Gene Tunney's decision to fight Heeney instead of Sharkey in finale

Another issue with Risko as a challenger, is that both his wins over Sharkey and Godfrey were received as poor fights in the press.

 

We know what Heeney offered as a challenger to Tunney because the fight happened and we know about it.had the fight not happened it wouldn't be nearly so obvious.

I think Klompton hit the nail on the head when he said these articles were basically making Tunney's case. If there's a bunch of challengers, and Heeney is the one who puts on the best run of form, and there's not a lot between them, as well as lots of close boring fights, then it's hard to argue Tunney didn't have a point.

After Tunney retired Sharkey showed himself capable of more, but plenty of guys had showed the sort of promise he had at point, then gone on the sort of rub of bad form he was on, and just never really done anything after that

 

I don't see what the relevance of the Godfrey fight on June 27, 1928 is to any of these issues. It came after the decision to fight Heeney had been made. Also hard to see using it as a cudgel against Risko, though.

The position seems to be that Heeney beating Risko in October, 1927, gives Heeney the edge over Risko,

but then why is Risko fighting Sharkey in March of 1928? Shouldn't there have been a rematch between Heeney and Sharkey with the winner to get Tunney? Why should Risko be involved as a spoiler if even if he wins it doesn't matter?

And is the quote from Jess McMahon wrong that there was an agreement for the winners of the Sharkey-Risko and Heeney-Delaney fights to meet in an elimination? And why is Delaney still in it after losing to Risko?

"poor fights"

Which Risko won.

 

"We know what Heeney offered as a challenger to Tunney because the fight happened"

And we know that a youngish Risko did better against Tunney in 1925. Box rec quotes a newspaper report which gives the rounds as 6-2-4 for Tunney which looks much more competitive than Heeney in fact was.

"Heeney is the one who puts on the best run of form"

Did he, here are the fights of Risko and Heeney from Sept 1927 on:

Heeney

9-8-1927-----Paulino Uzcudun--draw
9-30-1927-----Jim Maloney--KO
10-26-1927-----Johnny Risko--won
1-13-1928-----Jack Sharkey--draw
3-1-1928-----Jack Delaney--won

Risko

9-14-1927-----Jack Delaney--won
10-13-1927-----Quinton Romero--won
10-26-1927-----Tom Heeney--lost
11-25-1927-----Paulino Uzcudun--won
12-7-1927-----Phil Scott--won
3-12-1928-----Jack Sharkey--won

So Heeney is 3-0-2 with a win over Risko. Risko is 5-1 win wins over Uzcudun and Sharkey, and also Scott, who had twice defeated Heeney in fights for the British Empire title. I stick with Heeney beat Risko, but Risko looks better against the field.

I note that Risko had only 13 days off while Heeney had 26 days off for their October 26 fight. I wonder if that had an impact.

I repeat that I don't see why if the win by Heeney over Risko in October of 1927 puts him above Risko regardless, why Risko is the one who is matched with Sharkey in March of 1928. Shouldn't Heeney have been re-matched with Sharkey? Why have Risko fight Sharkey if even if he wins he is out of luck?

 

In those days, 13 days between fights is like going on a world cruise today.

 

Risko was more competitive probably because Tunney beat him with an injured left hand. I don't think Risko being the best of the pack does anything to hurt Tunney's case.

Do you really think if his last fight was an easy win against an opponent he'd already beaten he'd be getting more credit than he's getting for the Heeney fight.

 

It seems to me there are two issues raised by Suzie. Did Tunney basically select Heeney? Was Heeney the best contender?

On the first, the evidence produced on this thread seems strong that Tunney was the critical voice in selecting Heeney. It appears that in March, 1928, the press thought there would be an elimination between Risko and Heeney. Rickard and Muldoon wanted it. The match between Risko and Sharkey makes little sense unless there was going to be another elimination. Risko winning means nothing as then Heeney gets the shot. And if Sharkey won? Why would beating Risko leapfrog him over Heeney as Heeney had already beaten Risko?

My take, just looking at everything, is that both Sharkey and Tunney had beaten Risko back in 1925. Now Risko had improved enough to beat Sharkey. Tunney had aged from 28 to 31 since he outpointed Risko. I think he judged Heeney less of a potential threat.

The excuses for not having an elimination make no sense. The time line? The Tunney-Heeney fight was on July 26. Plans for an elimination between Risko and Heeney were in the works in March. Such a fight could easily have been put on in May or early June with considerable time until the championship. Dempsey-Sharkey in 1927 was on July 21 with the Tunney-Dempsey fight on September 22.

And this is if the championship fight couldn't be put off until September. It is incredible that either the NYSAC or the NBA would have stripped Tunney for defending in September rather than July.

