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

Tunney adjusted in the second fight, and WON, after getting busted up in the first.

For the sake of simplification, remember "Rocky 3", man. That is adjustment, successful adjustment.

It is inaccurate to simply say Tunney mindlessly fought Greb the same old way 5 times, as you are. It's not true, it's historically inaccurate.

And that's all I'm championing here.

 

Did he win? By your own justification you can't count NWS and quite a few had it for Greb. Less than half admittedly.

Anyway MANASSA I have Tunney anywhere between 16-25 depending on what mood I'm in.

 

You need to read through this thread before you say another word and make yourself look less informed than you already have:

http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=151587&page=9

To be clear though: Are you saying newspaper decisions dont count, or that somehow Loughran wasnt trying in their ND fights? Im curious because Ive never heard this.

Are you saying age, size, and ringwear mean nothing? If so we can end here.

I would be hesitent to use Loughran as a source for anything. He has an excuse for every fight he ever lost and while he no doubt believes those excuses he was handled by Greb.

He says Greb never figured out what he was doing. Do you think Greb never figured out anyone he fought? He fought every type of fighter you can imagine. Loughran wasnt doing anything Greb had not seen before. He says he took Greb apart. If so why did his own hometown papers not state this. Loughran was already a hero in Philly by their first fight and he was judged a loser.

He claimed until the day he died that he was robbed in New York against Greb. Go check what the papers in New York have to say on Chronicling America and Fulton History. Greb made him look like an amateur.

If Tommy had figured Greb out, being the better fighter as you say, why did he only win in Boston by the skin of his teeth? Why did he lose their next fight in Pittsburgh without winning a round? Go look at the Pittsburgh newspapers on Google News, and before you say that it was Greb's hometown I will remind you that Loughran was every bit as popular in Philly and never beat Greb there. The best he could do there was a gift draw in their last fight?

How can you say Tunney mastered Greb when he lost three of five fights to him and only had a convincing win in their last bout when Tunney was a full grown heavyweight and far younger and bigger than Greb? Seems a little like you want to give Tunney more credit than he deserves and ignore the fact that a fighters physical makeup has a lot to do with his success.

 

So how are they so hugely different? We have the opinions of several leading sportswriters WHO WERE PRESENT at the bout. You're saying we should discount this evidence??

Greb got the better of Loughran in these fights, period. Loughran's "adjustments" didn't work. The next day primary source reports confirm this. Greb was the better man here.

 

True, but in the case of Harry Greb, this never happened. No firsthand, primary source evidence regarding Greb or his opponents supports what you're saying.

Why are you quoting non-firsthand sources? Was William Celano there? No, evidenced by his age and the fact that he's quoting the myths that have been passed down for generations regarding this fight. This point of view has been largely discredited, now that we have access to newspaper archives and don't have to listen to the yarn-spinning of imaginative writers anymore, writing about the fight years after the fact. Here's some firsthand evidence from people who were actually PRESENT at Greb-Tunney 2 (research courtesy of o former poster):



All of these decisions were rendered by papers directly from ringside, not wire reports:

NY Morning Telegraph: Greb won 10 of 15 rounds
NY Evening Mail: "Decision depriving Greb of LHW Crown Calls for Sweeping Inquiry"
Newark Star Eagle: Gave Tunney only the 14th round
Newark Evening News: Greb gave Tunney as bad a beating as the first fight, it was one of the worst decisions handed out since the Walker Law
Jersey Journal: The only round Tunney won decisively was the 14th.
Standard Union:After weird decision Tunney is LHW Champion: Judges decide against Greb who had lead on points
NY Sun: Gave Tunney the fight because Tunney scored more points yet then states that Greb scored more points but that the writer took points away because Greb clinched too often...
The NY Evening Telegram: Gave the fight to Tunney
NY American: gave it to Tunney
NY Times: gave it to Tunney
NY Evening World: Scored it a Draw and added that Tunney did not deserve the victory despite the writer stating he was a great admirer of Tunneys
NY Tribune: called it a draw stating the decision met with much disapproval, writing for the same paper Grantland Rice called it a poor decision
NY Herald: Gave it to Greb, another writer for the paper called it a draw
Evening Journal: Gave it to Greb
Evening Mail: Gave it to Greb
Philly Ledger: Gave it to Greb
NY Daily News: Stated a draw would have been a better decision.
Pittsburgh Post: Gave Tunney only two rounds.
Pittsburgh Gazette Times: Gave it to Greb
Pittsburgh Press: Gave it Greb

Bill Muldoon chairman of the NYSAC stated it was a bad decision.

Thats 4 votes for Tunney, 15 votes for Greb, and 4 votes for a draw. So in essence 19 of 23 ringside opinions listed above believed Greb should not have left the ring without his crown. Thats pretty overwhelming particularly considering the strong words used in most of those articles saying things like "robbery" and calling for an investigation, etc. Lets also keep in mind that this was Tunney's hometown and the majority of those papers were hometown papers for Tunney.

