View Single Post
Old 01-24-2013, 05:46 PM   #28
P4P King
East Side VIP
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 26,426
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Tunney V Sharkey, Willard, Brennan,Miske, Firpo?

Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
It's an 8 round fight. I'd consider it being evidence of Gene's "vulnerability" to boxers in the same way that Meehan proves Dempsey is so vulnerable. Almost not at all, because whilst it happened, Dempsey and Tunney both excelled against this type afterwards. Trying to paint Tunney's pre-prime draw with Loughran as somehow crucial in deciphering his chances with superb boxers when he thrashed Carpantier, Gibbons, Smith and Levinsky is not really a tenable position. At least in Dempsey's case there are actual losses to Meehan combined with a vulnerability to Tunney himself.
I don't see the fight being scheduled for eight rounds as being an issue. Many states restricted bouts to six or eight rounds back then, and such fights were often ones that status in the division depended upon.

Later in this post you talk about extending the benefit of the doubt to Tunney over a single loss to Miske as Miske merely "having his number". But this 8 round fight somehow proves that Tunney was "vulnerable to boxers". This is contradictory. In fact, believing them both to be true seems rather ludicrous?
Not realy, because I take into account the rest of their records.

While Miske was clearly an expert boxer, he could be out boxed as Gibbons showed. Tommy Loughran's record suggsts him to be the best technical boxer of his era.

But he beat up all the cuties he met apart from Loughran with ease.
A devils advocate might suggest that Levinsky was past it and Carpintier was never that much of a technician, and that was the crucial difference.

Perhaps you should be making more of Charlie Weinert?

Can we have some examples?
Do you think that Randy Turpin was a better boxer than Sugar Ray Robinson for example?

Here's the problem with that: Miske never - ever - outboxed a great boxer. It literally is something that hasn't happened. Ever. His best result against a boxer was against Dillon where he seems to have done what the big man should always do, turn it into a fight with sheer aggression.

Firpo has never KO'd a great technician - assuming you aren't allowing Brennan, whom Miske also beat - but his power is confirmed. We know of it. It's a fact.

So you are betting your mortgage on something which has never happened against something that is demonstrated. You personally have a great deal less respect for Firpo's power than I do - this is likely why.
I have a great deal of respect for Firpo's power, but none at all for power as a stand alone comodity.

It's a little like picking Machen to out-box Ali rather than Shavers to KO him. Both are extremely unlikely but Shavers was probably one punch away from doing just that.
Honestly, I would rather go with Machen if I had to risk money.

We clearly think very differently here.

Well the chances of Darrly Pinckney (24-42 for a career, 20% ko) knocking out Junior Jones (who out-boxed Orlando Canizales and Marco Barrera) is, in my opinion, far, far, far less likley than a huge heavyweight puncher KOing a great HW technician. It is one of the most impossible results in the history of boxing, but it occured.

Billy Smith is underestimated technically but I wouldn't describe him as "a technian" by any means. Johnson, on the other hand, is arguably the most definitive technician in boxing history. One punch did it.

Jackson was nowhere near Graham's status in terms of "cuteness". Clear classes between them in that singular aspect. One punch.

Some of the examples i've provided may be objectionable - they were listed, after all, completely off the top of my head. There are dozens more. But I think this contradicts your "lost cause" point. I think that is something you absolutely cannot claim in the wake of these results.
We have to distinguish between a punchers chance and a finishers chance. A finisher does indeed alwaws have a chance, but a puncher has very little against a durable opponent.

Within the so called punchers chance, I would suggest that your boxer puncher has a much better chance than a slugger.

Ironicaly you could argue that Miske was a better finisher than Firpo, but that is not a deciding factor in my argument.

...but can we have some examples?
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote