View Single Post
Old 01-24-2013, 06:28 AM   #21
P4P King
East Side VIP
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 23,355
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Tunney V Sharkey, Willard, Brennan,Miske, Firpo?

Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
I think that's arguable, but even if it is absolutely true, as evidence of a supposed vulnerability to clever boxers, it is sp**** in the extreme.
I think it is very pertinent.

Loughran exceled from a technical standpoint, because he had no choice. He realy didn't have much else to go with, but that meant that he could out Tunney Tunney from an early age.

The guys that Tunney was steering clear of were not the punchers of the division, they were the other cuties.

And my point is that none of these men DO equal Tunny on technical brilliance, and that fighters arguably better than all of them (apart from Gibbons, whom he stopped) had failed to "find an angle". Boxing is more absolute than punching. If you can't out boxyour opponent, you can't.
This is an interesting statment.

I would argue that there are many cases of inferior boxers beating superior boxers, simply by finding the right angle. Unlike punching, boxing is too complex to be absolute.

Allowing that Firpo hit hard enough to break Tunney's legs, we then have to acknowledge that it could happen at any point in the fight.
I think that even if he hit Tunney clean, he would just get up and continue outboxing him.

That is, Miske either can or cannot outbox Tunney, and we know he almost certainly couldn't. Firpo is probably physically capable of knocking him out.
If my mortgage was on the line, I would rather bet it on Miske finding a technical plane to exploit, than a blindfolded Firpo killing a sparrow with a slingshot.

In short, if Miske had met and out-boxed Tunney in his prime, I would have to re-think my view of him in detail. If Firpo landed a perfect punch and knocked him unconscious, I would take a more "**** happens" point of view.
In that scenario, I would conclude that Miske was what I thought he was previously, but that he just had Tunneys number. I would feel obliged to significantly revise up my estimate of Firpo as a finisher.

Nah, that's just not true at all. If it were, results like Julian Jackson KO Graham, Pickney KO Jones, Tarver KO Roy Jones, Smith KO Johnson, Ray KO Charles, Satterfield KO Johnson, Choynski KO Jack Johnson wouldn't occur. Now maybe none of these are an exact template of Tunney-Firpo but they all pit "elusive technicians" against people who can take a punch with the result being the technican who can take a punch being KTFO.
These guys were both punchers and technicians in my opinion, with one or two exceptions.

Now let's have some examples of clearly inferior boxers out-boxing great boxers. It's much rarerer by definition!
Largley because if you outbox somebody, you are automaticaly deemed to be a better boxer, but when you look into it examples are manifold. There are actualy very few fights where the better techinician on paper lost, where the result was not due to some technical angle.

And I never said otherwise. What I was demonstrating is that Tunney, based upon the reality of his career seems more likley to be stopped - nearly twice - than out-boxed - which seems never to have happened.
The only person who came close to stoping him based on a window of opportunity was Dempsey (no shame there).

You probably had more chance of outlanding him, either by boxing or by swarming, than stopping him based on a single mistake.

Again, I haven't said otherwise. What I am saying is that if they had never met, then everyone would be saying, "oh, if Braddock could out-box Baer, Schmeling could do it." I think you would be one of those people.

But because they met, and a don't give a **** puncher managed to overwhelm the vastly superior technician, we know otherwise. I wouldn't expect that type of fight here, of course.

Last edited by janitor; 01-24-2013 at 07:07 AM.
janitor is online now  Top
Reply With Quote