BoxRec

Ezzard brought up a couple of interesting points:

"When did the rule change from not starting until a guy was in a neutral corner (like Tunney-Dempsey II) to the rule we have today when the count starts immediately?"

I have often wondered that myself. My best guess is that it depends on the jurisdiction of the fight; ie it depends on the state, country, governing body if it was a title fight. It probably gradually became more and more common. Seems like it was common by the 1950s to have the timekeeper start counting immediately and referee picks up the count from the timekeeper after he has made sure the fighter scoring the knockdown was moving to a neutral corner.

"Wasn't another controversy that when Tunney dropped Dempsey a few rounds later the ref started counting before Tunney went to the neutral corner?"

Yes, in round 8. Tunney knocked Dempsey down to one knee. The referee immediately began counting. Dempsey was up pretty quickly; but yes the referee (by the rules of the fight) should have waited until Tunney started to move to a neutral corner.

Interestingly, the timekeeper was already on five when the Tunney/Dempsey II referee picked up the count. The great controversy was that he opted to begin counting at one.

Tuan_Jim wrote:I know he wasn't literally knocked out, but Boxrec is teeming with millions of WKOs over men who weren't unconscious - I mean he was down for more than a 10-count and under the rules of boxing, at least traditionally, that's a 'KO by' on the ledger.

I love Tunney, but he was certainly in a state on the canvas. Those were full-blooded shots from one of the all-time terrifying punchers.

I can't take you seriously any more after you said Deontay Wilder was carrying too much weight.

Ezzard wrote:

misterpunch wrote:sharkey was a second rate heavy. I don't think you can dispute that. GT beat a first rate heavy twice - tunney wins against jack a no brainer in this house

What makes you say this? Watching him now he has the workrate and movement of a middleweight.

He was inconsistent but still a fantastic HW on his night.

the late twenties and early thirties were not a great era for heavyweight boxing. sharkey, carnera, braddock, baer were regular 2nd raters and Louis cleaned them all out. it was a weak time from the retirement of gene tunney in 28 until things picked up again with the bomber and it took a little time even then.
sharkey shone in a very dark field

Ezzard wrote:

misterpunch wrote:sharkey was a second rate heavy. I don't think you can dispute that. GT beat a first rate heavy twice - tunney wins against jack a no brainer in this house

What makes you say this? Watching him now he has the workrate and movement of a middleweight.

He was inconsistent but still a fantastic HW on his night.

think again and take a look without the rose tinted glasses

Amazed that anyone could watch Jack Sharkey and call a man that gifted 'second rate'. I can only assume you judge fighters' worth by skimming Boxrec records and are too mentally incurious to explore their stories. Fighters were matched tough and often in those days - it was many decades before the appeal of the perfect looking record was discovered, and managers began to take a more cynical, calculated approach to matching their fighters.[/quote]

sharkey was tough. that does not make him a 1st rate heavy. ive watched him and his pals baer, braddock and carnera over many years and this is not the cream of the heavyweight eras let me tell you. sharkey was a pretty tough but keep his skills in perspective please

misterpunch wrote:Amazed that anyone could watch Jack Sharkey and call a man that gifted 'second rate'. I can only assume you judge fighters' worth by skimming Boxrec records and are too mentally incurious to explore their stories. Fighters were matched tough and often in those days - it was many decades before the appeal of the perfect looking record was discovered, and managers began to take a more cynical, calculated approach to matching their fighters.

sharkey was tough. that does not make him a 1st rate heavy. ive watched him and his pals baer, braddock and carnera over many years and this is not the cream of the heavyweight eras let me tell you. sharkey was a pretty tough but keep his skills in perspective please[/quote]

just to be clear for you guys sitting there thinking jack sharkey was the unluckiest guy to ever get in the ring and really ought to be among the cream of the greatest heavyweights in history - get real. I ask you, where can you place him in the long pantheon of true greats in this division?

if you cant place him in the top 20 ever - and I cant, try as I might - then he is...sad to say it..2nd rate..down there with braddock and baer and a bit above carnera (who beat him)

Most people don't have him in their top 20, though I'm sure some people do. Just because someone is not in the top 20 Alltime doesn't mean they are a second rate fighter. There have been tens of thousands of heavyweights in history. He was better than more than 99.9% of them.

He was certainly in the the top 30 All time.

Between Tunney and Louis, there were several pretty good, roughly even heavyweights. Yes Louis beat many of them. (Though Sharkey and Braddock were at the end of the line by the Louis fought them. )

There was a ot of interest in the ehvyweight division at the time. Besides the champions (Schmeling, Sharkey,Carnera, Baer and Braddock) there were good fighters like Risko, Schaaf, and Uzcudun. Loughran was a good heavweight as well. These guys drew huge crowds for many of their fights.

Tunney would have beaten Sharkey 100%. Sharkey a good and unpredictable heavy but tunney was great. He'd have found a way to win almost certainly on pts.

Ambling Alp II wrote:"When did the rule change from not starting until a guy was in a neutral corner (like Tunney-Dempsey II) to the rule we have today when the count starts immediately?"

I have often wondered that myself. My best guess is that it depends on the jurisdiction of the fight; ie it depends on the state, country, governing body if it was a title fight. It probably gradually became more and more common. Seems like it was common by the 1950s to have the timekeeper start counting immediately and referee picks up the count from the timekeeper after he has made sure the fighter scoring the knockdown was moving to a neutral corner.

It was in the wake of the foul filled Dempsey/Firpo fight. There were a number of voices in the press complaining that Dempsey fought dirty. Nat Fleischer campaigned to clarify the rules. At the time of Dempsey/Firpo the rules stated the referee may direct the standing fighter to a neutral corner. This became the referee must. . . . Another rule amended was that if a fighter is knocked out of the ring he must return to it 'under his own power'.

Essentially a rule that had to be enforced because of Jack Dempsey later cost Dempsey the chance to regain his crown.

Sharkey was a great fighter in, yes, a great heavyweight era. His run that began with the close win over Renault through the Schmeling DQ loss (in a fight he was dominating) is very impressive, only marred with the loss to Gorman, which he avenged. His victories over Wills, Godfrey (in his prime and in-shape) and Loughran don't get the credit they deserve

The draw with Heeney and SD loss to Risko (who he'd beaten previously) are classic cases of the aggressor getting the nod despite being outboxed. Sharkey was not a bore-in guy but would jab and counter-punch guys to pieces, but then just like today some judges simply award the guy lunging forward. The draw vs Walker was also a gift decision; everyone at ringside had Sharkey winning the fight.

I think prime for prime Sharkey would've beaten Tunney . . Tunney excelled vs guys who came forward like Dempsey and Heeney but would struggle more vs a fellow boxer/counter puncher who was just as slick and nearly as fast, but also bigger and a stronger hitter.

I think Tunney could have outboxed Sharkey. Tunney was very talented.

to be really fair to jack sharkey - he was a "second rate champion" which makes him better than the "second rate" fighter I described him as earlier

Glad you amended that.

Sharkey had a serious ethics issue IMHO. I believe he agreed to a "date" between his chin and Primo's Fist....and he made himself available.

Here's a good article on him.

http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/blog/?p=430

You just could not resist, could you?