Bro all I can do is give fighters the "eye" test. He was a solid fighter, he boxed well, he was good defensively, light on his feet and tied guys up on the inside when he had to. I have no problems with Tunney, I just fail to see what he did better than Wlad in any area. He employed a style that is very outdated, in the same way that guys like Tunney would laugh at a John L Sullivan with his dumb bare-knuckle stance.
I'm a naturally skeptical person, I like forming my own opinions about things, and I don't take the opinions of so-called experts as fact. There's too many people who have this rosy view of old timers that clouds their judgement, they get really romantic over these guys who had to fight 300 times in a career. And in the end, they think it makes them smart to regurgitate what the "experts" say to constantly show people "hey, look at me, I know my boxing history". To me it's just so lame.
I appreciate guys like Tunney and Dempsey because they are pioneers who pushed the sport forward. Just like I appreciate guitarists like Mississippi John Hurt, Les Paul, Jimi Hendrix, Eddie Van Halen, ect because they were guys who pushed the art forward and allowed those who came after them to build on what they had done. But I'm not going to act like their ability is the same as guitarists today. You can go on Youtube and see 14 year old kids who can play better than Jimi or EVH.


Thanks:
Likes:
Dislikes: 


Reply With Quote

Bookmarks