeffries and even said so in a challenge to "Fight any fighter in the world except Jim Jeffries".

I don't see any black fighter beating Jeffries with the possible exception of Jack Johnson

[pundit]

All three could have stayed champs for a couple of more years or so. Jeffries and Tunney are likely to have won their next defense; Marciano may have met Patterson. Patterson was quite green at the time, but he may have had an outsiders' chance.

Who is most likely to have ended their streak? I reckon:

Jeffries: Jackson (for sure)
Tunney: Schmeling (perhaps)
Marciano: Patterson (perhaps)

Cheers,
P

I don't know that Johnson would have beaten Jeffries for sure. Jeff at his peak was as strong as a bull and could hit like hell. I would favor Johnson, but would never disregard Jeff's chances of beating him. He was a great fighter.

Some have said that Jeff wouldn't have been champ as long as he did if he'd have faced black challengers. I disagree. He KO'd the experienced Hank Griffin in his PRO DEBUT. This is the same Hank Griffin whom Jack Johnson couldn't beat in 3 fights and later claimed was the first man to really hurt him in the ring. In fact Hank beat Johnson in one of their 3 "draws".

Sam Langford wanted no part of Jeffries and even said so in a challenge to "Fight any fighter in the world except Jim Jeffries".

I don't see any black fighter beating Jeffries with the possible exception of Jack Johnson

At the same time Jeffries said "Johson is better than I ever was" after their bout...

[surf-bat]

All three could have stayed champs for a couple of more years or so. Jeffries and Tunney are likely to have won their next defense; Marciano may have met Patterson. Patterson was quite green at the time, but he may have had an outsiders' chance.

Who is most likely to have ended their streak? I reckon:

Jeffries: Jackson (for sure)
Tunney: Schmeling (perhaps)
Marciano: Patterson (perhaps)

Cheers,
P

I don't know that Johnson would have beaten Jeffries for sure. Jeff at his peak was as strong as a bull and could hit like hell. I would favor Johnson, but would never disregard Jeff's chances of beating him. He was a great fighter.

Some have said that Jeff wouldn't have been champ as long as he did if he'd have faced black challengers. I disagree. He KO'd the experienced Hank Griffin in his PRO DEBUT. This is the same Hank Griffin whom Jack Johnson couldn't beat in 3 fights and later claimed was the first man to really hurt him in the ring. In fact Hank beat Johnson in one of their 3 "draws".

Sam Langford wanted no part of Jeffries and even said so in a challenge to "Fight any fighter in the world except Jim Jeffries".

I don't see any black fighter beating Jeffries with the possible exception of Jack Johnson

At the same time Jeffries said "Johson is better than I ever was" after their bout...

True, he did say that, but I think that statement says more about Jeff as a man than any true feeling about his chances in his prime against Johnson. Again, I think that JJ beats Jeff prime for prime, but I don't count Jeff out. He may very well have been the strongest of all heavyweight champs(definitely in the top 5) and an outstanding athlete. He was fast for his size and had terrific punching power, not to mention a degree of boxing skill taught by no less than Jim Corbett and Tommy Ryan, both boxing masters in every sense of the word.

Have you read "A Man Among Men"? If not, READ IT! It will change your view on Jeffries forever.

[pound per pound]

had these 3 not retired.........


A. who would have there next title defense been against?

B. how long would they have lasted? who would be the man to finally dethrone them and why?

This is a thought provoking question.

I beleive Jeffries was starting to peak as a champion when he retired. Fitzsimmons, Corbett and Sharkey were past their best, as was Ruhlin, and Griffin. Jeffries said, “They’ll never come back" after defeating Corbett. I suppose Jeffries could have meet Marvin Hart, Jack Root, George Gardner, Tommy Burns or Billy Lang. I exclude Johnson because the loss to Hart took him out of the picture. The public felt that none of the challengers were as good as the men Jeffries had already beaten, and by 1904, the money in prize fighting was not what it once was. So Jeffries retired at a young age. I tend to beleive he could have been champion for 3-4 more years.

Tunney is different. The money was there for him. Tunney did not want to be a fighter anymore. He had other interests to pursue. This killed a great legacy to be. Tunney would likely defeat Shakrey, Baer, Young, Braddock, and the other 30's contenders. I think Tunney could have remained champion for 3-4 more years. The fight crowd did not care for Tunney. The old proverb be careful what you wish for came back to bite boxing in the rear. When Tunney retired, heavyweight boxing was a mess. Many of the fights were marred with low blows, alleged fixes, and bad decisions. Sharkey, Schmeling, Carnera, Baer and Braddock failed to make a successful title defense.

