Gene Tunney -vs-…

I feel like Tunney beats Foster, and pulls it very close against Moorer, if not straight up losing that match up. Michael wasn't the same man he was at heavyweight, he was still insanely explosive (Moorer's punch was still devastating when he moved up, so it must've been much more dangerous at lhw), but much more gun shy.

 

They would've been fantastic fights.

 

I can't find the quote (at least not now), but Gene did have experience with southpaws, and wrote exactly on how to deal with them. Not Bob's fault, but he ruled over a weak era in LHW history, not like the loaded one Michael Spinks ultimately prevailed over.

 

I guess he would beat everyone Tunney beat at Lhvy, excepting Greb.

Greb was
167 1/2
166
171 1/2
165 1/2

In his losses and draw to Gene.
You are certainly correct in saying Moorer has no names of any note on his175lbs CV.

 

Tunney's toughness gives him the advantage over both Foster and Moorer. Bob had the big punch but I think the Fighting Marine was a tougher man. And when you mention Moorer, toughness is not the first quality I think about. Instead I think about Teddy Atlas having to harangue him to get some effort.

 

I just do not want to turn this into a Dempsey or Greb thread, but yeah man, it's to do with Jack. I don't think Dempsey is a bad champion but generally overrated with the biggest reason being "But the men who saw him had such a boner for him"

Dempsey's resume is easy to pick apart and has been done heaps

Dempsey's colorline is easy to pick apart and has been done heaps.

The only thing you can't strip from Dempsey is Fat Fleischer masturbated to his picture every day and twice at night. Every time you give the Dempsey fanbase a **** kicking they revert back to "but those who seen them though" Like as if generational bias doesn't exist. Hell, one member here straight up told me it doesn't. He's a bit stupid, you know, denying a well known fact.

And Tunney won on a controversy.

Then you have Greb. Was Greb ever prime for Tunney?

What ****ing LHW non-champ gets champion status because they beat up a MW?

Greb a loss-less guy?


It's just not that impressive to me. He ducked the hardest fights of his era, dominated a division so weak and unimportant even he isn't known for greatness in that division, but still he's brought up against real LHW champion and real greats like Spinks who really dominated his division and then actually whooped the champion at HW, no controversy needed.


So, really, the short is I just don't get the Tunney people. I am not a fan. Seems like a guy who carefully managed his career to get some name value in some relatively unfaIr fights because there was no name value in white LHWs.

 

Salient points.

 

Yeah, some here. Substitute Patterson for Tunney and you get the same result. But the Patterson apologists will attack and attack.

 

I may have gone too far into cursory points to make my main clear.

Dempsey = overrated ATG but an ATG - heavyweight

Greb = overrated ATG but an ATG - middleweight

Tunney = great light-heavyweight?

Kiss my ass bro. Not when dudes like Spinks have a resume at LHW. Charles has a resume with other great LHWs on it. That's my beef with Tunney as a great LHW.

TBH, I wouldn't argue about it.

You talking about GOAT Patty?



---

There's this little joke I used to say when I'm feeling silly and I want to end a thread in a way that made it very clear no grown adult human speaks this way in any serious tone without ruining an entire post's worth of jokes by saying they are jokes.

"if you don't agree it's because you suffer from tiny pee-pee"

Yeah, that just got me a ban warning. Maybe x2 because I asked about it and I do not think the mod appreciated the asking. I apologize if my posting behavior has been ... negative, It is more a culture clash than an honest dislike, or at least on my end. I didn't expect anyone to take the tiny pee-pee line seriously, in fact it's the line that lets you know you shouldn't take the post so seriously. I use jabroni similarly and often cruse to lighten what I'm saying.

I think I might have been taken as very antagonistic when in fact I mean to be brotherly. That's my bad, if you felt attacked, like for real, in any of my posts, that's on me, that's me just not fitting in well.

 

Just to be very clear, it's not only a yes on that, but I mean to say I don't even see Tunney in the same category as Spinks, or Moore, or Langford, bro ain't even John Henry. Which is why I favor both posed in the original question over Tunney.


It's cool if you like Tunney bro, don't have to not talk about him. I'm not going to be a dick or anything. I certainly didn't mean to make the Tunney fans be quiet.

 

Beats Foster, loses to Moorer since Moorer would rehydrate like 20lbs and has the advantage of PEDs