Most reports state that when the decision was announced the audience sat stunned and a low murmur was heard throughout, confused by the decision. This was evident even among sections rooting for Tunney. It wasnt until after Greb left the ring and Tunney started out of the ring that he was given his ovation and the paper states this was given to him by his fans, not the entire audience, many of which hooted, hissed, and shouted robbery.

Here is a direct quote from Tunney on the decision: "Realizing there was some justice in Greb's claim of a bad decision, I offered him a return engagement." -Gene Tunney, A Man Must Fight, P. 162

add this as well: The earlier verdict of ten rounds for Greb quoted from the NY Morning Telegraph was from Sam Taub, James Sinnot, writing for the same paper also gave it to Greb by a margin of 8 rnds Greb, 5 Tunney, and 2 even. He added that a draw would have been an injustice. Joe Lynch, then bantamweight champion, interviewed by the Sun felt Greb won it.

The bout is listed on Boxrec as a Unanimous Decision but this was not officially announced as in those days generally only the winner was announced. Two days after the fight the New York Tribune wrote that the decision had been a split decision with 2 votes for Tunney and 1 for Greb.

So now our tally is (excluding Joe Lynch and one of the judges): 6 for Tunney, 17 for Greb, and 4 a draw. or 21 of 27 (77%) who felt Greb should have kept his crown. More than three fourths of some of the most respected boxing minds in the country (that we know witnessed the fight) felt Tunney DID NOT deserve the decision.

This should all carry a bit more weight than anything Mr. Celano says, no?

No, this is Tommy Loughran spewing his usual drivel. Unfortunately, the newspaper reports don't support his glowing appraisal of his efforts vs Greb. As Lord Ty pointed out, Loughran never lost a fight in his life (just ask him!). He had more excuses than the NHL has playoff games. Read the next-day reports of their fights. They will tell you exactly what I am telling you. Neither Tunney nor Loughran ever fully adjusted to or "mastered" Greb.

 

It was a robbery. Go read what I just posted

No, he fought him the same the last four. He made an adjustment after their first bout and yes, did meet with some success (he won two undisputed). But the last four bouts he employed the same tactics, sometimes winning, sometimes losing. All you need to do is go read the next-day reports and you'll see that what I'm saying is true.

The myth that Tunney "adjusted" to Greb after their first fight and dominated their series thereafter is a lie/fairy tale that needs to finally be put to rest. It simply didn't happen that way. :smoke

 

Whenever I come across a fight with enough debate about the legitimacy of the result, a fight I cannot myself watch, I've decided it fairest to just consider it a draw.

 

I agree.

 

Ironically, my last name is also Cavanaugh (no relation)

 

Genes rep in his hometown New Amsterdam News takes a heavy beating in these write ups.
Sez he avoided his crosstown rival Kid Norfolk like the plague!!


Kid Norfolk, Lightheavy, Buried Here

New York Amsterdam News (1962-1993) [New York, N.Y] 03 May 1969: 40.


CitationFull text - PDF (45 KB)‎
Choose "Display selected items" to manage your list.
Close 2Preview
Press the Escape key to close
Sports Whirl

Matthews, Les. New York Amsterdam News (1943-1961) [New York, N.Y] 01 July 1961: 28.


Citation/AbstractFull text - PDF (49 KB)‎
Choose "Display selected items" to manage your list.
Close 3Preview
Press the Escape key to close
They Robbed Him of His Title, But Not His Soul: Passing of Flowers Leaves Only Geo. Godfrey Jackson, Dixon, Gans, Walcott, Langford, Flowers Credit to Race, Says Writer WILLS NOT GIVEN A FAIR DEAL

The New York Amsterdam News (1922-1938) [New York, N.Y] 23 Nov 1927: 9.


Citation/AbstractFull text - PDF
Choose "Display selected items" to manage your list.
Close 4Preview
Press the Escape key to close
WILLS-SHARKEY IN SPOTLIGHT

The New York Amsterdam News (1922-1938) [New York, N.Y] 06 Oct 1926: 13.


Citation/AbstractFull text - PDF (27 KB)‎

 

In all fairness to Prime and everyone else, I think we ALL bought into that myth at one time. It was almost like an heirloom, passed down to succeeding generations of boxing history fans just like the Papke-Ketchel "sucker punch", the Greb-Walker street fight and Clay-Cooper "ripped glove/extra time" myths were. All of them have pretty much been thoroughly debunked, but we all believed them at one time or another.

 

I wonder if prime thinks Battling Nelson was better than Joe Gans based on their series? Or if Tarver was better than Roy Jones? Or if Ross was better than McLarnin?

There a lot of series where the better fighter does prove out. Particularly when the playing field is absolutely level.

Most people would agree that giving up weight, or age, or two working eyes, or height would each be difficult handicaps to overcome. Harry Greb gave up all of those and more every time he faced Tunney. In addition to fighting Tunney on his home turf the first three times they fought. A concession Tunney would never give up to Greb. For some reason Prime seems to think these handicaps were meaningless.

I wonder if Gans' tuburculosis was a meaningless handicap against Nelson and if he was really that great he would have just overcome it? :-(

How different would their series have looked if they had fought their second and third bouts in Pittsburgh? Greb would might have only one unofficial loss to Tunney, to three points wins, and a newspaper decision.