While it's 1) not on the level of its successor bout between these two, and 2) I wouldn't even call it a classic, I don't think. I had read that it was a one-sided fight, so I was kind of expecting a dull, one-sided fight. Well, here goes my scoring, and my assessment of the action: 1. Dempsey came boring in with hooks and uppercuts to both head and body. Tunney fought back with powerful jabs and some harsh straight rights and lefts in response to Dempsey's attacks. It was a good first round, and very close. However, near the end of the round, Tunney pounded Dempsey on the ropes with a two-fisted barrage, but Dempsey was saved by the bell. Close round, but Tunney sealed it with his late come-on. 2. The exchanges in this round were yet more furious with Dempsey being more aggressive, getting wilder and faster with his attacks on Tunney. However, Tunney was taking the play away from the Manassa Mauler in the latter half of the round. He was no longer trading with Dempsey, but tying him up to neutralize him. Another close round, but Tunney's tactics edged it for me. 3. Uneventful round went to Tunney. 4. Near the end of the fourth round Dempsey switched styles. Previously he had fought in a pressure-fighter style, crouching and boring in with an attack to the body. Near the end of the fourth he was straightened up, jabbing some, and overall trying more to compete with Tunney at his own game of boxing. Tunney. 5. Dempsey attempted to box against Tunney all through this round, except on the defensive. Tunney. 6. Dempsey's attempt to box Tunney was not as effective as the style he had previously been using against Tunney, and he realized it by this round, and switched back to pressure fighting and brawling. He did stop fighting out of a crouch though. Round still went to Tunney. 7 and 8 were not displayed on film, so I couldn't score them of course, but I imagined my score still would have been for Tunney. 9-10. Both uneventful rounds, went to Tunney. Tunney went on to win a UD. While I think it was merited, what I had read, that it was a one-sided fight is simply a lie. Every round on film was closely contested, and it was clear that Tunney was not eager to get into a more dangerous fight with Dempsey than he was already in. And it was still a close fight. However, I gave every round to Tunney, so it was not a close fight in the sense that Dempsey didn't win a round of the fight. I must add that considering that Dempsey took no tune-ups for this fight, and after a 3-year layoff, I was surprised at the closeness of the match. Verdict: It was a fairly good scrap, particularly in the early rounds, but waned into a rather ordinary affair after that. Might be worth the watch. All depends on if you're crazy about Dempsey, Tunney, or 20s fights.
Good god. A close fight? Seriously, what are you watching in some of these. Tunney took every round of this fight. He had Dempsey's face grotesquely cut and swollen, which can be seen in ringside photographs. Dempsey himself had to be led by his handlers to ring center to congratulate Tunney. The radio announcer, Major J. Andrew White was so perplexed by Dempsey's poor performance that as early as the first round he stated that "This is not the Dempsey we are accustomed to seeing" and later called Dempsey a "shell of his former self." He described Dempsey's face as "a terrible sight." In the final round White again called Dempsey a "hollow shell" and said "theres a new champion in the making." Right as the final bell rings White states "There's the bell, and unquestionably we will have a new champion!" Here are some of the ringside reporters impressions: Henry Farrell: "Tunney won eight of the ten rounds by a mile. Two might have been awarded to Dempsey only through the courtesy that might be conceded to a champion." Editor of the Kansas City Times: "Jack Dempsey didnt win a round as the tally card kept by this correspondent shows. Incidentally we sat by one of the two judges whose decision made it unnecessary for the referee to submit his verdict, and this judge gave not one round to the fallen champion, called not one round a draw, but gave but gave each and every round to the new wearer of the heavyweight coronet." Joe Butler Sports Editor of the Scranton Times: "Dempsey, as the saying goes, went to the well once too often and in his last dip he took a scientific trimming and a complete drenching." He added that had the fight gone 15 rounds Tunney would have knocked Dempsey out. Alan J Gould, Hazelton Standard Sentinel: "Dempsey only a shell of his old fighting self, was outboxed and outfought from start to finish, groggy and bleeding in a one sided battle." M D Tracy writing for the United Press: "To the conscious mind it didnt seem possible but the unconscious mind said Dempsey the man killer was about to pass from the pages of pugilism... ...round after round went on, Tunney ever dominant." Grantland Rice, syndicated: "He (Tunney) not only outpointed Dempsey in every one of the ten rounds but the challenger hammered the champions face almost out of shape." Hype Igoe: "I think Gene mastered the old champion at every turn." "There never was a more deliberate butchery of a champion." Regis Welsh, Pittsburgh Post: "Dempsey outboxed, outfought in one sided fight." Jack McAuliffe: "I think Tunney won every round but the sixth." "Never did a champion drop down from a champion to a novice as Jack Dempsey did last night." FairPlay: "The point margin was overwhelming." W C Vreeland, Brooklyn Daily Eagle: "In only one session, the seventh, did he (Dempsey) do anything like fighting, and this in only a rough way. It was his round, if one was willing to stretch the honors to the breaking point." Harry Newman, New York Daily News: "Dempsey was outfought, outgamed, and badly battered by the former marine who had the edge by a large margin in every round save the seventh." Frank Getty, United News: "From the opening bell until its last fateful clang, Gene not only outgeneraled the former champion but took his heaviest punches, withstood them, and struck back harder on his own behalf." Jack Lait, Wilkes-Barre Record: "After he got a few cracks on the jaw he folded up just like he did in the first 11 rounds of his match with the late Bill Brennan. Spitting gobs of blood, his left eye closed tight, his right cut and bleeding from a ragged wound, he bobbed and crouched and missed and swung and puffed and tried to look ferocious." James J Wood, Brooklyn Times Union: Stated only one round, the sixth, might be given to Dempsey. Dempsey was so shamed by his performance he later claimed he was poisoned to explain it away. I could post these quotes literally all day but the point is that Dempsey didnt have a look in in this fight. And frankly the only thing he accomplished in the second was when he dropped Tunney. Tunney won every minute of every round of the second including the long count round minus about thirty seconds when he was dropped and then got on his bicycle.
