And Tunney was absolutely amazing at staying off the ropes. Truly. All those backward miles must of made him into what he was in regards to that. Anyone agree? Thoughts, opinions...?
Dempsey should have been the champ after that fight. Just finished Ferdie Pacheco's book on his Greatest Rounds in boxing, and he has a lot of documentation about the time Tunney was on the mat (anywhere from 14 seconds to SEVENTEEN (according to The Ring Magazine's Nat Fleischer). He also noted that the referee (Barry) didn't start counting until Dempsey finally went to a neutral corner, but when Tunney later went on to knock Dempsey down, Barry immediately started counting while Tunney was hovering around behind him. Take a look at that fight again, and let me know what you think. The impression I get from Pacheco's book (as well as people like Mills Lane, and others quoted on that fight) is that the referee was bought and paid for. To answer your question, Tunney was good at movement. However, he should have lost that fight. I'm not sure what you mean about backward? Tony
Opinions vary on this one, but for me Tunney always knew where he was. He looked alert. To quote the man himself, "nine of the ten seconds a fighter is on the canvas belong to him." And those are how the ref counted them, not anyone else. I heard Tyson say Dempsey may have had an advantage in the follow up - maybe. As to the variance in the counts, i've heard two therories. One, Dempsey and his manager had made enemies and the ref was in Tunney's corner. Two, Dempsey had famously destroyed Willard by hovering and it stuck in the refs mind (and the mind of anyone else who saw it). He was very keen to get Demspey to a neutral corner. Bad refereeing - but terminal to the match? Not in my opinion.
Dempsey was up so dang fast in round 8, The ref did not have time to get Tunney to a netrual Coner, Had Dempsey stay down. Perhaps the ref would have stop counting. Dempsey was also well known for standing over guys. The Willard and Firpo fights makes a good point in that regard.
I was taken by Dempsey's rabbit punching in that fight. As to the referee "being bought and paid for," I disagree. Dempsey knew the rules ahead of time for that fight, that the fighter scoring the knockdown had to go to a neutral corner. He didn't, simple as that. Going by the rules, the referee correctly did not issue a count until he was in that corner. I'm not sure what there is to argue here.
That I didn't know. Thanks. As to the rest, all I can say is that the referee didn't even look around to see where Tunney was before he started counting when Dempsey went down, which was a lot different than what happened when Tunney went down.
Tunney sure did have some good feet. He was a handful for Dempsey and I think he would be for many others like Marciano, Louis, Jeffries etc
If thats the case then the referee also incorrectly began counting when Dempsey was down without directing Tunney to a neutral corner. Though I don't think it really had much effect on the outcome.
Lemme rephrase that. Agreed to the statement about the referee began counting; I can't say for sure to the second one, because I think if Tunney had gotten up at a TRUE nine, Dempsey, whose tactic was to immediately swarm his opponent, would have slapped him around like a rag doll, personally.
Been a while since I watched the fight but Tunney looked ready to get up by around what would have been 6 or 7. When the ref was pushing Dempsey into the corner he just stayed down to take a breather. Being the mover he was I think he could have run around for another 10 seconds avoiding taking anything that would have resulted in him getting his head cleared. Nothing is certain but that would be my guess. Don't remember you unless you were the guy that used to post in the lounge when I first joined. :think
..............No argument. But if that's the criteria one uses to conclude that a referee is in the bag, it's pretty dubious.