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

Somebody doubts this?

 

This is ESB. Someone doubts everything. Probably you could go to general and find someone who thinks Zab Judah is better than Ross.

 

Its debateable but I think McLarnin was the better fighter. I think most people do but maybe Im mistaken.

 

In P4P poll here at ESB Ross was #20, McLarnin's name is missing among the 38 fighters that got at least one vote.

 

Ross was greater than McLarnin. Shouldn't be much debate on that IMO.

 

:deal

 

You sound like a wannabe pontificating revisionist, the likes of which I have seen through before as paper tigers, easily declawed...

I'm saying anyone who claims, right off the bat, that Greb WON when the results are NO CONTESTS, shows sloppy concepts and a slanted outlook.

By the same token, this cannot be used as an excuse, totally disregarding Tunney's performance against the hallowed Greb. Greb feasted on younger, bigger men, but with Tunney he more than met his match. This counts for something, though the caveats have been taken well into account. Nobody is thrusting Tunney ahead of Greb. Greb is top 5; Tunney, top 30.

Loughran comes across as full of himself, but he did beat Greb, and his explaining how--however colorfully--fits in with history. Adjustment, by two of the ring's greatest masters, to succeed where so many others failed. I quote Tunney: "I discovered through the early part of that (first) fight that I could lick Harry Greb. As each round went by, battered and pummelled from post to post as I was, this discovery gradually became a positive certainty in my mind."

Yes, but thinking something and doing it successfully are two very different things. Are you prepared to say a sublime tactician such as Loughran learned nothing, adjusted nothing in the prior bouts before reaping a win?

I have never said any such thing.

I made a generic statement--genesis of this discussion--that others have made:

Tunney was undoubtedly Harry’s master in their wonderful five-fight rivalry, though not as comprehensively as the history books suggest. Historians and researchers have lately credited Greb with the newspaper decision in their fourth fight at Cleveland, which would make Gene the three to two winner in their series. After their final scrap, Greb reportedly visited Tunney’s dressing room and good-naturedly barked, “I never want to fight you again.” –Mike Casey, “All-Time Boxing” founder, boxing historian, International Boxing Research Organization member.

The Klompton argument is valuable, appreciated, but it goes against everything everyone has ever known about Tunney-Greb. I've read since the 1970s how Greb beat Tunney once, handing Gene his only loss. Now we are told it's all been a huge conspiracy and we have all been unwitting suckers. I say let's bring it all out and let time tell how things pan out. In the meantime, Gene Tunney, for decades a respected man, has words of value to me:

"I entered the ring with Greb determined either to win or to die in the attempt. I reasoned with myself that it would be much better to die than to lose. While training for this match I contracted influenza. It increased as my training progressed. I could not call off the contest or ask for a postponement. The Garden dates were filled. There could be no chance of getting another match with Greb until the following autumn, so I had no choice but to go through with it. After doing well for the first six rounds, I suddenly became physically exhausted. Greb relentlessly battered me about the ring from the sixth to the eleventh round. They told me in my corner I was losing, that if I wanted to win I would have to capture the remaining rounds or knock him out. In sheer desperation I came out at the start of the twelfth and luckily hit Greb with a long right on the cheekbone that had everything I had in it. It knocked him to the ropes. He slowed up considerably. Fight, fight; hit, hit. I kept on repeating to myself -- and did. I was given the decision at the end of fifteen rounds. It is only fair to Harry to say that there was a great deal of disagreement as to the accuracy of the decision. The judges, newspaper men, and spectators were divided." –-“A Man Must Fight”.

There is no consensus. I will say this: the two men AT LEAST fought on even terms when it really counted and, as Greb faded, Tunney mastered, yes, mastered his gallant foe, wear, age, size, Tunney's quality, all of this included. Thus, Tyson mastered an old Holmes; Pryor mastered an old Argüello; Argüello mastered an old Olivares; Lewis mastered an old Tyson. And on and on. And kudos to all these masters; lesser fighters would not have done what they did. This elevates Tunney, not to No. 1, but it elevates him.

 

A pleasure, Surf-Bat. I'm not yet prepared to gleefully toss out 90 years of universally accepted history without subjecting the new theory to rigorous scrutiny. It's our sport we're talking about!

 

You just clearly don't know how to READ AND COMPREHEND. If what Tunney did with Greb--who wasn't finished--is as worthless as you imply, any old tomato can would have done it.

 

Some excellent cuts, thrusting, and parries on this thread, and one tiny example of condescension,[ I thought Klompton had returned.]

New information is the result, very worthwhile.



I still don't rank Tunney above Loughran though.:nono

 

Mike Casey is well known for ignoring primary sources when writing his articles.

Tunney doesn't even remember the round when he caught Greb with a long right hand to the head. It was in the 14th, not the 12th, and it wasn't at the start of the round.

 

Indeed, sir. And I would never expect you to. In this lazy, sound bite-lovin', Wiki-research generation we need to always look a bit closer. Keep in mind that with Greb-Tunney II that almost all of it has already been done for you, courtesy of former poster KLompton's breakdown of the primary, firsthand newspaper sources that I posted.

If you wish to dig in to make sure that those are accurate, then I see no fault in that. :smoke

 

I must disagree with this. Those results are based off several primary sources. They are thorough, unbiased, and from several different points of view. Therefore, they cannot be labeled as sloppy or slanted.

I did. I gave you an avalanche of primary source material; eyewitness material from writers and people who were at ringside. The only "time" it should take would be the time it takes to read it. The results are overwhelmingly in Greb's favor. Ignore all of this at your own risk

 

Well those fights weren't no contest they were no decision which is very different.