After watching the Long Count with Dempsey, there was little left to watch of Tunney, of course. Just the Tom Heeney fight, which was not filmed very extensively. Of course, with only a total of 5 Tunney fights in the can, and no more than 5 Tunney fights being possible of being in the can at this point in film history, I'm going to make an open judgment about Tunney, since I don't think it's fair to judge him based upon only 5 fights. I was not near as impressed with his victories over Dempsey as I thought I would be (although the second was still pretty good), and thus I am a bit skeptical of even his best victories that appear on his resume that do not appear on film. In that way, I tend to write Tunney off as only a slightly better than the average elite of the day. On the other hand, with 3 wins over the great Harry Greb on his resume, I am also hesitant to condemn Tunney as an ordinary fighter. So my judgment on Tunney remains open. The only thing I can say of Tunney's skills is that I was disappointed once again in how hyped up he seems to be by fans, and even more by historians. He seemed to me a great boxer, ONLY IN THE CONTEXT OF THAT ERA. I don't think he holds a candle to the light heavyweight masters of later years like Archie Moore, Ezzard Charles, Harold Johnson, and Michael Spinks.
Tunney a little over rated for me .. Resume wise, the greb fights, and me thinkin Prime JD knocks his block off ... But that is just me.. 3 great wins over Harry Greb?? Greb was much smaller than Tunney and beat his ass twice giving up 13 lbs and 9 pounds in fights 1 and 2 ... think about how much weight that is ..... especially coming from a shopworn fighter
Well, it is true, the significant weight differential, but I was thinking of them being great wins for Tunney more in the sense that they probably propelled him into serious fame. Wouldn't you agree? Not to mention, even though he was definitely bigger than Greb, Greb was supposedly a very masterful and tricky boxer in the business, and seems like he would give even a light heavyweight a rough go of it, as a a win and draw with Tunney in the other two-fifths of their series proved.
I mean Tunney should have won those fights .. or maybe how much better a fighter Greb was than Tunney in a p4p sense I guess,, that's kinda the point I'm trying to make .. Going off memorey here ,, but i think it was like fight #49 for Tunney and Greb was much smaller , 3 years older and already had well over 200 fights under his belt ....
I understand what you're saying. The fact that Tunney lost and drew with this man, no matter how great he is, kind of crucifies the Tunney myth.
Agree for the most part with your take. Tunney looks by far the best of any of the light-heavyweights and heavyweights of the 1920's on film. His five filmed fights (all I have seen and I think all there is) are with the very mediocre Heeney, and the shopworn Dempsey, Gibbons, and Carpentier. In later years he would have run into big guys who could box and would shoot jabs back. Who knows how that would have worked. So as you put it "in the context of that era." Having so much trouble with the smaller Greb raises doubts not attenuated by his other wins. And a big man like even the aging Wills, or Godfrey, and also Sharkey, would really have helped his resume.
My highest esteem for Tunney is that he is among a select few in the boxing realm that retired on a good note. However, I wish he would have fought on through the 30s and faced people in some more even matches. I would have more respect for the man if he at least attempted fights with Schmeling, Sharkey, Baer, and Carnera, even if he didn't win.
There's also some footage of his fight with Soldier Jones on the Dempsey-Carpentier undercard. It's short and not very revealing, and it has to be slowed way down because it appears to have been filmed at a about 12 frames per second, but it does exist.
