Tommy Gibbons sadly forgotten now /why?

Because he lost the three most important fights of his career. Against Greb as a title eliminator to Dempsey in 1922 losing almost every round. Unbelievably he got the shot at Dempsey instead of Greb (probably because he lost) and managed to lose to Dempsey after doing well for the first five or six rounds. Then losing a title eliminator to Tunney in 1925.

Gibbons didnt KO Norfolk until 1924 when Norfolk was nearly blind. Gibbons had in fact been ducking Norfolk since 1917 and maybe as early as 1916.

However, that being said Gibbons was a tremendous fighter with excellent skills, great durability, and a good punch, particularly to the body. In his prime (which was between 1919 and 1922 or 1923, he was a tough proposition for anyone.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfasKAZ1Vso[/ame]

 

i like that video

 

I have the whole Gibbons-Bloomfield fight and its a wonderful film. Really shows Gibbons famed use to the left hook to the liver. He often stopped guys with this punch and if he didnt stop them outright with it he sure softened them up. Mike Gibbons criticized his brother after the 1922 Greb fight by stating that Gibbons impressive KO streak made him fall in love with his power and become a more one dimensional boxer. Another factor in Gibbons being forgotton is that for most of his career he was over shadowed by his more famous brother Mike. Most people until about 1921 or so knew him as "Mikes brother" when he finally came into the limelight he (like i said in my previous post) lost his big ticket fights so to the casual fans he was the guy who couldnt win the big one. He is similar to Jerry Quarry in that if you saw his less well known fights you would understand just how good he was but he always seemed to come up short in the big ones.

 

I am not certain I agree with your premise. Gibbons is a Hall-of-Famer.

He has a fantastic won-lost record, lost only to Greb, Tunney, and Dempsey (as well as Miske on a foul) and was certainly an excellent fighter. He also won a couple of no-decision over Greb-one when Greb was very young in 1915 and one in 1920, before losing two rematches, including the 1922 title fight.

On the down side, the New York Times in their article previewing the fight with Dempsey pointed out that Gibbons had fought a relatively small amount of top level fighters. They viewed his record as somewhat puffed up. His best wins were Greb, Chip, Levinsky, Carpentier, and Norfolk, but he does not match many top lightheavies for depth of good competition.

The other downer is that he was never champion and clearly was not as good in the twenties as Greb or Tunney. Not being as good as Greb and Tunney is no disgrace, but it certainly takes the wind out of claims that Gibbons was better than the top lightheavies of other eras--Fitz, Loughran, Conn, Charles, Moore, Johnson, etc.

 

The IBHOF inducted Tommy in 1993, about as quickly as they possibly could have recognized him. Footage of an impressive win like the Bloomfield knockout can certainly boost his image and reverse his relative obscurity. It's impressive to watch his technique and two fisted power in this situation. He pivots well into his cross and hook, leveraging both with impressive force. I wonder if Mike may have been just a little envious of his kid brother's punch.

Maybe Tommy should have gone right after McTigue following Dempsey. Even in his early 30s, he had the punch and stamina to take out McTigue inside the distance. From what I gather though, he went where the money was, and that's why he continued campaigning among heavyweights.

 

Sorry if I misunderstood. I haven't been posting that often for a while on ESB but it seems to me that Gibbons was discussed quite a bit.

What is odd about the lightheavyweights in the early twenties is that Greb, Tunney, Gibbons, and Loughran fought for the American title while the inferior Carpentier, Siki, and McTigue were fighting for the World title. Gibbons would have licked the world champs from 1916 to 1925 rather easily, I think.

One thing you could do to stoke discussion is to set up fantasy fights between Gibbons and other top lightheavies such as Conn or Moore, or even middles like Robinson. Gibbons spent much of his career fighting at middleweight.

 

I doubt Mike was jealous of Tommy's punch. Mike could punch pretty darn good himself but didnt have a killer instinct. He didnt like to hurt people and viewed boxing as a sport not as a fight. The one time he got really mad and set out to actually hurt someone was when he KOd Young Ahearn in one round. Ahearn and his manager had been popping off about Gibbons previous win and Gibbons got angry. They found out the hard way you dont make Mike angry. He damn near killed Ahearn. I have a photo of him lifting Ahearn's unconcious body off the canvas after the KO and you can see the fear in his eyes that he may have seriously hurt or killed Ahearn. It was a dramatic and brutal KO. It was also filmed but has yet to turn up.

 

As long as Jack Dempsey is rember, Tommy Gibbions will be rember also.


Tommy did a LOT more than lose to Dempsey, but still, he gain forever like fame with his bout with Dempsey and breaking the banks of Shelby.

I belive a few years ago in the 90's Shelby had a party or something in honor of the fight that for a brief while brought them center stage, yeah it was a flop money wise, but in the long run, it is what Gibbions and Shelby are most known for.

 

Gene Tunney
'A Man Must Fight'

p. 138
"The night of the Greb-Gibbons fight in old Madison Square Garden, I was introduced by good old Joe Humphreys as ready to meet the winner. As things later developed, it was fortunate for me that Greb won. Though there is no telling what would have happened if I had been asked to meet Gibbons at that time rather than Greb, I believe that I was not seasoned or experienced enough for Gibbons. He probably would have won from me by a knockout."

pp. 171-172
"... I felt the time had come when I was ready for Tom Gibbons. In my opinion, Gibbons was the best fighter in America next to Jack Dempsey. I had watched him, studied him, and knew him. He was acquainted with all the tricks of his craft. He was fast, clever, and could hit a terrific blow with an incredibly short movement of the arm. To Tom Gibbons fighting was a science and he was master of it. He went about his work in the ring with a brilliance and flash and apparent indifference. All his actions were smooth and free from tension. He was very methodical, however."


pp. 173, 174 "... On seeing" (Gibbons KO2 exhibition with Paul Sampson, Pioneer Athletic Club, NY, 1921) "I decided that it would be several years before I should be ready for him, but I believed the time would come when Tommy would have to be removed on my climb to the contendership...
"All during the year of 1924 and the early part of 1925 Gibbons gave me no rest. He hurled challenges and defies at me wherever he went. I bided my time. I did not feel I was ready for him 1923 in 1924.
" Though Gibbons was unaware of it, I had been training to fight him from early 1923."

Tunney on neutralizing Gibbons hook:
pp. 175,176
"... Even his famous double-feint and slip-in with a terrific left hook to the liver or chin, as his opponent would paw out a left hand to protect himself, was foiled every time, I knew after the second feint that Tommy would advance his left foot, slip in with his head down, and try landing that awful jolt with his left. Before the left could get started, I would drop a short right in on his forehead or left eye and then step back out of danger. This particular trick of Tommy's was his stock in trade. After landing several of these terrific left's on an opponent's liver, eventually the recipient would drop his elbow to protect himself from an expected repitition, where upon Tommy never failed to change the attack from the liver to the chin. That is why at one time he had about twenty straight knockouts, most of them in one or two rounds."

 

guilalah thanks for that very interesting

 

Lets not forgett that he only lost to fighters who became champions, hall of famers, and pound for pound guys.

This in an era when a guy was expected to pick up the odd loss as a matter of being in the business.

At the end of the day, he lost to Greb Dempsey and Tunney (I exclude the Miske farce (I rate Miske higher than most)). He might have been expected to beat Greb theoreticaly, but he should not have been expected to beat Dempsey, and he was old against Tunney.

This was a remarkable fighter.