Worry about a draw? I can't buy that Rickard or Muldoon couldn't have used their influence to demand the judges didn't punt and came up with a winner.

As for Heeney as the best contender. Some believed it in 1928. I think the case for him was shaky at best in 1928, and with hindsight he was behind Sharkey, Godfrey, Uzcudun, and Risko.

 

Why had Risko gotten better to beat Sharkey. By all accounts Risko's and Sharkey's fight was poor, why not just think the erratic Sharky had just put on a far worse performce?

I can't think of ever seeing a champion get criticised for not making the top contenders fight more elimations bouts to get a shot at them.

Tunney fought someone who at worst was one of the top contenders, and there's a good case was his best contender. The other top contender (Risko), had already lost to both Tunney and the man he fought. There's nothing to criticize here.

 

This motivated reasoning has not just reached absurdity, but long surpassed it too. There honestly needs to be a new word for this.

If Tunney had fought Risko without the eliminator happening you would criticised him for picking an opponent that had not only already lost to him (when he was injured), but also already lost to Heeney.

If Risko had won the eliminator you would use the same criticism and say he avoided Heeney by making him fight eliminators, even against someone he already beat, until he lost one.

If Heeney had beaten Risko in the eliminator you'd probably accuse Tunney making Heeney fight eliminators until he was stake to get a shot, or dig up another contender.

If Tunney had invented time travel and used it to beat Joe Louis and Muhammad Ali at their peaks on the same night you guys would criticise him for mot fighting Rocky Marciano and Lennox Lewis instead

 

There's plenty of quotes dismissing RIsko as a challenger or interesting as an opponent for Tunney. Really all this does is back up Tunney's point about the lack of good challengers.

I don't really see how Heeney having a contract reflects anything poorly on Tunney. This might be some of the most absurd agenda pushing I've seen. It's so obvious you're starting with a conclusion, and just looking for any way possible to justify.

 

The Brooklyn Daily Eagle- 1928 Mar 14
By W. C. VREELAND.
"I HAVE attended all the fights between heavyweights in the last 35 years, but I swear I won't look at one if it is arranged between Tunney and Risko"
The speaker was one of the great unknowns who had witnessed the Sharkey-Risko. He was one of the great unknowns who had witnessed the Sharkey-Risko bout. He was a man well on in years and well off in this world's good, if good clothing is a true indication of a fat bank account. He had occupied a ringside seat, two rows behind His Honor the Mayor.
As he left the side entrance which opens out on 49th st., he expressed himself so that all and sundry of his friends—and there were a number of men in the party—could hear.
The man was florid of face. Whether he was naturally so or from the heat of his blood over the prospects of Johnny Risko being selected as an opponent for Gene Tunney, I know not. But judging by his words, he didn't relish any such thought for the future—a fight between Tunney and Risko for the heavyweight championship.
SPEAKS for Thousands.
AND that unknown was spokeman for man other men who discussed the Risko-Sharkey bout on their homeward journey Monday night.
. . .
And if Heeney and Risko fight, will that mean an honest-to-goodness opponent for Gene? Not much. Neither would pull a corporal's guard to the gate.
Better Dempsey, half blind, than Heeney or Risko. Dempsey is a fighting man.

 

"the erratic Sharkey"

How erratic was Sharkey?

From August 1925 when he was outpointed by Gorman to Carnera II he lost three times. Two were "grab the balls" fights with men who had been or would be champions. It was Sharkey grabbing against Dempsey after what looks to me on the film to be a foul. Schmeling does the grabbing in a fight Sharkey was doing well in before obviously fouling Max. His only other loss, and the only time he was outpointed, and in a way I would say honestly beaten, was against Risko. From the Gorman fight through April of 1928 he defeated Risko, Maloney (2), Godfrey, Wills, McTigue, and Delaney. He would go on to beat Stribling, Loughran, Scott, Carnera, and Schmeling.

One can argue there is no decisive, non-controversial, defeat from August, 1925 until Carnera II. Even the Risko fight was a SD.

From the Gorman fight through the Delaney fight, Sharkey was 14-2-1. From August 1925 up to the Tunney fight, Heeney was 11-3-2 against far less tough competition. He didn't fight men like Dempsey, Wills, and Godfrey.

As I posted before, why have Sharkey and Risko fight if Risko was eliminated the previous year by Heeney. Risko winning gets him nothing. And why would Sharkey winning clear the air. Why does beating a man Heeney had already beaten put him over? The answer which makes sense is Rickard was setting up a final elimination. But Heeney's manager didn't want it for obvious reasons, and Tunney used his clout with Rickard to force the Heeney fight and avoid Risko.