Marciano is a different story. Sadly he never got a chance to go for the golden 50th. The Rock injured his back while picking up his daughter after the Archie Moore fight. This forced Marciano into an early retirement. He could not expect to win with a bad back. As fate would have it, Marciano did not retire a wealthy man. His manger robbed him blind. Marciano talked about a come back fight with a new manager vs Ingo, but it never came to materialized as his body no longer responded they way it used to. The money was there, but Marciano valued his legacy over a pay day. Bravo for him.

[Ambling Alp]

It is interesting to speculate. However, you can't really blame Jeffries, Tunney or Marciano for retiring when they did.

jeffries and marciano had no one to fight. tunney had plenty of good to great fighters that he could fight

As for Tunney, he really didn't have serious challengers either. No one stood out at all, no one was considered in tunney's class.

no one stood out? i would give jack sharkey a good chance at beating gene tunney. sharkey should have fought tunney in 27 and was going to until dempsey cheated but sharkey was better than dempsey at that point of his career. sharkey was on his way to a points win over jack.


- sharkey was inconsistent but he would have brought his A game to a big fight like the tunney fight. sharkey is a top 25 heavyweight of all time in his prime when tunney retired. yet he doesnt stand out? sharkey years later talked about how he was still pissed off tunney retired before fighting him

- george godfrey top 40 heavyweight of all time in his prime. tunney retired before facing him. yet he doent stand out?


- Maax schmeling top 20 heavyweight of all time. this is not tunneys fault as max didnt earn a shot or begin to enter his prime until 1929 or 1930. still, had tunney not retired in 1928, he could have defended his title and then had a huge fight with max schmeling in 1929 or 1930. this fight would most likely take place in 1930, and i would give max a good chance at beating tunney.

all 3 of these are VERY dangerous fights for tunney, and sharkey and schmeling fights would be very close decisisions.

- and then you got guys like larry gains who when he is ALLOWED to try his best, was a very good fighter and would be a dangerous fight for tunney.

other challengers like tommy loughran, johnny risko, young stribling would be legit fights for tunney.


so how did no one stick out even though u had a division full of dangerous top contenders and great fighters?


- had tunney fought some of these guys, we would fight out how good he really was. tunney was very untested as a heavyweight.

so tunney could have fought godfrey or sharkey in 1929, and then schmeling in 1930. and then he would have a case of being a top 10 heavyweight of all time.



at tunneys peak, i would pick him over all of the above, but some of them would be very tough matches for him and if tunney did not bring his A game, he would get beaten!

BB - I guess you are missing my main point. I will try again.
None of the guys you mentioned were considered the consensus #1 contender when Tunney retired. Tom Heeney, who seem to dismiss, had as much claim to being the # 1 contender before he fought Tunney as anyone else.
Heeney had recently had a draw with Sharkey, and had beaten Risko.

No, Sharkey wasn't considered a great fighter at the time. As mentioned he lost to Dempsey (it was his own stupidity that got him Ko'd in the 7th round), only got the draw with Heeney and lost Risko. This was all in a 12 month period of time before Tunney defended the title against Heeney.
Sharkey wasn't deserving of a title shot.

Did Godfrey standout? No he didn't. He lost to risko shortly before Tunney beat Heeney.
Did Larry gains stick out? No. He got stopped by the the legendary Bill Hartwell shortly before the Tunney-Heeney fight.

So how did no one stick out even though u had a division of full of dangerous fighter, great fighters?

No one had any sort of winning streak against the other contenders.
Heeney was consider at roughly the same level as Sharkey,Risko, Godfrey, Uzcudun etc.
Tunney completely dominated Heeney. There was no reason to think he would have trouble with any one else.

If Tunney had fought some of these guys, we would have found out how good he really was?

Well, he had already easily beaten Risko and Loughran in Newspaper decisions, stopped Wienert, not to mention Dempsey twice and and stopped Gibbons.

No one thought any of these "great fighters" were dangerous contenders to Tunney at the time Tunney retired.

