Was Philadelphia Jack O Brien a good fighter?

He was amazing.

 

Judge for yourself:

This content is protected

Hard to see the footage, though.
He seemed good for his era, wouldn't be good at all if he was teleported to right now, but for his era he was good.

 

No. He's an ATG fighter.

 

He was so good that Chicago Jack O’Brien and Topeka Jack O’Brien have been lost to history as his O’Brien-ness overshadowed their very existence.

 

The 3 times I saw him live in California when I was 12, he was an amazing talent, but he could be timed.

 

You just called Tunney a poor boxer, I don't think you have good ability to judge boxing skills.

 

Unequivocally yes!

There are legitimate problems with his record, but he was undoubtedly one of the best p4p of his era, at some stage!

 

This guys seems to have been teleported quite a bit.

He sparred with Jem Mace, (the first bare knuckle world boxing champion), Harry Greb (who we have no film of), and ultimately Joe Louis!

That is quite a feat, for a man who does not have a teleporter!

 

Gene Tunney is overrated. He accomplished a lot in his era, but he fought in an era before boxing had really became boxing, and all the fighters were garbage compared to today's fighters. Once you get to the 40s, and even the 30s with Louis, you get boxers who could compete with modern day boxers. Everything before are just crap, good for their era yes, but absolute crap in the grand scheme of boxing. They were the best they could be, though.

Who knows? In a hundred years, today's top fighters might look like garbage. Pre-1930s fighters were good for their time, but are **** compared to now.

No way Tunney even ranks in the top 100 of heavy or light heavyweight professional boxers if he fought today. He gets on lists bc people look at the achievements, and the best a fighter can do is beat the best he can at the time.

 

What a post. With each passing decade in most cases the fighters are less experienced compared to the past generation and have less dimensions to their game. Fundamentals are sorely lacking even in many champions today. The boxing game was much tougher back in the day. No mandatory 8 count and and forcing fighters to a neutral corner was rarely enforced. Most fighters today aren’t complete fighters due to being inexperienced.

Look how little Sullivan Barrera (was ranked in top 10) knows about working on the inside. GGG and Abel did their best to drill some of these little subtleties in Barrera’s head, but these aren’t things you can pickup overnight.

Ward took full advantage of Barrera’s weaknesses. Ward did the same with Kovalev. Ward would be considered a green fighter if he fought back when Tunney fought.

This content is protected

Sergey Kovalev, who is one of the best light heavyweights today is not only less experienced than Tunney was, but Kovalev is also a one dimensional fighter. Kovalev has virtually no inside game and when Andre Ward fought dirty he looked at the ref for help and quit instead of handling it with his own ability. Kovalev is a novice compared guys like Archie Moore, Al Gainer, Billy Conn, Kid Norfolk, Gene Tunney, etc.,

 

I think Kovalev beats Conn, Tunney, Norfolk and Gainer but not Moore.

Look at this:

This content is protected

Watch the full thing (it starts off with training, but goes to the fight in a min or so)

Ward would be considered a green fighter? (to my understanding, means inexperienced boxer) Lol no. Ward would dominate that era. Won't say go undefeated, because the rules and stuff would be different, but man boxers from pre-1930s would not be able to compete nowadays. They were good for their time, yes, but bad compared to other times. The sport has evolved so much, the meta-game of it, that they couldn't compete with modern fighters. Not any of the Tunney footage I have seen has impressed me.

If Tunney had half the skill of Ward he would be undefeated. (which isn't far off from his current record lol)

They're like oldies without any goodies

 

I love how 1930s fighters are good enough, even though most of then fought in 1920s. Guys like Jack Sharkey, Max Schmeling - they were 1920s fighters and Tunney's contemporaries at HW.

If you think that Tunney, Leonard, Gans, McFarland, Langford ect look like a crap, then change the sport you talk about.

 

Gene Tunney would absolutely slaughter Kovalev,,in my opinion.

 

I kind of agree, that Tunny fought in an era, where boxing had not yet fully developed into something we would call "modern". I'm talking generally speaking - because when it comes to Tunney, I believe he was ahead of his time. To me he looks quite accomplished, with modern skills - and to say he wouldn't be a top-100 LH today is a bit harsh, imo. Naturally the heavyweights would be too big - but I could see him make an impact at LH.