Printable View
Gene Tunney would move and jab until there was nothing left for Joe to do he would not let joe plant and that would be joes down fall Tunny by a clear UD beats Louis 15 out 20 in my book and doe it with a jab and good movement something that would cause joe major problems if he watch his fights.
Tunney was good as a heavyweight but he did only beat an old Jack Dempsey and he only had 3 fights at heavyweight.
Louis had trouble with Billy Conn a great light heavyweight but you can't judge how Tunney would do only on that result. And Joe STILL WON let's not forget it.
As a boxer Joe puts Dempsey to shame....he could jab and land combinations and use defense
Lyle:
I think that the win against Conn was more a result of Conn's incapacity to resist the opportunity for a knockout. In deciding to drop to the soles of his feet and attempt to get Louis out of there he got caught, so Conn's loss rather than Louis' win you know?
I wouldn't say that Jack Dempsey was that "old" at the time. Lazy, out of shape and rusty perhaps. But his fight with Sharkey between The Tunney fights illustrated that he was not dipossessed of his power or his will to KO an opponent (although he had to cahse Sharkey like he did Tunney.)
On the night of the long count too Jack looked good early, but Tunney came back again to outbox him, so I give Tunney huge props.
Master:
In light of the recent Heavyweight scene, it is difficult to keep in mind that boxing (even at heavy) is not all about power. Ali fighting Liston for the first time would not have made any great impression using his power alone. Larry Holmes wasn't exactly a devastating puncher.
And in the history of the heavyweight there have been numerous boxers whose succeses have been down to their skill more than their strength. Guys like Walcott, Charles, Ellis and indeed Lewis all set up their KO victories with great moivement and accurate punching in combination.
The weakness in Louis guard wuld have been exploited by Tunney therefore. Perhaps not to the same devastating effect that Schmeling exploited it but instead just to pop at it, score points and keep the brown bomber off balance. I love Joe Louis, but i can't say for sure he would beat Gene Tunney
I am not saying he would definitely win but I believe the Dempsey that destroyed Willard would have beaten Tunney and Joe was better than Dempsey. I know it does not always follow but you get my point.
I take it you mean Prime Louis> Prime Dempsey> Prime Willard.
I actually have my reservations about calling Willard prime there by the way...
Willard indeed was a formidable opponent though and it's no secret he had power, as i feel his KO win over Johnson was perfectly legit.
However I just feel Tunney was another kettle of Fish. Master, please don't think I'm arguing that Tunney wouyld have murdered Joe or anything like that, butI feel he does deserve to be recognised up there with the top 20 or so.
...Willard is out of the discussion other than that was DEMPSEY'S PRIME....so he's saying the Dempsey that whipped Willar would have whipped Tunney.
Joe Louis looked past Billy Conn and in the rematch it showed
Hitmandonny I know your trying to put a case for Tunney, he was very good and fit boxer but not a great.
There are many that would disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
In modern boxing he would be a Light Heavy.
I feel he could be great at that weight.
Agreed at that weight, although Ezzard Charles is my greatest light heavy and I am sure Archie Moore, Foster and Spinks could beat him, so Rocky would be the greatest Cruiserweight I believe he beats Evander at that weight.
You know, I'm always left puzzled by Marciano...
How good was he?
Was his relentless style and exceptional conditioning enough to compensate for his lack of size and skill against the elite heavies???
Would he have been able for Evander, the size differential wouldn't be so much an issue as James Toney proved...but would Marciano meet a boxer of that size and that nature (one of the biggest hearts and most tested chins in boxing) and still keep gunnng it from first to last bell?
I'm really not sure!
At cruiserweight he may have done, but once Holyfield was the heavyweight no. Remember Qawi nearly beat Holyfield, and Marciano hit harder.
Marciano was a hellacious puncher, no question about that at all!
He also had a tremendous heart (as we saw in Charles marciano 1, when his nose literally split by an elbow, clogged up with blood to the point that he couldn't breathe, marciano ordered the corner to pull apart the skin at the cut so his nasal passage was open to and he could get air.)
but he was incredibly short in comparison to many and with his lack of active defense and skill I'm not sure could he get into holyfield and he could be picked apart at range.
On the other hand he could get in and wear him down to the body..
This is a really good thread...A couple of thoughts.
First, Tunney was a very underrated puncher, and, possibly, one of the smartest and most disciplined fighters in history. I've read where the quality of Liston's jab was established by saying it was "nearly as good as Tunney's." In the accounts of his fights you read often of his tremendous body-punching skills, and he would NEVER have done what Conn did in the first Louis fight. If Schmeling was clever enough to hit Louis all night with that right, Tunney would figure him out,too. But not in that same way because Louis had that figured by the end of the firsat Schmeling fight, it was just too late for him. Schmeling hit harder than Tunney, at least, I think, with his right, but he was not nearly as thoughtful in the ring. And, not to speak bad of Louis, but the rap against him was always that he was robotic in the ring. He had trouble adjusting.
Marciano was pretty damn good. Goldman always said that, if Marciano had started boxing at 12 instead of at 25, he'd have been the greatest ever. He said his biggest problem was in not trying to teach him too much. His power and his stamina and determination should be unquestioned, and, if you really watch his fights, he's a bit more clever and harder to hit than given credit for. This is where I think he would do well against most modern heavyweights: he advanced with his weight back on his right foot, prodding with his left. Being short and in a crouch, his weight being back made him a bit harder to hit then a guy like Frazier who came forward leaning over his left6 leg while looking for the hook. Marciano's stance would make a guy reach for him.
Think, for a second, about a modern day giant of a heavy trying to jab the 5' 10" Marciano while he he crouched back like that. He can't reach him, unless he reaches for him, because there isn't one of these guys smart enough to get low and jab like Foster did against Tiger. When the tall guy reaches and jabs down, what punch does he get hit with? That winging right that was Marciano's best punch. I submit that his lack of height and his style would present problems to today's super heavies that would only be matched by their inability to deal with his work ethic.
CC Modern very good heavyweight would handle the Rock but that does not make them greater than him.