I would agree. I think Charles gives him fits though. I think a safe be is Gene wins 2 out of the 3, But I would favor him all three fights, and definitely any rematch.
Of course Tunney won 19 out of 20 rounds against Dempsey. Dempsey just couldn't break down or take out skilled boxers
Prime Tunney beats any version Walcott and Moore. Prime Tunney v prime Charles is 50-50. But with the Charles of 1954, Tunney wins. 3-0 Tunney
How about we take Marciano out of the ring for 3 years ,feed him a steady diet of Holywood starlets and good times.Have him acrimoniously split with his long term manager, face several lawsuits from him , then come back and face a prime motivated Gene Tunney? How does that sound to you?:think
Gene Tunney held his hands very low - about chest high - and threw a lot of jabs and straight rights. In a lot of ways he fought like the younger Vitali Klitscho, except Vitali could get away with holding his hands so low because he was so tall while Gene had better footwork. I think Walcott, Charles and Moore would have very little problem landing on Tunney. I'd give them all a great chance at beating him. I think Moore - who had more KOs than anyone including over a lot of heavyweights - might even stop him. Dempsey didn't fight like any of those guys. Neither did Georges Carpentier. Walcott and Tommy Gibbons kind of fought similarly, but Walcot was a lot bigger and stronger. Tunney might have the best chance against Jersey Joe. Sometimes Joe would telegraph his punches and his defense wasn't great. But I'd favor all the 50s guys over Tunney. Not by a lot, but I would.