Tunney versus Marciano
JAlexa9898
right time and they both retired having beaten everyone they ever fought. At
least from what I understand Tunney did. Plus it would be an interesting
comparison of styles.
charles.beauchamp
Tunney by stoppage around round 8 or 9. Rocky would have lost several
fights under todays rules for stoppages. Tunney carves his face up as Rock
stalks
him for several rounds trying to drop him.
v/r Beau
"JAlexa9898" <jalex...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020928164846...@mb-mn.aol.com...
Bob Sheehy
Harry Wills.
Tunney was a great LHW and a Top 20-25 heavyweight. Marciano would turn
out his lights around midway through a 15 rounder.
Zroaster
http://boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=017615
Cheers Boxrec............
"Bob Sheehy" <bob...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:29838-3D9...@storefull-2352.public.lawson.webtv.net...
Bobby Bearden
Tunney would not be able to keep Marciano off him. A swarmer can go through
a boxer and Marciano was the best swarmer the heavyweight division ever saw.
Harry Greb was a swarmer, but he lacked Marciano's power. Still he managed
to beat Tunney the first time they met. What Tunney learned to help him beat
Greb later would not have worked with Marciano. Rocky, despite what his
critics claim, wasn't a bad boxer. He wasn't great as a boxer stylist, but
he was competent and he did exactly what his trainer, the great Charlie
Goldman, told him. He worked on the left hook till he was a devastating left
hooker. He crouched and could come up with power with a punch, something few
fighters can do. Goldman told Angello Dundee that Marciano was the only
fighter he trained who could do that.
Tunney was a masterful boxer, probably the best pure boxer stylist of the
heavyweight division, but it would be his inability to really hurt Marciano
that would make him vulnerable. Cutting Marciano wouldn't deter him at all.
Jabs in the face didn't bother him.
The way to stop Marciano, short of a friendly and over-cautious referee,
would have been to stun him with a punch. To do that, a fighter would need
real power. Ignore people who say, "He was dropped by a light
heavyweight..." Sure, he was dropped by Archie Moore, the fighter with the
most knockouts in the history of boxing. It was a flash knockdown and he
wasn't hurt at all; he got right up without a count. Tunney wasn't the
knock-out artist Moore was.
It would be a great fight, Tunney would give Marciano a boxing lesson, but
in the end, Rocky would catch up to him and beat him down. Probably not by
one punch, but by a an accumulating.
Bobby Bearden
BoxMuham
>Tunney did not beat everyone he ever fought.
No, but he did come as close to doing so as one can get.
>Tunney was a great LHW and a Top 20-25 heavyweight.
Please list the 19 heavyweights you feel would beat Tunney.
Tunney was better than Dempsey. Tunney was the best pure boxer in
heavyweight history. Tunney might beat Larry Holmes, Joe Frazier... Tunney
matches up pretty well against even Louis and Ali.
Tunney is EASILY among the top 10 greatest heavyweights.
BoxMuhammad
charles.beauchamp
"Bobby Bearden" <th...@digitalexp.com> wrote in message
news:upforq7...@corp.supernews.com...
I doubt all your doubts. In todays game Marciano would have lost several
fights
to cuts. Tunney's jab and ability to take a beating would rule over Rocky
in a
fight. What elite pure boxer did Rocky ever fight at their peak? LaStarza?
v/r Beau
Gary Toney
"charles.beauchamp" <charles....@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:j3xl9.445506$kp.12...@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
> 12 rounds 2002 Nevada rules
> Tunney by stoppage around round 8 or 9. Rocky would have lost several
> fights under todays rules for stoppages. Tunney carves his face up as
Rock
> stalks
> him for several rounds trying to drop him.
>
> v/r Beau
>
But, here is how I see a 15 round bout taking place in 1928 under New York
State rules while Tunney is in his prime.
.
Tunney carves his face up as Rock
outboxer the Rock in 8 out of 11 rounds. It's round 12 and Tunney's legs
are tiring as his footwork slows. Rocky prods forward with a barrage of
punches and Tunney is having trouble keeping his arms up due to the
accumulated battering his arms have taken over the course of the bout.
Rocky senses that Tunney no longer has the strength to keep him off. Rocky
steps in with a hard uppercut and as Tunney's knees buckle, the Rock smashes
a vicious left hook to Tunney's exposed chin as he goes down and out.
