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

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).

 

Yes.

[url]http://www.ibhof.com/pages/about/inductees/oldtimer/smith_jeff.html[/url]

 

Well, this:

1. Greb
2. Armstrong
3. Robinson
4. B. Leonard
5. Langford
6. Charles
7. Moore (YES, **** off)
8. Willie Pep
9. Roberto Duran
10. Bob Fitzsimmons

And then, in no order:

Ross
Canzoneri
Ali
Louis
McFarland
Tunney
Gans
Walker
Dixon/McLarnin
R. Leonard (possibly)

 

You do realise that, if you couldn't think of any more names to add, we may have a solid top twenty one

 

Okay how about this. After those the bracket includes Whitaker, Holyfield, Arguello, Hearns, Spinks, Saddler, Chavez, Williams, Ortiz, Gavilan, Napoles, T. Gibbons... **** it, it's running away with me already, stick to twenty one for now.

 

****, me too.