Is Gene Tunney underrated on P4P and LHW lists?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Jersey Joe, Jul 15, 2010.


Page 2 of 7
  1. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,469
    Sep 7, 2008
    I agree that Loughran is aesthetically wonderful, and he also has a stacked resume. I think the main knocks on Tunney are exactly as Suzie says; no fight with Loughran closer to his prime, and of course, didn't fight the top black fighters, though I think that's more of an issue with him as a Heavy.

    I have him in the top 5 at light heavy, and despite being past his best, the two wins over Dempsey see him rank high P4P on my list. Just outside the top 20 IMO.
     
    Flea Man, Jul 16, 2010
    Flea Man, Jul 16, 2010
    #16
  2. Jersey Joe

    Jersey Joe Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,820
    7
    Mar 8, 2005
    On film there are two major problems with Charles. Firstly, as Ali pointed out, his footwork is decidedly average. Whereas Tunney's was excellent and way ahead of its time. Second, Charles had poor fight strategy. For example, he fought a war inside vs Marciano. After getting beaten due to that poor choice and lack of ring generalship, he didn't adjust at all and did exactly the same in the 2nd Marciano fight. Can you imagine Tunney making such a blunder? Before the first fight, Gene would already have watched every Marciano tape and would have a fight plan to use his footwork and reach to stay outside and jab n move. Look at how he kept a cool head in the 2nd Dempsey fight, and immediately got on his bike after the knockdown. A few rounds later he almost stopped Dempsey. Marciano would probably have lost a wide decision. Tunney was arguably the best fight strategist along with Ali.

    That is why Tunney is a more dangerous H2H opponent than Charles, and why he hardly ever lost.

    There are other factors such as his chin (Charles was ok, Tunney's was one of the best ever P4P), and the fact that he totally dominated 'the man' at heavyweight, winning 19 out of 20 rounds vs Dempsey. Whereas Charles got owned by Marciano - twice. Plus, Charles never won a title fight at LHW. Charles also never fought a fighter as great as Greb.

    The questions I would put to anyone who doesn't rate Tunney very high - what could he have done better in his career? What boxer in the light-heavyweight division would be favoured to beat him in a 3 fight series? With Charles I can say that he could have won the LHW title, could have beaten Marciano by two shutouts instead of losing, and could have avoided the many losses and knockouts he suffered. With Tunney all I can say is he could have beaten Greb 5-0 instead of 3-1, and could have taken a few more fights against 3 or 4 opponents he would probably have comfortably beaten anyway. Tunney did pretty much everything it is possible to do in a boxing career, as well as it is possible to be done, Charles and Moore didn't. I would say only really Spinks has anything close to the same ironclad resume and skillset as Tunney.
     
    Jersey Joe, Jul 16, 2010
    Jersey Joe, Jul 16, 2010
    #17
  3. TheBradyHawkes

    TheBradyHawkes ۞ Full Member

    2,209
    1
    Jul 5, 2008
    I rate him as the absolute #1 LHW of all time, so no, not underrated in my book.
     
    TheBradyHawkes, Jul 16, 2010
    TheBradyHawkes, Jul 16, 2010
    #18
  4. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005

    What an awful post. I am contemplating whether I should even bother rebutting it. :-(
     
    SuzieQ49, Jul 16, 2010
    SuzieQ49, Jul 16, 2010
    #19
  5. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    62,042
    46,922
    Feb 11, 2005
    I found it well-structured, elegantly pursued and entirely cogent. Please argue unemotionally versus his contentions. Otherwise, refrain from comment. It does not add to the discussion but detracts from your position in the argument.
     
    Seamus, Jul 16, 2010
    Seamus, Jul 16, 2010
    #20
  6. itrymariti

    itrymariti Cañas! Full Member

    13,728
    47
    Sep 6, 2008
    Charles is much more skilled than Tunney on film.

    As for the fighting inside vs. Marciano - there wasn't really another way to fight the guy. It would be like criticising Quarry for fighting inside vs. Frazier.
     
    itrymariti, Jul 17, 2010
    itrymariti, Jul 17, 2010
    #21
  7. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,534
    9,538
    Jul 15, 2008
    Wrong. He fought inside because he had 33 year old legs with over 100 fights under his belt. Inside was not the only way to fight Marciano ... is that how you feel Ali or Holmes would have fought him ?
     
    he grant, Jul 17, 2010
    he grant, Jul 17, 2010
    #22
  8. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    The knocks against Tunney are he didn't fight many of the best fighters in the 2 divisions he operated for whatever reason. Its really that simple. No Kid Norfolk/Prime Lougran at LHW, Wills/Godfrey/Sharkey at HW.

    Then there's the fact he wasn't fighting at the top level for very long
     
    PowerPuncher, Jul 17, 2010
    PowerPuncher, Jul 17, 2010
    #23
  9. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    Anyone who puts forward the argument 'Charles could have done more, he could have won the LHW World title' when comparing the 2 is ignorant beyond belief. For 1 no one would give Charles a title shot and for 2 Tunney was never the World LHW Champ either
     
    PowerPuncher, Jul 17, 2010
    PowerPuncher, Jul 17, 2010
    #24
  10. Pusnuts

    Pusnuts Active Member Full Member

    1,432
    7
    Jun 23, 2009
    Definitely underrated Id say, hes no lower than Dempsey anyway, almost the Calzaghe of his era
     
    Pusnuts, Jul 17, 2010
    Pusnuts, Jul 17, 2010
    #25
  11. Pachilles

    Pachilles Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,294
    28
    Nov 15, 2009
    SuzieQ, you are fined one credit for a violation of the Verbal Morality Statute
     
    Pachilles, Jul 17, 2010
    Pachilles, Jul 17, 2010
    #26
  12. itrymariti

    itrymariti Cañas! Full Member

    13,728
    47
    Sep 6, 2008
    No, but it is the only way Charles could have fought him, because he didn't have the legs for it. It's not because he was too dumb to realise that there were better options as Jersey Joe claimed.
     
    itrymariti, Jul 17, 2010
    itrymariti, Jul 17, 2010
    #27
  13. itrymariti

    itrymariti Cañas! Full Member

    13,728
    47
    Sep 6, 2008
    Who is that girl?

    Don't know why it's only just occurred to me to ask that.
     
    itrymariti, Jul 17, 2010
    itrymariti, Jul 17, 2010
    #28
  14. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    62,042
    46,922
    Feb 11, 2005
    I assumed it was Jennifer Beals from Flashdance.
     
    Seamus, Jul 17, 2010
    Seamus, Jul 17, 2010
    #29
  15. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    HeGrant,

    Charles was 32 when he fought Marciano in a spectacular fight on June 17th 1954. Not 33. If your going to constantly bash this victory, at least get your facts straight. Just one question....Did Tommy Gibbons have 32 year old legs against Dempsey? Did Ken Norton have 34 year old legs against Larry Holmes?
     
    SuzieQ49, Jul 17, 2010
    SuzieQ49, Jul 17, 2010
    #30
Page 2 of 7