Shouldn't Gene Tunney be rated higher pound-for-pound?

[LittleRed]

Originally Posted by McGrain

I have nobody to add. Some prick will be along though.

Hello! No little guys. No Wilde or Jofre or anybody below 118 (except Dixon).

[PetethePrince]

Tunney avoided the best blacks. So no. Manassa, how far off was Burley in your top 20? He did conclusively beat your #7.

[Manassa]

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

Tunney avoided the best blacks. So no. Manassa, how far off was Burley in your top 20? He did conclusively beat your #7.

When he was younger, yes. Bivins also beat my #6, but he's not near the top twenty.

Burley shouldn't be in the top thirty five realistically - you would have to say Jose Napoles, Emile Griffith, Kid Gavilan and Luis Rodriguez had worse records for this to be the case.

People get offended by the numbers sometimes, but they forget how many great boxers there have been.

[lufcrazy]

Originally Posted by Manassa

When he was younger, yes. Bivins also beat my #6, but he's not near the top twenty.

Burley shouldn't be in the top thirty five realistically - you would have to say Jose Napoles, Emile Griffith, Kid Gavilan and Luis Rodriguez had worse records for this to be the case.

People get offended by the numbers sometimes, but they forget how many great boxers there have been.

[Surf-Bat]

Originally Posted by Manassa

What are peoples' thoughts on this?

His record is impeccable. He has the following Hall of Famers on his record:

Jack Dempsey x2
Harry Greb x2
Georges Carpentier
Tommy Gibbons
Battling Levinsky
Jeff Smith
Leo Houck x2

Now we know any fighter's can be picked apart (Dempsey was past it! Greb was smaller! Etc...) but Tunney seems to have shown astonishing consistency and beat some of his best opponents with ease.

.

Absolutely and SHOULD be in the case of Tunney. As you can see, Tunney was good at picking on past-prime MWs like Houck and Smith. Carpentier, Gibbons and Dempsey were all at or nearing the end. I posted this awhile back regarding Tunney. I still stand by it:

People speak of Gene's discipline inside the ring but forget that he was equally disciplined outside of it in avoiding black fighters and other potential hazards (things Conn and his camp dove headfirst into). If you look at and compare his record to those of his contemporaries you will see how carefully constructed it is, replete with muggings of fading middleweight and light-heavyweight contenders and former champs. Just about all were on their last legs when Tunney fought them (why not fight Loughran a few more times?). Klompton wrote this to me once:

Billy Gibson, Tunney's manager, demanded the fight with Jeff Smith be a no-decision bout because they couldn't select a pro-Tunney referee. The more one reads about Tunney's back room dealings the less respect one has for him. The guy was undeniably talented but he sure seemed to have the deck stacked in his favor whenever he could. Its even worse when you consider that Smith was several inches shorter, had a shorter reach, weighed in at 12 pounds less (despite coming in at about 11 pounds OVER his best weight), 6 years older, and turned pro more than five years before Tunney, and had a lot more mileage on the odometer. Basically Tunney had every conceivable advantage and STILL wanted to have friendly officiating

[red cobra]

He should definitely be in the top 20, even if he didn't fight any black fighters.

[Manassa]

Originally Posted by lufcrazy

[Manassa]

Originally Posted by Surf-Bat

Absolutely and SHOULD be in the case of Tunney. As you can see, Tunney was good at picking on past-prime MWs like Houck and Smith. Carpentier, Gibbons and Dempsey were all at or nearing the end. I posted this awhile back regarding Tunney. I still stand by it:

People speak of Gene's discipline inside the ring but forget that he was equally disciplined outside of it in avoiding black fighters and other potential hazards (things Conn and his camp dove headfirst into). If you look at and compare his record to those of his contemporaries you will see how carefully constructed it is, replete with muggings of fading middleweight and light-heavyweight contenders and former champs. Just about all were on their last legs when Tunney fought them (why not fight Loughran a few more times?). Klompton wrote this to me once:

Billy Gibson, Tunney's manager, demanded the fight with Jeff Smith be a no-decision bout because they couldn't select a pro-Tunney referee. The more one reads about Tunney's back room dealings the less respect one has for him. The guy was undeniably talented but he sure seemed to have the deck stacked in his favor whenever he could. Its even worse when you consider that Smith was several inches shorter, had a shorter reach, weighed in at 12 pounds less (despite coming in at about 11 pounds OVER his best weight), 6 years older, and turned pro more than five years before Tunney, and had a lot more mileage on the odometer. Basically Tunney had every conceivable advantage and STILL wanted to have friendly officiating

Any different to Ray Leonard?

[Manassa]

Originally Posted by Manassa

Any different to Ray Leonard?

Meant to say Robinson, although Leonard was picky, too.

It's no coincidence Robinson never fought some of the better black welterweights and middleweights of his time.

[Surf-Bat]

With the exception of Armstrong, SRR fought and beat most of the greats on his resume in their primes. Can't say the same about Tunney. We don't know if Gene could have beaten prime versions of those guys.

[Manassa]

Originally Posted by Surf-Bat

With the exception of Armstrong, SRR fought and beat most of the greats on his resume in their primes. Can't say the same about Tunney. We don't know if Gene could have beaten prime versions of those guys.

Based on his performances, I'd say so. Tunney was tough. Robinson may not have maintained his record had he fought H. Williams or Burley.

[the cobra]

Just outside top 20 for me.

[rusak]

Originally Posted by Manassa

What are peoples' thoughts on this?

His record is impeccable. He has the following Hall of Famers on his record:

Jack Dempsey x2
Harry Greb x2
Georges Carpentier
Tommy Gibbons
Battling Levinsky
Jeff Smith
Leo Houck x2

Now we know any fighter's can be picked apart (Dempsey was past it! Greb was smaller! Etc...) but Tunney seems to have shown astonishing consistency and beat some of his best opponents with ease.

I've thought of around a #22 placing alongside Packey McFarland (who I previously rated in the top fifteen but I think that was too much).

You shouldn't be rated P4P unless you beat good fighters who are bigger than you, or unless you completely outclass everyone who is about your size or smaller. Tunney didn't do either of those things.

[Manassa]

Originally Posted by rusak

You shouldn't be rated P4P unless you beat good fighters who are bigger than you, or unless you completely outclass everyone who is about your size or smaller. Tunney didn't do either of those things.

Joe Louis?

[Surf-Bat]

Originally Posted by Manassa

Based on his performances, I'd say so. Tunney was tough. Robinson may not have maintained his record had he fought H. Williams or Burley.

Let's not start comparing Tunney's resume with SRR's. They aren't even in the same universe.