Tommy Gibbons vs. "Philadelphia" Jack O'Brien Who Ya Got?

Gibbons takes this fight!!! O'brien was a good boxer but I think that
Gibbons did better against prime opposition!!!

Also, Gibbons one KO loss was against Gene Tunney, when Gibbons
was past his prime.


Grebfan9
www.firstroundboxing.com

 

I don't rate O Brien very highly at all ,who did he beat? Harmlessly clever he lacked any power ,never defended his title and was twice kod by the middleweight King Ketchel Can you see O Brien going 15 rds with Dempsey as Gibbons did?Gibbons takes it easily as OBrien turns it into a footrace ,as usual.

 

I agree but want to throw in that O'Brian drew with Johnson.

 

Actually it was a no dec fight over 6 rds and Johnson had done ,no training ,knowing O Brien was devoid of power,Johnson was on the drink for a week before the fight ,and entered the ring nursing a hangover,accounts of the fight in Randy Roberts excellent Papa Jack say that Johnson padded round the ring grinning,doing next to nothing,OBrien ran round the perimeter to avoid contact,and the crowd booed heartily,By the way the documentary "Unforgivable Blackness ",which every one quotes including that buffoon "Slick South paw ",made by Ken Burns,draws heavily on Roberts research.I wouldn't put much stock in the fact that O Brien went 6rds with Johnson You could have said he beat Choynsky twice ,but I would have replied O Brien was 25 ,whereas Choynsky was 34 and 35 respectively and being kod twice in 1rd by the likes of Kid Carter.

 

I put some comments at boxrec for Johnson-O'Brien bout a little time ago.



"Three or four times during the mixes-up, O'Brien was roughed to the floor, and once ge got tangled in the ropes." (Philadelphia Inquirer)

Philadelphia Inquirer scored for Johnson. Wilkes-Barre Times Leader had O'Brien winning three rounds, with two even, and 5th round to Johnson (same report was printed in NY Sun and Washington Herald). NY Times ruled it a draw. Wire in multiple newspapers (for example, San Francisco Call) had it a draw. Trenton Times reported that the referee stated he thought O'Brien the winner by a shade.

Sports editor of Philadelphia Inquirer in May 23 issue wrote: "A half dozen writers, for instance, gave Johnson the credit of having won the bout, but no two of them agreed as to the distance by which he won, and if you read all these accounts you must have come to the conclusion that he won any distance from a whisker to a city block. And it was the same with the able gentlemen who espoused the O'Brien cause. Some declared that he won all the way, and that but for his willingness to take the initiative there would have been no milling at all, while others gave him the decision solely for the splendid showing he made against such a tremendous physical handicap."

 

The crux of the fight ,as I see it was that barring being stopped Johnson could not lose his title,knowing O Brien ,had no power to accomplish a stoppage Johnson took advantage of this to come in out of shape ,and just go through the motions ,blame Johnson for a bad fight ,but don't run away with the idea that OBrien was his equal in any respect,Burns was OBrien's master ,and Jack spanked him like he was his Daddy.

 

Tommy Gibbons only lost against great fighters like Dempsey, Grebb and Tunney.

If you put him in with anybody not quite on that level then expect him to do prety well.

 

This is verry informative.

Thanks for the insight.

 

Everyone was disappointed about Johnson's performance, but then they were also giving O'Brien credit for his cleverness and defensive skills in that fight, many people were very surprised by his performance even while admitting Johnson wasn't at his best.

 

As for Burns-O'Brien fights.

1st fight O'Brien won a decision, having the better in every round except 4th which was even.

2nd fight was declared a draw, and although Burns was the aggressor, but it was countervailed by O'Brien's cleverness and generalship.

3rd fight was considered a fake, both fighters admitted it. There was a lot of talk in the following weeks about some other O'Brien's fights being fake, and Jack had no choice but to declare his retirement in such situation, although he later changed his mind.

 

I don't know if it's true ,but I read that the third fight was mutally agreed to be a "Barney" ,but when they touched gloves Burns told OBrien,"do your best Jack because I mean to win this fight",the referee suppossedly declared "all bets are off".You will correct me if I'm wrong ,but the first fight was a 6 rounder was it not, which may have favoured the lighter hitter.I don't rate OBrien on a par with Burns,and Mr Brusso was some distance below Johnson as a Champ.

 

O'Brien offered Burns to lay down, or he'd not meet him at all. Burns agreed to it, but desided to double-cross O'Brien, and told manager Tom McCarey about it before the fight. McCarrey told the referee Charles Eyton before the fight started to announce "For good and sufficient reasons I will call off all bets on this contest." But he didn't tell him the reason so that Eyton could deside the bout without being affected by knowledge it was a fake. I doubt Burns said anything to O'Brien when they went to the center to greet each other (although Burns claimed that he did), the referee or the seconds would have heard it and figured it out there and then. Everyone was puzzled about the reason until next day when the club's management made an announcement about the reason why all bets were called off. LA Herald had no idea about the reason, neither did Eddie Smith in Oakland Tribune or R.A. Smyth from SF Call. Smyth said the referee thought the bets were called off because the betting odds looked bad or something, although 5 to 4 in O'Brien's favor doesn't look particularly strange, he looked to be in good shape.

Next day there were several announcements.

1907-05-10 Los Angeles Herald ( page 8 )

 

Classic Johnson apologist reaction. Even if all the above were true, a lack of professionalism is a major flaw in a fighter.

He carried more excuses into the ring than any other champ in history.