Jack Johnson v Gene Tunney 15 rounds.

Good thread!

 

You can say it because his results were better.

Conversely, Johnson's best wins were at 192 and below, not at the higher weights when he looked so good for the camera. We can suppose he was a better fighter but his results do not bear this out... Perhaps in part because he chose weaker opponents.

 

Yet, some might argue that him beating Gans and being green was greater than any other win he recorded after...

 

Yes, but better in the context of discussing Heavyweights.

 

Not when you figure in that Gans had just fought a rough fight with Dave Holly the day before, caught an overnight train from Philly to Boston and then had to fight 15 rounds with Langford on very little sleep.

I'll take a prime, well-rested Gans to beat the lightweight Langford almost every time.

Just my humble opinion

 

Accompanied with information that I for one was unaware of.:good

 

Very tough fight to call. Depends on how many rounds IMO. 12 Tunney takes it but 15 Johson comes on strong late with his Superior stamina

 

Let's look at the styles and tendencies of the two. Johnson had was somewhat stationary in his footwork, had a low guard, didn't throw a lot of punches, and was a better in-fighter than out fighter.

Tunney used swift footwork, was a very good out fighter, threw far more punches, and fought smart.

Translation....this isn't going to be a fight where Johnson can walk up and clamp down on a much smaller fighter who 1 ) lacks defense / smarts, and 2 ) weights under 170 pounds and can be bulled around by Johnson in a clinch.

Johnson in his prime had trouble vs. a much smaller Jack O'Brien, who like Tunney could box. However Tunney it much harder, and took a better punch in comparison to O'Brien.

I would pick Tunney via wide decision, 10 rounds to 5.

 

I am one of Tunney's biggest fans - one of the most beautiful boxers in history to watch in my opinion - but at the same time I have a slight hunch that Georges Carpentier, had he been in his prime, may have matched him - and the same goes for Tommy Gibbons - both towards their their last chance saloons looked very even with Tunney in the early going (at times I think Tunney was even a little frustrated by Carpentier's ability) - I think Tunney benefitted from to some extent - and only ended up looking so brilliant against both once their old legs and reflexes started to lag - prime versions of both would've been interesting - whereas no matter how good Johnson looked on film I think in reality he was 10 times better still - it looked to me like - had his life not been in danger for doing so he could've blown away everyone he was filmed against in 1 or 2 rounds at most - we only really get a gauge on Johnson and even with so little you still know the man was a genius - Tunney was great no doubt and a masterful looking boxer but Johnson was...well Johnson - I see Johnson becoming too much for Gene possibly enough to force a stoppage late

 

Okay. Johnson had a low guard ,it seems to have served him well as he is perceived by the majority of boxing writers as being the greatest defensive heavyweight champion of all time.
Tunney had a low guard, hands at waist level.
Joe Jeannette is considered a fine boxer, in all their fights he never out boxed Johnson and was frequently on the floor against him.

" Tunney fought smart". And Johnson didn't? :huh

Johnson fought far more men over 170lbs than Tunney ever did.

Tunney only fought 3 over 190lbs, one was a shot Dempsey, who had him down for 14 seconds ,the others were Risko and Heeney, both slow predictable, brawlers.

Johnson threw O Brien around like a doll.It was a 6 round no dec .It is possible ,[ over the championship distance ,] that Johnson might have performed differently against a man who was beaten by Burns ,a fellow he had toyed with ,and kod by Ketchel ,another he had played with.:think

Johnson bulled everyone he fought around in the clinches, including 227lbs Jeffries, pinning his hands up his back ,and walking him backwards ,whilst asking Corbett ,"where do you want him"?

Tunney faced one top puncher at heavyweight ,and he was palpably past his best, we know what happened when that puncher connected.


Translation, this isnt going to be a fight where Tunney can land his jab frequently ,and with impunity ,against a come- forward limited slugger

I've no problem with anyone picking the Marine here ,but it is as well to do so because of valid study of the men , not because you hate ones guts, with an all consuming passion that destroys your objectivity.

 

Get a clue McVey. Johnson fought 2nd and 3rd rate guys in his title matches, yet he had to settle for draws and ND's vs.. guys Tunney would box circles around. Johnson's stationary style and low guard were an easy target for a 160ish pound O'Brien, were they not? Yes!!! O'Brien and Tunney had a similar enough boxing style for a comparison, except Tunney hit much harder and was more durable by a mile.

