Why so many rate Tunney ahead of tyson at heavy?

It also shouldnt be forgotten that "that" Dempsey was the clear second best fighter in the world. He Knocked out the Third best fighter in the world in between the two fights. At worst, "that " Dempsey was on par with "that" Tyson that was beaten by Holyfield and Maybe even with the legendary "Tokyo" Tyson.

It is highly possible that absolutely no fighter in history wins 19 of 20 rounds against "That" Dempsey".

 

true it was quite a feat but there are a few fighters that i think would have taken dempsey out before the final bell rang

 

It was very much an 80s fad.

Anyone who did not have Johnson, Dempsey, Tunney, Louis, Marciano, Ali, Holmes and Tyson as their top eight Heavyweights was simply not taken serious.

 

As a general rule of thumb, if Janitor picks the modern fighter, then shut the **** up

 

...but none of them were big AND decent

 

Anyway, Tyson would have walked thru Gene Tunney like a hot knife thru butter.

Tunney was great.

Never stopped.

Only lost once, to Greb by decision
Beat Greb by decision 3 times
Drew with him once

Beat Battling Levinsky W12
Drew with Tommy Loughran
Beat Georges Carpentier KO15
Beat Tommy Gibbons KO12
Beat Jack Dempsey W10 x2

There is nothing that indicates he would do well vs. a monster like Tyson though.

Tyson beat Michael Spinks in 91 seconds, Carl Williams in 93 seconds, Tony Tubbs in under 2 rounds, Larry Holmes in under 4 rounds, Pinklon Thomas in under 6, and plenty of other HWs like Bruno x2, Ruddock x2, Mathis, Botha, Savarese, etc.

 

Very few do. It's a fringe opinion.

 

This attitude is beginning to shrink I believe. But I get exactly what you mean.

 

... but they were the hws to beat.