I'd feel criminal if I didn't share this. (HD JD vs Tunney II)

Dempsey nearly...actually did...KO Tunney when he was past his due date. In 1919, at his height, surely he would be faster, stronger and most important, HUNGRIER. So yes, i think he wears out Tunney in 1919 just like Greb did around a few years later. And remember, Greb demolished Tunney. SUrely so would Dempsey.

 

Mm. It is plausible it could be short work. But not easy. I see this being a 7th-8th round stoppage by Dempsey in 1919.

 

I actually have to give Dempsey a little more credit then I normally would. Protects his chin very well, keeps off center line and excellent head movement. Seems this fight he was just so hesitant to pull the trigger.

 

I actually have emailed the owner of this youtube channel. I found it as well and was blown away by the quality of his restorations and asked how he did it and he uses artificial intelligence to upscale and clean up the footage. The results are astonishingly clear at times, and to be able to watch these fights with such high levels of quality is a privilege.

 

Blessing really, he's a good man to do what he does for such a small audience.

 

Film is film, the film doesn't change what the fighters do in the ring. Old, grainy film or cleaned up film the fighters stay the same, it's just easier to watch the cleaned up film. Dempsey would probably have gotten the knockout if he had the same referee that Ali had vs. Bonavena. This ref made Dempsey go to a neutral corner.

IMO, both of them looked okay, I liked Tunney's 1-2, he threw the right as soon as the jab made contact, just as fighters are taught to do. Dempsey got the knockdown by feinting a right, bringing the right shoulder forward and putting him in position for the hook. There was a lot of clinching/holding, both kept their left hands lower than I prefer, but it wasn't a big problem for either of them in this fight. They both also came forward with their left hand low, that's dangerous, but again, I didn't see either of them get caught while moving in so I guess it worked? I didn't watch the entire fight (I'm just not a fan of old fights) so I might have missed some things both good and bad.

Dempsey looked like his timing might have been off, sometimes he looked like he saw something but he didn't have the quickness to do it, but he was mostly aggressive and changed levels a lot while advancing. Tunney moved, and he kept Dempsey honest with his right. I didn't see anything that either did that is a "lost art."

 

Thank you?

 

You're welcome?

 

The Napoles vs Griffith fight is unwatchable in quality. Hope he does that next.

 

I'm rooting for some of the really early stuff myself. Although I've never seen really early film reprocessed to the quality of this Dempsey Tunney film. So maybe later is better for conversion?

 

Absolutely great, many thanks. Really makes the fight come to life, after all these years of grainy footage. So many more I would like to see. Meanwhile, grateful for these links.

 

Two quick thoughts on this observation:

1) Considering how primitive many think boxing was in the 1920s, I'd say it's more significant just that Dempsey and Tunney didn't look terrible. There was, after all, somebody in this forum who believed that he could personally defeat Jack Sharkey.

2) The question of "lost arts" raises a more interesting question. You're a modern expert. People who believe in "lost arts" think that old boxers knew stuff that modern experts never learned. If Dempsey and Tunney were really, genuinely using "lost arts" in there, you'd expect to have a hard time recognizing them. Because you wouldn't know quite what to look for. Same way you might not know quite what to look for when you're watching a kickboxing match.

Disclaimer: I'm skeptical of the existence of "lost arts" at all. Except maybe in clinch wrestling because the rules really were different. But clinch wrestling "lost arts" would probably get you DQ'd today, so who cares.

 

I'm no expert on anything, I learn everyday at the gym. The guy on the forum who thought he could beat Sharkey is not unusual, I don't have a scientific poll, but I would guess most modern boxers probably think they could beat the champions of Sharkey's time. This is a video that someone posted on this forum within the last month. I would guess that if the fighters could be disguised, and people watched both videos, this one would be more impressive than Dempsey - Tunney.

And, maybe you are right about the "lost arts?" Maybe I just don't recognize them or appreciate the subtleties that are happening? Good point!

This content is protected

 

Yeah. It would be an interesting experiment to conceal a modern guy by making the film look old, and then claiming he's some lost contender from the 50s. Explain that it's just footage of good old George "Tire Iron" Johnson. They don't make 'em like that today, no sir.

 

There was a short, cleaned up clip of Jeffries vs Sharkey 1899 recently linked on this site - very impressive in relative terms but of course this is better.

Older stuff will have a more limited ceiling for improvement- but those who do the conversions endeavour to obtain the best orig. version in the first place - sometimes the best orig. versions (pre enhancement) were not well circulated or often seen by most anyway.

When Unforgivable Blackness aired and showed the first round KDs of Burns v Johnson I was gob smacked - I’d only read of the KDs and, after years of seeing everything Johnson, I figured they weren’t captured on film - but there they were. Scenes from the Johnson - Jeffries fight were also the best I’d ever seen.

It seems that some converters just concentrate on upscaling, fattening up the frame rates via AI software etc. - others again borrow that finished product and then colorise - I guess some do it as a job lot also. Depending on the orig. quality, sometimes the colour adds to the mod. and overall effect, sometimes not so.

It also seems the very old stuff was filmed at only about 18 fps - thus jerky movement. The prob was compounded by these old films being shown via later projection machines cranked at 24 fps - which I guess meant the older orig. films were being run at 33% faster than their orig. intended fps delivery - so first fluidity issues at lower fps and then speed issues atop that, - I mean some fighters might literally have those inherent issues - even when filmed at 60 fps in glorious 8 K - suffice to say, is there any technology bar totally fake CGI etc. that could make the likes of Butterbean EVER look good? LOL, .

The old timers have often been misinterpreted and somewhat underrated as judged through a relatively primitive, illusory “lens” without due account for same. With the new tech, at least there is that much less mental accounting to be done and more fair judgments made.

The first version of Dempsey vs Brennan II, 1920 I ever saw years ago was not very watchable - but now we’ve arrived at this amazing, colorised quality:-

This content is protected

Both Jack and Bill don’t look too shabby at all IMO. - though even in this fight Dempsey was allegedly under par, having been partying in the lead up (ala claims re Tokyo Tyson). Still, Jack hung tough and took his punch into the 12th round for the KO win but there is suggestion that JD might’ve fouled - hitting on the break - just prior to the KO shot IIRC.

The orig. pre fight footage was also always very impressive - but cleaned up again, - outstanding:-

This content is protected

Bill Brennan had quite the pugilist’s proboscis on him - classic!

As to JD vs GT prime v prime, the KD/long count in the rematch might be called up in Dempsey’s favour, the thinking being “Well, if past prime JD could do that….”, but it was after near 17 rounds of dominance before GT got caught - Gene isn’t likely to nap or become so complacent against absolute prime JD.

In Jack’s favour when considering his prime condition vs that of later fights, I think even a few degrees loss of speed and overall mobility was far more detrimental to a fighter of Dempsey’s ilk than equal measures of similar deterioration would be for a more all round boxer.

For the puncher, there’s a BIG difference between semi connections/near misses and perfectly flush, potentially fight ending, power shots.

I think an absolute prime and on point JD catches up to prime GT by rounds 7-8 but still a tough fight and chase for The Mauler.