He would have brought his "A" game against anyone of them, because he was a very consistent fighter. It wouldn't have mattered if they brought their "A" game or not. Tunney was in a different league than these guys.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

i would give schmeling, sharkey good chance at beating tunney. tunney wasnt in a league above these guys. i rate schmeling over tunney on my all time heavyweight list.

what makes u believe tunney would have beat sharkey in 1928-29 or schmeling in 1930?



- godfrey is a great fighter but he doesnt match up well with tunney. STILL tunney should have fought him because he was the most dangerous challenger out there. THROW GODFREYS RECORD OUT THE WINDOW ALONG WITH ALL THOSE STAGED FIGHTS, BAD DECISIONS HE PARTICIPATED IN.

[surf-bat]

1930. still, had tunney not retired in 1928, he could have defended his title and then had a huge fight with max schmeling in 1929 or 1930. this fight would most likely take place in 1930, and i would give max a good chance at beating tunney.

all 3 of these are VERY dangerous fights for tunney, and sharkey and schmeling fights would be very close decisisions.

- and then you got guys like larry gains who when he is ALLOWED to try his best, was a very good fighter and would be a dangerous fight for tunney.

other challengers like tommy loughran, johnny risko, young stribling would be legit fights for tunney.


so how did no one stick out even though u had a division full of dangerous top contenders and great fighters?


- had tunney fought some of these guys, we would fight out how good he really was. tunney was very untested as a heavyweight.

so tunney could have fought godfrey or sharkey in 1929, and then schmeling in 1930. and then he would have a case of being a top 10 heavyweight of all time.



at tunneys peak, i would pick him over all of the above, but some of them would be very tough matches for him and if tunney did not bring his A game, he would get beaten![/quote]

BB - I guess you are missing my main point. I will try again.
None of the guys you mentioned were considered the consensus #1 contender when Tunney retired. Tom Heeney, who seem to dismiss, had as much claim to being the # 1 contender before he fought Tunney as anyone else.
Heeney had recently had a draw with Sharkey, and had beaten Risko.

No, Sharkey wasn't considered a great fighter at the time. As mentioned he lost to Dempsey (it was his own stupidity that got him Ko'd in the 7th round), only got the draw with Heeney and lost Risko. This was all in a 12 month period of time before Tunney defended the title against Heeney.
Sharkey wasn't deserving of a title shot.

Did Godfrey standout? No he didn't. He lost to risko shortly before Tunney beat Heeney.
Did Larry gains stick out? No. He got stopped by the the legendary Bill Hartwell shortly before the Tunney-Heeney fight.

So how did no one stick out even though u had a division of full of dangerous fighter, great fighters?

No one had any sort of winning streak against the other contenders.
Heeney was consider at roughly the same level as Sharkey,Risko, Godfrey, Uzcudun etc.
Tunney completely dominated Heeney. There was no reason to think he would have trouble with any one else.

If Tunney had fought some of these guys, we would have found out how good he really was?

Well, he had already easily beaten Risko and Loughran in Newspaper decisions, stopped Wienert, not to mention Dempsey twice and and stopped Gibbons.

No one thought any of these "great fighters" were dangerous contenders to Tunney at the time Tunney retired.

He would have brought his "A" game against anyone of them, because he was a very consistent fighter. It wouldn't have mattered if they brought their "A" game or not. Tunney was in a different league than these guys.[/quote]

Actually, Tommy Loughran, whom Tunney outweighed by 10 pounds, gave Gene all he wanted and many thought he deserved a draw. Tunney, true to his careful matchmaking ways, never fought him again. However you want to look at it, he absolutely did NOT easily beat Loughran.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

that was a green tommy loughran too

[HomicideHenry]

Someone brought up the point that if Jefferies fought a black contender he would have lost. I disagree on a few reasons:

1.) Early in his career he knocked out Peter Jackson, who was considered the best Heavyweight who was black, arguable the best of his era, in 3 rounds. You could argue that Jackson was over the hill or whatever, but that doesn't really show to me that he was strictly racist.

2.) Johnson lost to Marvin Hart, who became champion after Jefferies did, by 20 round decision. Sure Johnson beat a few other champions, such as Bob Fitzsimmons but "Speckled Bob" was almost 50.

3.) Most of the black fighters mostly fought eachother over and over again, so would that really mean that they were better than the white ones who fought various opponents?

I mean imagine a fighter nowadays only fighting a handful of the same guys at least 20 times, would you expect him to be a #1 contender to beat the champion?

4.) Most people sadly judge Jefferies by the Johnson fight, but remember the man had to lose over 100 pounds, and get into shape for a 45 round fight in just a few months time.

