If Floyd was so great defensively ,how come he kept hitting the deck? If Floyd is superior in technique to Tunney how come Tunney only went down once,and that against an ATG puncher,whilst Floyd was dropped by Roy Harris ,Pete Rademacher etc?If Tunney was so predictable ,with his stiff foot work,and low guard how come no one figured it out and kod him?Tunney never shuffled in his life he actually glides around a ring allmost like Ali his foot work is immaculate imo,it had to be to keep him up right through all those fights.As for low hands,I remember a guy winning the heavyweight title with that style ,it was in 1964 Feb25th.
how is that an excellent analysis? Tunney and sharkey fought nothing alike. Schmeling was jobbed in the 2nd sharkey fight. Speaking of Sharkey, he was top ranked contender during tunneys reign and tunney never fought him, many claimed tunney ducked him. whos to say tunney was a better heavyweight than sharkey. what big skilled heavyweights did tunney beat?
Tunney fought weak hitting 160-180lb fighters his whole career outside of jack dempsey. What 205lb + heavyweight did tunney face? what heavyweight puncher did tunney face outside of a washed up dempsey who put tunney down for 14 seconds? Patterson was down for flash knockdowns against those bums, mostly because he had alot of balance issues and was knocked off balance alot, but if you look at the film it was a slip vs radamacher he didnt even get hit by that "right hand". Check the films, floyd carries a very high gaurd with excellent upperbody movement in that awesome beek a boo defense. Tunney has a very low gaurd, no head or upper body movement, his defense is basically his fast feet circling and running away from smaller opponents. Floyd is much better at blocking, slipping, weaving punches A washed up Dempsey put him down for 14 seconds. Also, what skilled punchers did tunney face at 175lb or heavyweight? top 175lb punchers like jimmy slatter, paul berlenbach, etc etc were out there tunney did not fight any of them. Skilled big punchers like george godfrey harry wills, etc etc were out there didnt fight any of them at heavyweight. Tunney never fought a 205lb + heavyweight and never fought a black fighter. As far as Im concerned he is very unproven compared to say an archie moore who fought virtually everyone out there in 3 different eras. LOL. Tunney doesnt glide. check out his footwork, it has no rythm, its always back and forth it never changes its course......its never stylish smooth slick and mechanical like ali, pep, walcott, or charles of the 1940s(check out valentino, walcott I highlights)........Tunney doesnt glide at all........he more hops and scambers around the ring it doesnt look as pretty. Gene Tunney is No Muhammad Ali. Not even close. Not style wise either. Ali moved around the ring much differently than tunney, was much bigger and faster than tunney, and moved his head and upperbody in much different differections than tunney, and threw punches different than tunney.
No tunney hate, just offering my honest opinion of the guy after I studied his career and talked to historians about him, and watched the film.
Hey Suzie if Schmeling was the master counter puncher and superior technical fighter why is Baer beat his brains out? I know it's another topic but you keep dodging questions then pop in somewhere else.
Styles make fights. Why did Schmeling beat the hell out of louis for 12 rounds, while Louis EASILY demolished max baer in 4 rounds? How come baer couldnt do what schmeling did?
That's your answer to everything-"styles make fights". If syles make fights and Schmeling & Louis still have the same style, how do you account for the quick rematch?
How come no rematch for Schmeling-Baer? In case you didnt know, the fight was DEAD EVEN going into the 10th round, if not for baer knocking out schmeling he could have lost the decision.
In case I didnt know? I've seen it. There was nothing even about it. Baer had him in his hip pocket from the start.