The Sweet Science

So, the latest results of modern day revisionism go as follows:

This content is protected

Dempsey was a weakling and a bum
Greb was overrated based on no known film footage
Marciano was a talentless, crude bum
Carnera was an excellent fighter

This content is protected

 

????atsch:-(

 

If I had to call it, I would say that Wladamir Klitschko is the most intelligent man to hold the lineal heavyweight title, and Jack Johnson is the second.

 

No, you didn't, but a few posters have...confusing glibness with intellect.

 

It's important to note the difference between intellect and wisdom. Immediate intuition vs. universal insight. A doctor may be far more adept than a pot washer at solving problems but fail to glean as many practical life lessons. In that sense he's not as wise. A little philosophical yes, but then somebody dropped Bertrand Russell into the soup.

Michel De Montaigne wrote about the little personality tells in all we do, i.e. everything is a part of the whole. In that spirit Gene Tunney was, if not the ubiquitous intellect photo ops suggest, a very measured individual. His personality appeared to be of a finer grain than Muhammad's whose emotion got the better of his debates more than once.

Then again, Gene's article about jawing a Gorilla (if even remotely serious) may exclude him.

 

This wouldn't necessarily be a test of intellect.

 

Revisionism implies recent /new. Tunney was seen as a snob and fake intellectual in his own time including during his title reign its very well documented,including his own expressions of regret on how he projected himself to the reporters.
Instead of getting irate about it why not look it up?
What intellectual qualifications did Tunney have that leads you to your opinion? Serious question.

Being photographed standing next to GBS ,or the staged one of him lying in a hammock with a book in his hand?
Your other comments have nothing to do with this thread.

 

Truly tough question to answer. Intelligence can be measured in a variety of ways. Some people possess emotional intelligence, others can think when pressured or some people retain information better etc etc.
As far as a fighter who has the credentials that one would associate with intelligence Wladimir Klitschko and his brother both are worthy entries in the discussion.
Wladimir owns a PHD in sports science. Speaks 4 languages fluently (Ukrainian, Russian, English German) co owns a very successful promotional company K2. Is involved in numerous global charities and initiatives. Including eradicating illiteracy in third world countries. And is the current curator of modern art in a museum specializing in Ukrainian works. His brother basically meets the same criteria only his degree is in philosophy and now retired he has become a successful politician on his home country.

 

Nothing's really changed since the 20's,....the "crowd" still harbors contempt and dislike for Tunney today as they did back in the days when he was fighting. Being a bookish, intellectual so called "snob" is unforgivable, unlike being a filthy mouthed ghetto styled thug. That's ok of course. Plus, Tunney was white...very white. The hoi polloi would accept a black man if he was similarly inclined to the same intellectual pursuits as Tunney. The old double standard exists in full force today.

 

You have had your rant,what you haven't done
is answer my question.
WAITING?

 

The decision to give the nobel prize to Churchill was mostly political. Having been neutral during war, the powers that be in Sweden were eager to demonstrate their allegiance with the west. It basically a way to kiss as s, at least thats the way its depicted here in Sweden.

 

ALL my references to revisionism are pertinent...maybe not all to this particular thread, but they present a pretty good rundown of all the revisionist nonsense that goes on here..hipster revisionism thrives here.
well, I have a couple of links for you that explain Tunney pretty well, though maybe not good enough for a perpetual skeptic like you, especially when it concerns a "Yank". There's plenty of evidence of the lack of intellect of so many performers in this sport, no matter how gifted, like Ali and Mayweather to name just two, but there has always been a good amount of evidence, on the other hand, to support what the annals of boxing history have already noted, that Tunney was a man of self taught acumen and learning. Tunney was indeed a different sort of guy from most/all fighters, especially of his time and before. ..and that's why he earned the contempt of the public both then and now...here, have at it:
http://www.thesweetscience.com/news/articles/4688-gene-tunney-boxings-most-unique-champion

http://irishamerica.com/2011/01/boxing-buddies-george-bernard-shaw-and-gene-tunney/

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/14/books/14assa.html

 

In Tunney's case it probably does, because unlike 98% of fighters who "wrote" autobio's, I'll bet you your house that he didn't use a chost writer.