I have been rewatching a lot of footage lately and have to say one of the guys that impress me the most from back in the day that I can verify on film is Tunney. Many, myself often included tend to gage him based on how we feel about Dempsey but there is a lot more .. putting it simply, the man could really fight .. the films at light heavyweight are serious .. his assortment of punches, his combination punching, his body punching, his speed, conditioning , strength at 175 .. obviously his wars with an undisputed great like Greb .. my biggest and only knock is never having fought a black fighter ..
Carpentier had moments of looking pretty good himself .. courageous fighter that night for sure .. This content is protected
Tunney was the real deal. A very interesting interview I read years ago was with one of Tunneys trainers still living during Listons title reign. He stated “it is not generally understood today that Tunney's right hand was as feared a weapon as Listons”. He went on to describe Tunneys preparation for the first Dempsey bout and that he was trained perfectly to a very fine edge. That Tunney he felt would have beaten all other hwt champions since.
If you are not impressed by Tunney footage, then you either hate him or B&W films. He was very good, I always thought that he's better than his resume shows which says a lot!
He looks to me better than Charles who I am a big fan of .. stronger, faster, a better chin ... he has to be one of the very best light heavyweights for sure .. makes you realize just how tough Greb really was ..
This content is protected I've watched the video a few times trying to figure out what I'm missing? Can you tell me what you see in this Tunney video that you find so impressive? I'm not seeing much of a jab from Tunney, on at least a few occasions he throws the right hand like a baseball pitcher and brings his right foot off the canvas, other than that to me, he looks ordinary. I must be lacking the boxing sophistication to pick up on the nuances? It would be interesting to read what a sophisticated connoisseur of old time boxing sees when watching the video that eludes me. I want to learn, what makes you breathless when you watch Tunney in action vs. Carpentier? I did watch Lloyd Marshall earlier today in a short clip and to my unsophisticated eye, he looked good. He bent his knees, he kept his weight over his feet, he pivoted nicely after punching. To my untrained eye he looked better than Tunney. Maybe after you explain what I'm missing I'll get a better understanding?
It is a shame, and at the same time it isn't, that he didn't fight on until somebody took his title. He is one of the few champions who retired at his absolute prime, and therefore didn't achieve his full potential, in terms of resume. Jeffries is another example. Our understanding of Tunney has been distorted by the Dempsey fights, where he fought a lot more defensively than usual.
Watch more Tunney fights. Watch him against Dempsey if you want to see his jab. Watch him against Gibbons.
One of the great things of tunney was his conditioning....ive heard he trained as well as any boxers ever
I'm disappointed that you're not giving me specific examples of Tunney's brilliance in the video. Your original post read like you have studied the video and had made an educated determination that Tunney was "very good" so I was expecting a long list of things that he was doing well in the video. Since you didn't even give one example, are you admitting that what you wrote in your first post was just a platitude? That you have no idea if Tunney is "very good" or not? Maybe some of the posters who "Liked" your post will give some examples of things that Tunney does that are remarkable, maybe some of those fabled "lost arts of boxing" that we are constantly reading about on this board? You know, those things that Ray Arcel, Dundee, etc., took to the grave that no one else ever learned? Cause, I got to tell you, when I watched Tunney - Carpentier, all I saw was two guys posturing, then one would leap in with a telegraphed punch and the other would try to counter and then they hold until the ref gets them apart. Of course I never read the Bert Sugar books so maybe I'm missing something? To a guy like me, admittedly no Bert Sugar disciple, the skill level in the fight doesn't look impressive at all.
He was just a solid, competent boxer, which in that era made him stand out. Very little of the wild, free swinging, legs and arms in the air nonsense that a lot of guys back then indulged in. Very good control of range and command of the ring, knew when to throw power shots and when to tie up, kept a constant cool head throughout the fight (one of his best attributes). I won't go all bombastic and claim he was one of the finest technical boxers of all time, or anything like that, but for an old timer he had pretty good skills.
I see terrific speed, conditioning, combination punching to the head and body, head feints. slipping punches .. a vey solid package.