Could Tunney really beat Frazier & Foreman?

Retired after Zama.

 

Was Perry really the greatest treadmillist in history?

 

I don't think either fight would last long. Tunney was very skilled, but he just didn't have the physical tools to hold them off.

 

He would have a chance, very good boxer

 

not my fault you are too dense to understand fight films and analysis , every argument is frazier and foreman too big , or they would pressure Tunney meanwhile actual footage shows the chances they would get to hit Tunney would be smaller since he doesnt do things their opponents did.

 

how do you block folks , I gotta whole lotta idiots I wanna block!

 

1) "Little kid"? You have no idea about my age. I am 55.

2) You are the one acting immature-& mean from a safe, anonymous distance. By trying to be demeaning, not sticking to the facts.

3) I believe Tunney was at least over 190 for both bouts with Dempsey. You mentioned his Heeney fight, *falsely*-as the only fight he weighed over 190-& at best assumed something for no reason-but it seems like you may have been DISONEST. He was near 190 against Greb by their last fight, Greb said he had gotten too big for him.

4) You have a habit of either being dishonest about weight & size-fudging, rounding down, or to give you the benefit of the doubt, lazily assuming what you want to believe without checking it.

5) Most importantly-beyond your nastiness-is that I very clearly said I was referring to Tunney's s HW peak-not most of his career when he was a LHW.

6) The whole *thread* had the intention of saying the same-you think anyone would choose Dempsey when he was ~ 175 in day of weigh ins, to beat Frazier or Foreman?
Might as well mention Ali as an Olympic LHW or well under 200 when just starting his professional career in H2H match ups, lol!
That makes no sense, you are defending being irrational & bad practices.

8) You were DISHONEST about Marciano being a 180 lbs. champion: because you wrote that many time-yet been called out on that before.
Using his lightest very early career weight is not what is meant by as a "champion", your own words.

9) I will not bother to educate you about the skil levels of all the ATGs you dismiss-you are as extreme & biased as someone who always picks the older fighters regardless of the facts & a huge size disparity.

10) But it is easy to see that the undefeated Marciano earned his title shot.
He retired the greatest HW to that time & maybe ever.
He was 42-0 when he got a title shot-he waited longer than most to get it.
You could not even mount a sane argument that he did not deserve it.
Let alone beating the best challengers around after he got it: Walcott & Charles twice, & Archie Moore.
Nobody else was as worthy of it by the time he got it. He threw out the one guy who asked him about throwing a fight.

11) It is INCREDIBLE that "I never heard anybody refer to Lennox Lewis, George Foreman, Wladimir Klitschko, Gerry Cooney ect as super heavywights."

They are referred as SHWs ALL THE TIME.
In numerous places & forums, including here.
The fact that there is no formal SHW division professionally does not mean it is not accurate & useful as a description of the challenges of facing skilled guys over a certain height & weight (absent needing to be fairly fat to get there).

12) Let's see if you stick to your word to block me, or do not have the discipline to follow your word & resist another illogical, nasty comment.

Anyway, everyone can see-& some say, as in this thread-how bad (& wrong) you are.
You will likely find precisely *zero* people who disagree with me here.
Good luck growing up.

 

Of course he stands no chance, both KO him.

 

Tunney would be a nightmare matchup for young Foreman. Not saying he would win, but besides prime Ali and maybe Fury, he had the best style to diffuse him.

 

"Young" Foreman is as overrated as they come. I pick quite a few fighters to "Diffuse" him.

 

Yes, he had the style, but not the size. Ali and Fury are just as big/bigger than Foreman, huge difference

 

As much as I respect the hell out of Gene, I believe they both stop him.

 

Excellent analysis! Gene Tunney, in addition to always being in top condition, always made a thorough study of his opponents and planned strategies accordingly. He did his homework and always had a Plan B. This is best illustrated in his handling of the long count. Surviving the knockdown courtesy of the long count is perhaps what Tunney is best remembered for, but although he did get the extra time, he took advantage of those extra seconds to more fully recover. Upon rising, his quick footwork kept him out of further trouble, frustrating Dempsey until Gene took control again in the next round. And that knockdown in the 7th round was the only time in his pro career that he ever hit the deck. Because he fought so defensively, I believe his toughness gets underrated. In their first bout, Harry Greb gave him a frightful beating but he hung in there and finished the bout on his feet. Gene was a thinking man's fighter, and he learned so much from his series with Greb.

Between Frazier and Foreman, I would give Tunney a good chance against Foreman. The key would be how well he could survive the early rounds when Foreman is fresh and most dangerous. I believe he would box Foreman, trying to frustrate him and cause him to expend more energy than he is accustomed. The longer the fight lasts, the better Tunney's chances get. I believe he could get past the dangerous early rounds and take the play away from Foreman for a victory.

Frazier would be more problematic. Prime Frazier was like a tank, rolling over and through anything the opposition threw at him. He was a slow starter, so Tunney may have the advantage in the early rounds, but unless he could halt or slow Frazier's forward progress, Joe will get stronger in the middle rounds. Stamina would not be an issue with Joe, as it would with Foreman. Joe's constant pressure, body attack, and that big left hook along with his ability to absorb punishment and keep moving forward were so effective against virtually all of his opposition (except Foreman). I would speculate that Tunney's strategy would focus on winning rounds - one at a time while accumulating as many as possible, using the jab and straight rights. Gene would need to put to good use all that he learned in fighting Greb, for in Joe he would be meeting more than a souped-up version of Greb. Joe had the style to grind down a Gene Tunney and for that reason it would be hard to bet against him. But at the same time, I could see the fight going the limit and even being close. The winner would depend on the strategies Tunney employed and how effective they proved to be.

 

take a look at how many times in boxing clinches did tunney take hits from his opponents .Tunney gets the jab off first (which he will) since frazier wanted you to jab so he can duck and throw that hook. Tunney will get the clinch and tie Joe up every time , its jab cross tie up over and over again and Tunney had SUPERB clinch defense probably the best all time. The battle will be Joe countering tunney who can feint with the best of them(certainly might be the goat on film at feinting) vs 1 dimensional frazier . Tunney would stop him clean.

 

He loses to both