I'm not sure who you're arguing with on one of these points. I said that Tunney won every round. When's the last time you watched this fight?
I have not watched the first fight in many years and feel some of the quotes are particularly harsh but that is likely because Dempsey lived the high life for a long time, made a ton of cash, didn't defend his title and many felt his time for a thrashing had come ..Tunney did say at one point he hurt him with a shot to the throat enough that he was pretty hoarse after the fight for a while .. I feel he did much better in the second fight .. he lost most rounds for sure but most were very competitive and we saw flashes what might have been had he actually maximized his talent which he did not .. Let's keep in mind that he was fighting an exceptional fighter in Tunney who was in his own prime and while Dempsey , while more active for Chicago than he had been in half a decade never had his legs back ... simply wasn't the man from 1919 .. If Dempsey had a prime it was for Willard ... by Brennan 2 he was already losing a partial and for sure post Carpentier ..
You said that the reports calling it one sided were a lie and said that while it wasnt close on a rounds basis it was a close fight. Thats simply not true. Im not sure how you arrived at that conclusion when Dempsey's performance was so poor that it was universally lambasted, the vast majority of reports having MAYBE winning one round at most, and his face was beaten to a pulp. I also dont agree that Dempsey did better in the second fight barring the knockdown. He was dropped once himself and staggered several times. In the final round he was beaten into a corner and had the radio announcer thinking he was on the verge of a stoppage. Once again most who saw it felt the 10 round limit benefitted Dempsey. The second fight proved decidedly that Dempsey's excuse that he had been poisoned by his friend and bodyguard Mike Trent was bunk and that the result of the first fight was exactly in line with the result in the second.
The main thing I would note is that Tunney looked by far the best of any boxer we have watched in the heavyweight division. I don't quite grasp your Tunney won every round but it was a close fight perspective. To give Dempsey his due, he tried hard and kept coming but he was completely outclassed. It is a good insight that Tunney was a deceptively strong man who was an excellent clincher. Dempsey couldn't work him over to the body as he did Gibbons and Sharkey. Of course, Tunney also had much better movement than anyone we have seen. I also thought the first four rounds were exciting with Dempsey going all out, even if he was generally missing, but after the fourth he seemed to run out of gas and the fight became a repetitious beatdown with Tunney looking like he was coasting while in complete control.
I agree. I think it was anybody's fight for the first four as they say, but Dempsey gassed after that.
I totally understand what you mean by it being a close fight despite Tunney winning every round. The rounds are competitive but Dempsey physically can't muster up enough to win the round. Currently rewatching the fight in who knows how long. Good lord is Dempsey past it here. He completely lacks the former quickness in his footwork and punches which also lack the snap he showed before. His legs are completely shot imo. His crouching style is no longer a crouch but a hunched and rounded upper back. He's pretty flat footed here too. I can only imagine what Dempsey from 1919-1920 would have done. Tunney is making him miss worse than I've ever seen. Dempsey also has great moments in the fight both offensively and defensively. I'm just captured by how much of a difference he showed in 3 years. Tunney won every round but every round was a hot contest with the impression that Dempsey needs one punch to knock him out at any given moment. Got to give Dempsey props. Like you said he didn't take any tune up fights despite getting in there with the best fighter in the world at the time arguably.
Yeah. I don't understand how Klompton and other people don't understand that. For instance, I don't know if you've seen Terrell vs. Chuvalo. Almost every round could go either way, but Terrell edges out about 10 rounds and the rest are even or go to Chuvalo. Sounds one-sided, but most of the rounds were close and two-sided.
As if Im the only person who ever called either fight one sided, and indeed Ive cited NUMEROUS examples in both cases. All you have is a decidedly poor opinion that those fights were competitive which leaves me wondering why you are so interested in a sport you clearly dont understand. Dempsey lost every round, he was completely outboxed, his face was turned to hamburger, he barely landed a solid punch, at the close one eyes was completely closed and he had several cuts. Tunney was barely even marked. Dempsey had to be lead back to his corner at the final bell and then back to Tunney to congratulate him. Thats not a competitive fight regardless of how much revision you want to apply to it.
Priceless. Imagine a shrink reading Klompton's posts ? They'd have a field day. The need to write these ignorant rants again and again .. Narcissistic personality disorder — one of several types of personality disorders — is a mental condition in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration, troubled relationships, and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of extreme confidence lies a fragile self-esteem that's vulnerable to the slightest criticism. Yup.
