Gene Tunney was an awful fighter

It's there in spades. To me he is the most impressive pre-Louis HW on film, and one of the most impressive LB4LB fighters on film. Great- not good- speed, footwork, efficiency in motion, stinging punches (he could bang but had fragile hands), and will.

Give it a few more decades watching the sport.

 

Are you sure we're not comparing checkers and chess here?

 

I'd rather not stay watching Tunney for decades unless I'm studying up on the primitive techniques of the fighters of that era. As it is, none of that is really there unless you put on your special rose-tinted glasses beforehand. As I said, he shows flashes of real skill, but rarely sustains it, and the clinching and crude rough-housing far overshadow the brief moments of smooth, technical skill.

 

disagree. Jack Dempsey and Jack Johnson are. I also think Max Schmeling and Jack Sharkey look just as good as gene tunney. Tunney was way ahead of his time in footwork, straight punching, jabbing, and combinations....but he was not ahead of his time when it came too holding his hands by his chin, lack of head movement, lack of inside fighting ability, leaning back to avoid punches, and at times he was a bit too herky jerky with his movement rather than nice and fluid and smooth.

 

Agree

 

You mean clinching and crude rough housing like Carlos Monzon employed to great success 50 years later? To have the ability to win fights both the pretty way and the ugly one is a hell of a combination to have, and it's not a common one to find. Being able to rough house and box well enough to win at the level Tunney did, and knowing when to employ which, is the sign of a versatile fighter and goes down as a plus in my book. That's a tough riddle to solve in any era.

 

He lacks the boxing skills that Monzon had, from what I can tell, and the best fighters that Monzon beat on film generally look more impressive than the ones Tunney beat, or indeed Tunney himself.

It's true what you say that aesthetic beauty is not all there is to effective skill, far from it actually, but when a fighter is considered one of the smoothest and most beautiful boxers of his era and still looks crude and lacking in modernized technique, I think that says something.

I wish you guys would stop insinuating that I seem to be missing something glaring. It's not as if my judgement and/or eyesight just goes out the window every time Tunney gets on screen. He's just nowhere near as good as so many other fighters I've seen from the modern era. That's not his fault, and is to be expected as he fought in a more primitive era by technical standards. He was a great fighter for his time. That's all that can possibly be asked. I don't think he'd fare particularly well in the modern era if transported through a time machine, however. Nor any fighter of that era, really.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhcFOni6B40

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZjRV1YYW2o

 

Tunney is a great fighter in any era.

 

Why does everything have to be 'smoooooooth', what's with this emphasis on smooth?

You either get hit or you don't, Tunney fought in a blindingly good era and got hit quite rarely.

Now get off your high horses and stop trying to tell us how a guy, who was a rare gem of a fighter, should have fought.

It's really is hilarious the way peeps try to give you an education on technique. Tunney probably knew more about that 'science' we go on about than most of the trainers at world level today put together.

How the hell can you criticize a technique that was so effective?

 

Tunney had his hands low and pulled straight back from punches like Ali and Roy Jones, Jr. BECAUSE HE COULD. The man had insane reflexes, speed and instinct. Johnson does not look half as good on film as Tunney, even ad******g for the time between them.

 

it was effective against smaller primitivley skilled fighters who were still fighting stances resembling bareknuckle era. like sweet pea said, its alot different than using these techniuqes against more modernly developed boxing styles.

 

He could against much smaller non punching older foes. the only time a 3-4 punch combo was ever thrown at him, he went down for 14 seconds. tunney had a horrible habit of when being drivin into the ropes, he would keep his hands by his waist. Ali and jones when taken back to the ropes, always covered up. Also, I do believe jones and alis speed/reflexes were on a different level than tunneys...both looked alot more smooth than tunney too. jones did keep his right hand high, and ali did keep his hands high at times. Ali saw what happened when you keep your hands too low(185lb cooper cleaned his clock). I dont think i have ever seen a time on film where tunney didnt have his hands by his weist with his chin sticking out.

He could get away with it against smaller older foes whom he had reach on, but what against a younger taller bigger fighter?

 

But that's so vague! What does it mean?

When you throw a punch, regardless of how you look, all that matters is whether or not you have been a good enough judge for it to land and for you to get away.

The real 'skill' in boxing is out-foxing your dude by getting him in the positions you want through insinuating actions and switching up your fight pattern, experimenting even, not having a good physique, rolling your shoulders or skipping about.

The tags of 'skill' and 'smooth' which Ali's legend has promoted have been used a benchmarks as of how you should fight when, ironically, Ali himself was a guy who decided to do things differently.

Real skill boils down to inherent and educated actions when confronted with a situation. It's an action, not a picture - it speaks for itself, if it works it cannot be undermined. It's an intangible mentality that all the great tacticians possessed as they blended into their backgrounds when faced with new dangers.

They stay on top of the battle through greater cunning and possess the calm inside to weather crisis', much like when Jack nailed Gene.

Irrespective of era, Gene Tunney was everything a great boxer should be.

 

This is a fantastically misinformed statement.

Do you really think Greb never threw 3 or 4 punches against him? Carpentier certainly did. I happen to think his reflexes and speed are on par with Ali's and Jones, Jr. He wasn't a master of "flash"... i.e. useless showboat antics, but he had straight, wickedly fast punches with plenty of power... efficient motion is the best phrase to describe his punching.

Funny, I just rewatched Dempsey I and am more impressed than ever.