Tunney V Sharkey, Willard, Brennan,Miske, Firpo?

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by McGrain

That's true, Miske might have more chance back in the day. I wouldbn't bet on it though.




I personally don't think that Loughran is better than Gibbons and he obviously wasn't better than Greb, so i don't think this holds much water. I don't think a draw over 8 rounds is indicative of Tunney's "form" versus boxers. I think that his KO wins over Gibbons and Carpantier and decision wins versus Levinsky and Smith (neither of which were that close) are far more telling.




Huge punchers KO superby gifted technicians all the time and it was more common in this era than in later eras. I don't think that Firpo would beat Tunney - at all - but I think it is more likely that he would KO Tunney than that Miske would out-box Tunney.

He was only in the neighbourhood of being out-boxed once - both Dempsey and Greb came close to stopping him.



Yeah, i would make Sharkey my first choice and Firpo my second. Hyper-aggressive tough punchers are difficult for top pro's because they don't obey the rules. I doubt very many people would be picking Baer to dismantle Schmeling were it not for the fact that it actually happened, but as soon as you have a puncher that aggressive in the ring, shit can happen.

I give an in form Sharkey the best shot too. As you stated, wild ,unpredictable swingers can give problems to clever boxers.

Ali v Bonavena ????

[Unforgiven]

Firpo's probably the guy Tunney is most likely to KO too, imo.

[janitor]

[quote]

Originally Posted by McGrain

I personally don't think that Loughran is better than Gibbons and he obviously wasn't better than Greb, so i don't think this holds much water.

It depends what you mean by better.

He didn't have the power of Gibbons or the versatiliy of Greb, but as an all out technician he surpassed either of them.

I don't think a draw over 8 rounds is indicative of Tunney's "form" versus boxers. I think that his KO wins over Gibbons and Carpantier and decision wins versus Levinsky and Smith (neither of which were that close) are far more telling.

I think that Loughran was the best pure technician he ever faced, and that is why he gave him such problems. Tunney also said that Ermillio Spalla gave him some issues.

My point is that technical briliance was Tunneys main card, and if you could match him on that, or just find an angle that he wasn't used to then the fight was on.

Huge punchers KO superby gifted technicians all the time and it was more common in this era than in later eras. I don't think that Firpo would beat Tunney - at all - but I think it is more likely that he would KO Tunney than that Miske would out-box Tunney.

If you match a guy like Firpo against an elusive technician who can take a punch, it is prety much a hopeless cause. The Firpos of this world have a chance against somebody like Dempsey, but next to none against a Wills or a Tunney. I think that a prime Miske outboxing Tunney is a far more plausible scenario.

He was only in the neighbourhood of being out-boxed once - both Dempsey and Greb came close to stopping him.

Dempsey was not just a puncher, but also an all time great finisher.

Greb was able to land on Tunney consistently.

Firpo brings neither atribute to the party.

His only hope is that he somehow lands a single big punch, and Tunneys chin turns out not to be as good as we thought.

Yeah, i would make Sharkey my first choice and Firpo my second. Hyper-aggressive tough punchers are difficult for top pro's because they don't obey the rules. I doubt very many people would be picking Baer to dismantle Schmeling were it not for the fact that it actually happened, but as soon as you have a puncher that aggressive in the ring, shit can happen.

Firpo was no Baer.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by janitor

It depends what you mean by better.

He didn't have the power of Gibbons or the versatiliy of Greb, but as an all out technician he surpassed either of them.

I think that's arguable, but even if it is absolutely true, as evidence of a supposed vulnerability to clever boxers, it is sparse in the extreme.

My point is that technical briliance was Tunneys main card, and if you could match him on that, or just find an angle that he wasn't used to then the fight was on.

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. 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.

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.

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 "shit happens" point of view.

If you match a guy like Firpo against an elusive technician who can take a punch, it is prety much a hopeless cause.

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.

Now let's have some examples of clearly inferior boxers out-boxing great boxers. It's much rarerer by definition!

Dempsey was not just a puncher, but also an all time great finisher.

Greb was able to land on Tunney consistently.

Firpo brings neither atribute to the party.

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.

His only hope is that he somehow lands a single big punch, and Tunneys chin turns out not to be as good as we thought.

There is a better chance of that than his being out-boxed by inferior boxers, in my opinion.

Firpo was no Baer.

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 shit puncher managed to overwhelm the vastly superior technician, we know otherwise. I wouldn't expect that type of fight here, of course.

[Unforgiven]

Originally Posted by janitor

Firpo was no Baer.

Or Schmeling's no Tunney.

[janitor]

[quote]

Originally Posted by McGrain

I think that's arguable, but even if it is absolutely true, as evidence of a supposed vulnerability to clever boxers, it is sparse 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 "shit 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 shit puncher managed to overwhelm the vastly superior technician, we know otherwise. I wouldn't expect that type of fight here, of course.

[mattdonnellon]

If McMahon could handle Willard then Gene would box the ears off him, no chance.
Brennan didn't do anything good eneough to trouble Tunney so a decisive loss or late stopage.
Miske that lost to Dempsey probably gets stopped and any version looses on points.
Firpo has no chance, not even the snowball's, gets his ears bokked off.
Now Sharkey that's a different kettle of fish, I think the Gob could upset the Marine, he was a better boxer than Loughran and hit harder, an intriguing match-up, remember Jack took on Godfrey, Wills and Dempsey, he dodged no man.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by janitor

I think it is very pertinent.

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.

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?

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

But he beat up all the cuties he met apart from Loughran with ease.

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.

Can we have some examples?

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.

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.

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.

In that scenario, I would conclude that Miske was what I thought he was previously, but that he just had Tunneys number.

As i've said, this would represent a boogeyman encounter, wheras Loughran NOT beating Tunney somehow shows that he is vulnerable to boxers. Makes no sense at all.

These guys were both punchers and technicians in my opinion, with one or two exceptions.

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.

And I don't think that Firpo would win. He might not win a round. But history has shown us, over and over and over again that a big puncher is never out of it. That's just a fact. It's inarguable.

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.

...but can we have some examples?

[Unforgiven]

I'm glad someone mentioned Darrly Pinckney.
He's very under-used in Firpo discussions on this board.
It's almost as if he didn't exist.

[McGrain]

He's probably undermentioned full stop, that is an insane upset. He unbuckeld a coming Espadas Jnr., too. Which is a great sentence.

[Unforgiven]

He's nothing short of a legend.

[lufcrazy]

Originally Posted by mcvey

Willard
Firpo
Sharkey
Miske
Brennan


How does the Marine do against these Dempsey opponents?

All boxers as they were against Dempsey.

Miske has the best chance.

There's no way he stops Willard but he's conditioned enough to outpoint him.

He'll knock firpo out cold given how open he was.

Sharkey is really hard to call at that point but I think tunney grinds it out.

Brennan was quality but not on his level and he likely loses on wide points.

Have I missed anyone? Long and short is I honestly think tunney could have fought jack's schedule without defeat (until he gives Greb a title shot of course)

[janitor]

[quote]

Originally Posted by McGrain

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?