Jefferies in his prime could take enormous punishment, as evident in the Johnson fight, he took a beating for 15 rounds and didnt go down until the 15th, fought in a crouch, was very quick and for the time was one of the larger Heavyweights. He chased down Jim Corbett for 23 rounds, and in the rematch beat him in 11, plus he was immensely strong.

Mind you. It wasnt until after he was retired 6yrs, had to lose a hundred pounds, fighting in extreme heat that he was beaten by Johnson---and it took Johnson 15 rounds to do so. Nobody in his prime came close, with possibly the exception of Tom Sharkey, who was possibly the most dangerous man to face, as he used every dirty trick in the book for an advantage.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

peter jackson was a shell of his former self when he fought jeffries. he had fought just once in the last 6 years and he was struggling with symptoms of hisdisease when he fought jeffries. STILL, papers at the time leading up to the jeffries fight commented on how jackson was looking very good and looking like his old self. jeffries win over him means something, but that was nowhere near a vintage black prince!

[JC]

Johnson's loss to Heart is also a bit suspect.

Part of the reason the black fighters fought each other so much was because many of the top white contenders would not fight them.

[Ambling Alp]

i would give schmeling, sharkey good chance at beating tunney. tunney wasnt in a league above these guys. i rate schmeling over tunney on my all time heavyweight list.

what makes u believe tunney would have beat sharkey in 1928-29 or schmeling in 1930?



- godfrey is a great fighter but he doesnt match up well with tunney. STILL tunney should have fought him because he was the most dangerous challenger out there. THROW GODFREYS RECORD OUT THE WINDOW ALONG WITH ALL THOSE STAGED FIGHTS, BAD DECISIONS HE PARTICIPATED IN.

What makes me think Tunney would have beat sharkey?
Well for one thing look at their common opponents.

Tunney beat Dempsey twice. Sharkey got ko'd by Dempsey.
Tunney beat Weinert twice (inlcuding one by Newspaper Decison, the other by KO)
Sharkey lost to Weinert twice (including one newspaper decison)
Tunney easily won a Newspaper Decision against Risko, Sharkey split two fights with Risko.
Tunney completely dominated Heeney and stopped him in 11 rounds. Sharkey only had a draw with Heeney.

Of course just becasue fighter A beat B, and fighter B beat C, that doesn't automatically mean fighter A would beat fighter C. But usually he would. And this isn't just one guy, its 4 common opponents. Tunney had no problem with any of them and Sharkey had all sorts of problems with all of them.

If you look at their strengths and weaknesses, Tunney has almost every major advantage. Tunney was faster, the harder puncher, had the better chin, was harder to hit, better technical skills, and was a smarter fighter than Sharkey. If Tunney didn't knock out Sharkey, Tunney would win a lopsided decision.

If Tunney would have kept fighting and fought Schmeling in 1930? Well, we can only speculate since Tunney retired in 1930.
Tunney's skills would probably have declined a little, ( he would have been 33) but she still have most of the same advantages that he had over Sharkey (with the exception of punching power). Tunney should be able to win a relatively comfortable decision over Schmeling.

If you would have asked most serious boxing people in the late 1920's or 1930's if they they thought Schmeling or Sharkey was better than Tunney, they probably would have laughed at you. Neither were nearly as well respected as Tunney.

As far as rating Schmeling over Tunney all time, I don't agree with that either. Schmeling had a great career, but he had some lapses as well. Besides the win over Louis, he had some other nice wins. However, he lost to Hamas, drew with Uzcudun, lost to Baer (very badly) Gains as well as being crushed by Louis. This may seem like nitpicking since these were good fighters, but when you compare him to all time greats you have to mention them.
He also had the two controversial fights with Sharkey, and neither really established themselves as the better in that head to head matchup.

Tunney had at least 8 fights against legitimate heavyweights ( And a few more against ham and eggers). He didn't lose any of them, and won most of them very easily. We know Sharkey couldn't do that, and it's very doubtful that Schmeling would have either.

As far as Godfrey, whether some of his fights were fixed or not, the fact remains that he didn't have enough big wins to establish himself as the # 1 contender when Tunney was champion. It's not like Harry Wills not getting a shot against Dempsey.

When Tunney retired, it wasn't the general opinion that Tunney was ducking Godfrey or Sharkey or anyone else for that matter.