Gene Tunney V BoB Foster -light heavy?

Plus Foster didn't do so well with opponents above 175. And keep in mind, he wasn't fighting in the era of modern SHW's where the average heavy is 215 pounds give or take. When he moved up, he fought guys who weren't much over the LHW limit. That's another reason I'd favor the 190ish pound Tunney.

 

The fight is at 175lbs though.

 

Now you’re going to open yourself up to this silly diatribe?

No, mobility and footwork are not one in the same. Elmer Rush was mobile, he didn’t have really good footwork. Joe Louis had really good footwork, but he wasn’t very mobile.

Positioning and angles are not the same either. Positioning is being in optimal position as often as possible, in as many various situations as possible. Angles is about finding openings. The only embarrassing thing happening here is this stuff having to be explained to you.

Dempsey was past his prime, but still on form. Anyone with two eyes could see that. He even almost turned the tides on Tunney in one of the most infamous knockdowns ever.

You think you laughing at me bothers me? It’s like developing feelings for the dirt under my toe nail.

 

Oh ok......disregard then.

 

Get them feet clean!

 

Bet if Foster got in the ring with him he’d disagree. Wonder if that one goes a round.

 

It wasn't picking Tunney to win, it was his outlandish claim that it would be easy as pie for Tunney and anybody picking Bob has no idea what they are talking about. The relevant quote was:

"Tunney beats him in a once sided boxing lesson."

 

Again, we need to read and comprehend what is being said here. I didn't say they are exactly the same, I said, they often times go hand in hand. Often times, mobility goes hand in hand with good footwork. Finding examples where they don't mesh proves nothing, that is fallacy 101. Shall I cite the examples of people with good mobility and footwork and act like this proves my point? It would being that I could name more examples than you could to the contrary, but it was funny seeing you act like you made a point. Same thing with positioning and angles, often times these also go hand in hand. If you're good at angles than by proxy you created those angles through positioning. There isn't any of way to slice it. If you created the angles, you've created them through positioning and movement.

He wasn't IN FORM, by any stretch of the imagination. That is your bs fairytale in order to justify Tunney having a great win. Dempsey wasn't in form, and I'll say again, MANY fighters throughout history could've beaten him by that stage in his career.

 

That perhaps is overstating his case!

 

Old, rusty Dempsey 7 years removed from the Tiger of Toledo? Sh*t, Carpentier lasted more than a round with a better Dempsey and stung Jack well during that time.

 

That’s because he would.

The Dempsey that fought Tunney was far faster than Foster, far better pace, better mobility, far better head movement, more powerful and stronger, and had a better chin with overall more durability.

And Tunney practically gave him a boxing lesson.

Tunney doesn’t look like he has a habit of losing, unless it’s against a p4p top 3 all time fighter. And only once in four fights.

Foster loses more fights, he will lose this fight. Tunney is a class above him.

 

So you’re complaining that I mentioned two traits he has as a fighter because sometimes they go hand in hand (which they often don’t)?

Suck it up you pansy. That is the most inconsequential complaint I’ve heard from anyone in a long time. It’s not even valid, since positioning and angles are not the same, and it’s hardly consequential. It’s the tiniest detail you could find in a larger argument, and you still ****ed it up.

Dempsey was on form, attacking with explosive energy, big power, fast movements, and smart boxing. His reaction time was just a step behind Tunneys, who had better boxing, faster speed, better footwork, and better defense. This is certainly true when looking at the footage, no matter how many hissy fits we have to hear from you about this innocuous detail or that.

 

Agreed

 

It is a close fight, the absurd thing is saying that it would be a one sided fight

 

175 lbs was the upper limit I thought too.