The Jeannette than Johnson fought was very green, and sometime has a losing record. How you can claim Jeanette was a good boxer then is beyond lame. Johnson had 25 pounds on Jeanette according to a news report and Jeanette, a ton of experience.

For the 10th time, you have no f'm clue because you don't watch or don't own the flims. Johnson had his hands full with a mediocre Moran. The fight was close. Watch it. Score it. Moran landed enough. Where is Johnson's vaunted defense on film? Outside of a clumsy Flynn, and Ketchel who looks like a rookie tough man ( Both guys were short, and had no jab or defense ) I don't see it. Johnson did not move Jeffries around early in the match. Watch the early rounds you buffoon, and you will see Jeffries is pushing Johnson backward more often than not. When Jeffries who had not fought in 6 years grew tired, then Johnon began to move him around. Got it? I have only told you 10X.

If you understand how styles make fight ( I fail to see it in your posts ) you would know that when an active boxer type who moves around the ring and fights a more stationary counter puncher type who happens to have less reach and throws less punches, the active boxer mover type wins more often than not, unless a KO happens. An example here would be Roy Jones vs. James Toney.

If the fight came down to who wanted it more, Tunney wins again. Johnson quit vs Klondike, and opted out pressing aciton in 2nd half of the fight vs Hart. 'Nuff said.

 

The McVey-Mendoza great spiritual struggle is the last redeeming aspect of this board.

 

Assessing Johnson's chances here I am taking into account ALL his body of work ,not just his title defences , same with Tunney,[otherwise I would be judging Tunney on two fights]
"Johnson had to settle for draws and no decs"

A draw against Jim Johnson , when he was nearly 36 years old , and had been out of the ring for all but a year and a half, oh, and sustained a broken arm.
Jim Johnson fought 3 draws with Sam Langford ,1 with Jeff Clark, 2 with Joe Jeannette ,as well as beating Jeannette in 1 fight. Neither Clark, Langford ,or Jeannette had a broken arm in any of these bouts.

You seem to have difficulty in assimilating what a no decision contest is. It is a fight that ,unless there is a ko , has no decision rendered at the end of it. Therefore , having to settle for a no dec ,is a given before the contest begins.atsch

Johnson's low guard was an easy target for O Brien can you show me a PRIMARY SOURCE that confims this? If not, it is just spin

Jeannette? There is no PRIMARY SOURCE provided by you, that shows Johnson had a 25 weight advantage over Jeannette in ANY of their fights.
Again , just spin.
On the 2nd of November 1905 Johnson defended his "coloured heavyweight title against Jeannette , Johnson won easily . Twenty three days later Jeannette stopped Sam Langford after 8 rds.

I dont watch or own fights? I started collecting super 8mm fights in the 1960's Including Johnson v Moran.

I have PRIMARY SOURCE reports that state Moran was well beaten by a fat ,out of shape, 36 years old Johnson and I have posted them ,you did NOT respond to them. Just as you did not respond to PRIMARY SOURCED reports that I posted showing Jeannnete eliminated himself from title contention in 1911 ,by being thrashed by Langford.

Jeffries? I have posted PRIMARY SOURCED reports ringside accounts of the fight with Jeffries that state he was outclassed in ALL departments ,including strength ,from the very start.

One of those reports came from the referee Tex Rickard.


Telling me to the contrary 100x will not change the evidence of the film, nor the first hand testimony of the referee, and ringsiders such as Corbett, and Sullivan , both of whom hated Johnson.


Johnson did NOT quit against Klondike he was stopped George Siler, who was the premier referee of that era ,was present,and I posted his account of the fight here, by the way, Johnson scaled in the region of 168lbs for the Klondike fight.

Understanding styles ,and how they work? Well I was certainly nothing special in the ring, but I have actually had fights in the ring , so maybe I am more qualifed than you to assess how that works?


I would hazard a guess that you are the only poster who would question Johnson's courage , he went 10 rounds with a broken arm, he went 26 rounds with a giant when he was 37, and was in front after 20 rounds ,according to the referee Jack Welch, he went 15 rds to a win over fringe contender Pat Lester when he was 50 years old.

Johnson many times went into the ring to face not only an opponent, but a crowd that fervently hoped to see him beaten into the dust.
Johnson's whole life ,and the manner in which he lived it ,palpably demonstrated that he did not give **** for anything.


At his funeral, his Wife was asked what she particularly loved about him , she answered simply "I loved him for his courage , he was afraid of nothing. "

It ill becomes you of all people to question a man's courage ,we both know why don't we?