Marciano vs Gene Tunney

Love Gene Tunney...but...we're talking prime Marciano here...to many guns...

 

I like a prime Tunney by decision … too fast.

 

I know. He also fought 9 fights scheduled for 15 rds.

 

This. Marciano fought one top-rank heavyweight under the age of 35. Ezzard Charles.

 

Tunney's resume is even worse. I think old light heavies like Archie Moore and old heavies like Charles, Walcott and Louis are a bit more formidable than old MWs like Leo Houck, Jeff Smith, Fay Keiser, Whitey Wenzel, etc. Or lightheavies at the end of their careers like Carpentier and Gibbons. Marciano fought the far more dangerous fighters in his career. It isn't even close.

For what it's worth, Marciano cleaned out a division. Tunney cleaned out nothing.

 

Gene in his bombast said Greb and Tom Gibbons would beat Marciano, and thereby of course himself.

 

Beating Greb at least 3 times, who was himself ducked for years by Dempsey? Beating Gibbons? Beating Dempsey, who for all saying he was shot was but 31 and 32 years old when they fought? Becoming the only man to KO Gibbons?

Add Jeff Smith, Carpentier, Delaney, Levinsky and Houck and that's pretty damn solid.

 

He didn't beat Greb 3 times.

Beating a Gibbons who was fighting the final fight of a long career is not impressive to me. A Gibbons whom he admittedly avoided when Tommy was in his prime. I think it's safe to say that the Charles, Walcott and any number of fighters were more dangerous propositions that that version of Gibbons.

Case in point. Tommy was done.

And living la dolce vida and well past his best.

Picking on washed-up old MWs and LHWs like Smith, Houck and Carpentier is impressive to you? I think we have different standards then You wouldn't even put those guys (or Jimmy Delaney) in the same ring as the best guys Marciano beat.

Not solid at all.

 

Technically true, but one of the No Decisions was an easy newspaper verdict for Tunney. In the words of the A.P.:

"Tunney gave Greb as thorough a beating as he has ever received. So completely was Greb outclassed and outfought in six of the ten rounds that he resorted to a defensive fight after the third and thereafter was guilty of persistent holding and stalling varied only by rare flashes of offensive fighting, which Tunney quickly terminated by a devastating attack. Tunney concentrated his fire almost entirely on Greb's heart and body, landing with deadly accuracy and telling effect. After a flashy start, Greb went on the defensive and let entire rounds go by without making more than a weak show of attack, without landing a decisive punch, even on those rare occasions when he undertook to do the leading."

He was done after and because Tunney tore him up. His last 11 fights before Tunney were 10 knockout wins and a decisive newspaper verdict over Carpentier in a No Decision fight. In the 1924 annual Ring ratings, he was the #2 challenger for Dempsey's title, behind Wills; in June of 1925, Tunny retired him.

As opposed to, for instance, a 38- and 39-year old Jersey Joe Walcott?

 

There are those who would say four times. I hold to three tho at times can be convinced of 2 wins and one draw.

Then beating a Walcott who was in his final 2 fights of a longer career should not impress you either. Or beating a Charles who was almost 100 fights into his career and who was a sub .500 fighter afterwards. I guess I kind of get your logic, except no one had ever stopped Gibbons before. And lest we paint Gibbons as totally washed up, he beat Carpentier and Kid Norfolk each in the year previous. In fact he had not lost in 11 fights since the Dempsey affair.

 

"In a March 24, 1950 fight that went against him on a split decision, La Starza may have come closer than any other boxer to defeating Rocky Marciano. The scoring for the bout was 5–4, 4–5, 5–5, but La Starza lost on a supplemental point system used by New York and Massachusetts at that time. Both boxers were undefeated at the time of the fight, with La Starza's record at 37–0. According to newspaper reports, the decision was "universally condemned around ringside as a miscarriage of justice". Now that wasn't Rocky's best day but I have Gene Tunny on a whole different level than Roland LaStarza. I think most of you do too. Tunny was nearly as famous for his conditioning as Rocky, I don't see either fading much. IF you take stoppages off the table and neither man got stopped in his career, then it comes down to the judges. If they reward coming forward like a Bull and "making" the fight Rocky gets the nod, if they favor the Matador who by his skill stays alive tapping the bulls nose more often than he gets gored, well then, Tunny shades it. I think it goes the distance and is very close... Pick Em.

 

At first I was thinking Marciano easy, but this is by no means an easy fight when you really think about it. And speaking of LaStarza...Tunney would surely do as well or better against Rocky.
Interesting fight.

 

IMO it could go either way. I was thinking LaStarza when I first saw the post. Rock could reach him with his brutality at some point and Gene might slip and slide, jab, counter, and make for an interesting scrap on the other hand.
I've given up on anyone commented on my take on trying to match fighters from different eras. A 1927 Rock vs. a 1952 Tunney?
A 2000 Jack Johnson vs. a 1915 Klit?
A 2000 Ray Robinson vs. ANYBODY?
Let's disect matchups within reason...
My somewhat limited $0.02

 

Tunney might have a solid chance to outpoint the pre title Marciano, but I feel Marciano improved after winning the championship employing a more bobbing/weaving style. Given that, I would take Marciano by late stoppage or decision.