Gene Tunney's decision to fight Heeney instead of Sharkey in finale

In early 1926, Wills was offered $250,000 to fight Gene Tunney in a title eliminator, with the winner to meet the champion. Wills turned it down. This is Tunney offering to fight a slightly past his prime to past his prime Harry Wills. The offer wasn't a hoax. Wills declined it.

Greb said what I wrote, a 6th fight was offered by Tunney and Greb said something to the effect that by then Tunney was getting too big.

By the way, good information on Gains but my point was Gains was a newbie by Tunney's final year of activity and not in position for such a fight. No one in the public was pushing for it. So this by not fighting Gains, you can't blame Tunney. And he did offer Wills a fight, he declined.

That does not excuse Godfrey though who never got a championship fight form anyone. Or a fight with Gains for that matter.

 

This is incorrect. Tunney "challenged" Wills to a fight with absolutely no intention of going through with it. It was done as a means of putting his name in the press with Wills who was considered Dempsey's top challenger as a means of hyping up Tunney. This was admitted to during Tim Mara's lawsuit against Tunney. The were never going to fight Wills and frankly, why should Wills have ever entertained a fight with Tunney. He fought his first "eliminator" to face Dempsey in 1920. YEARS before Tunney's offer. From that moment he was consistently rated Dempsey's top challenger, he had fought numerous eliminators after that, his forfeit was on file with the NYSAC and he had their backing. He didnt need Tunney. Frankly the only purpose further eliminators would have served were to eliminate Wills.

You are conflating two separate incidences. After their fifth meeting Greb did say he was through fighting Tunney. It was a common compliment for Greb. However, within months Greb was asked by promoters in Miami to face to Tunney and agreed. Tunney did not want to face Greb and instead opted for Young Stribling. This fight never came off because during the promotion for this fight Rickard secured Tunney as a challenger for Dempsey's next fight and Tunney cancelled the Miami fight. Greb was willing to face Tunney. In fact, after Tunney won the title and was going around talking about how he had done this and that to Greb after their first fight Greb was furious and would have liked to have fought him again but by this point he had his bad eye removed secretly and could no longer fight.

Godfrey fought Gains twice.

 

"Jimmy Dougherty says that he heard from an uncle whose cousin told him that a friend heard a guy in a bar talking about how..."

 

Next day reports on the Risko-Tunney affair...

"Although John Risko, Cleveland heavyweight and recent graduate of the amateur ranks, fought the best fight he has ever put on, he was no match for Gene Tunney"

"It appeared that Tunney could have been far ahead all the way had he so elected. But the majority of the spectators did not realize he was favoring a fragile left hand."

"Gene Tunney won a referee's decision over Johnny Risko in rounds here Wednesday night. Tunney mailed Risko to a pulp but was unable to put him out."

 

Wasn't Jimmy Dougherty Jack Dempsey's old roommate?

 

Why do you insist on ignoring that Tunney had a bad hand when he beat Risko?

There are numerous comments that Tunney was far from his best that fight.

 

Thats hilarious. I dont know what to say to someone who has no doubt EVERYONE considered Risko, who lost to Heeney, a more dangerous opponent for Tunney than Heeney. Clearly that wasnt even remotely true.

 

"What can't you understand about real time context."

I posted about how Risko and Heeney compared in the spring of 1928 at the time Tunney pressured Rickard, by Rickard's own admission to the press, to abort a final elimination between Heeney and Risko.

How did their records compare?

You mentioned the last 7 fights for Heeney, in which he went 5-0-2 with draws with Uzcudun and Sharkey. The 8th fight would have been a loss to Uzcudun. The 12th fight back would have been a loss to Phil Scott. So in his last 12 fights as of late March, 1928, Heeney went 8 wins, 2 losses, and 2 draws.

In his last 12 fights, Risko went 11-1, losing to Heeney, but beating Uzcudun, Scott, and Sharkey, against whom Heeney went 0-3-2.

I concluded, and will stand by it, that Heeney has the edge of beating Risko in a fight Risko took with 13 days rest. Risko was better against the field and eliminated the top contenders. Heeney didn't.

"LOSS"

I have posted several times that this is Heeney's sole edge. Otherwise clearly Risko was doing better. And I would like to know why Risko was matched in March of 1928 with Sharkey if Risko had already been eliminated? And why was Heeney fighting Delaney who had lost to Risko? Suzie has posted contemporary sources which explains this. There was going to be final elimination between the winners of these two matches. But Tunney intervened with Rickard to abort the elimination. Why? The explanation which makes the most sense is that Tunney considered Risko more dangerous. Tunney had a tough fight with him in 1925. Risko had improved and was knocking off top men, including Sharkey, another fighter who had beaten him in 1925. Tunney was merely three years older.

"Ring ratings"

I used The Ring ratings because they are the only measurement we have in the 1920's. According to Dan Daniel in a 1958 The Ring issue, the 1920's Ring Annual rankings were a collaboration between Fleischer and Rickard, with Rickard signing off on them and allowing his name to be used as the rater. Flawed? Of course. I think all ratings are, but these are the best we have and better than picking names out of a hat. I posted that these were men who had or would appear in the ratings, not that they were rated at the time.

"Romero-Rojas and Seifert"

They appeared in the annual ratings. I posted that some, specifically naming Romero-Rojas, were past it. As for Seifert, he was in the 1926 annual ratings because he beat DeMave, one of Heeney's few ever rated victims. But it is silly to dismiss Risko's opposition by picking out the two weakest when his defeated Uzcudun and Scott, who defeated Heeney, as well as Sharkey, whom Heeney only drew with.

As for Heeney's victims, Delaney and DeMave were also beaten by Risko. Gorman was on a foul, and had been stopped by Delaney and would be stopped by Persson in his next fight. Maloney had been stopped by Sharkey in May, and Godfrey in one in August, a KO in which, according to box rec, he was out for ten minutes. Heeney KO'd him in that September.

Heeney's case rests totally on getting a decision over Risko in October of 1928, in a fight in which Risko had less than two weeks of rest.

If Heeney was better than Risko he would have proven it in an elimination. Tunney earned criticism by intervening.

"He got the shot. Deal with it."

I and everyone else deals with a lot bigger issues than this. Boxing history is after all a trivia subject of not much moment. It is fun discussing it precisely because it doesn't matter much.

"It is not like Risko or Sharkey would have done any better anyway."

As Heeney was just a punching bag, I don't agree. A man who defeated 7 world champions in all, and 2 heavyweight champions is not necessarily a pushover. Nor is a man who would become an actual heavyweight champion.

"Tunney was a better fighter than both of those guys."

Beside the point. The issues are which of these men would have been the toughest opponent, plus why Tunney got involved in picking his challenger. If he hadn't and the elimination played out, Tunney would be on much stronger ground.

"You think he should have stuck around for Risko, Godfrey, and Sharkey to get their **** together?"

I think it gratuitous to drag in Godfrey considering that Tunney drew the color line. It is fair to note that Risko eliminated Sharkey in 1928.

"By the end of the year Risko was completely through at the top"

Are you confusing Risko with Heeney? Risko would appear in the NBA quarterly ratings as late as 1933.

9-6-1930----#5
1-5-1931----#7
9-20-1932----#4
12-19-1933----#5

This is because Risko, as erratic as he was, continued to be able to upset top men. After 1928 Risko would defeat four men who had been or would be world champions. Heeney after 1928 was just an opponent who could be counted on to lose.

 

Because that's Risko and his manager, they want a fight with the champion and so have every reason to insist he improve since he lost to Tunney, I've explained this numerous times.

If fight reports were talking about a great improvement in his fighting that would something to consider.