Marciano by KO in the 12th round.
Gary Toney
charles.beauchamp
"Bob Sheehy" <bob...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:29838-3D9...@storefull-2352.public.lawson.webtv.net...
> Harry Wills.
>
Re: Wills comment...replace Tunney with Dempsey. Your off base.
Rocky never faced a top tier opponent at their best. Also Rocky would not
have been
unbeaten in todays game because a bunch of his fights would have been
TKO-bys due
to RSF cuts. Tunney's jab beat Dempsey. It would carve up Rocky.
> Tunney was a great LHW and a Top 20-25 heavyweight. Marciano would turn
> out his lights around midway through a 15 rounder.
>
Top 20-25? Your rediculous.
v/r Beau
Bob Sheehy
is documented in his own writings.
(2) Tunney won 61 of 81 career fights. He has 1 loss, 1 NC and 18 ND's
on his record. Many fighters have come closer to defeating all their
career opponents than Tunney did.
(3) Better heavyweights than Tunney? Peter Jackson, Jim Jeffries, Jack
Johnson, Sam Langford, Jack Dempsey, Joe Louis, Ezzard Charles, Jersey
Joe Walcott, Rocky Marciano, Sonny Liston, Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier,
George Foreman, Ken Norton, Larry Holmes, Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield,
Riddick Bowe, Lennox Lewis. How many is that so far?
5016
> news:20020928164846...@mb-mn.aol.com...
> > Who would win? The reason I am asking about these two is they both left at
> the
> > right time and they both retired having beaten everyone they ever fought.
> At
> > least from what I understand Tunney did. Plus it would be an interesting
> > comparison of styles.
>
> Tunney would not be able to keep Marciano off him. A swarmer can go through
> a boxer and Marciano was the best swarmer the heavyweight division ever saw.
> Harry Greb was a swarmer, but he lacked Marciano's power. Still he managed
> to beat Tunney the first time they met. What Tunney learned to help him beat
> Greb later would not have worked with Marciano. Rocky, despite what his
> critics claim, wasn't a bad boxer. He wasn't great as a boxer stylist, but
> he was competent and he did exactly what his trainer, the great Charlie
> Goldman, told him. He worked on the left hook till he was a devastating left
> hooker. He crouched and could come up with power with a punch, something few
> fighters can do. Goldman told Angello Dundee that Marciano was the only
> fighter he trained who could do that.
Very rare. Tyson was also really great at this at one time.
> Tunney was a masterful boxer, probably the best pure boxer stylist of the
> heavyweight division, but it would be his inability to really hurt Marciano
> that would make him vulnerable. Cutting Marciano wouldn't deter him at all.
> Jabs in the face didn't bother him.
> The way to stop Marciano, short of a friendly and over-cautious referee,
> would have been to stun him with a punch. To do that, a fighter would need
> real power. Ignore people who say, "He was dropped by a light
> heavyweight..." Sure, he was dropped by Archie Moore, the fighter with the
> most knockouts in the history of boxing. It was a flash knockdown and he
> wasn't hurt at all; he got right up without a count. Tunney wasn't the
> knock-out artist Moore was.
>
> It would be a great fight, Tunney would give Marciano a boxing lesson, but
> in the end, Rocky would catch up to him and beat him down. Probably not by
> one punch, but by a an accumulating.
>
> Bobby Bearden
I see your point, and agree that in 1950s Marciano would be able to
wear down Tunney in the same way that he did Charles.
But today, Marciano would lose fights because the interpretation of
the rules is different. He would probably have lost to Ezzard Charles
on cuts, and might have lost to others as well. Tunney was probably as
good a fighter as Charles and could probably have done the same job.
So, as always, when comparing different eras you have to compare the
rules of different eras, and even where the fights take place.
Marciano would have never got anywhere as a boxer if he was English
for instance - he would have been consistently disqualified, even in
the 50s. In his (or even Tunney's) time and place Marciano wins.
Currently, I believe Tunney wins.
Marciano vs Holyfield would be a dream fight for those who like tough,
strong, small heavyweights who know every illegal trick in the book.
It would have to happen 20 years or more ago though - today it is a
near certain technical decision with Rocky cut from a headbutt.
jonah
ducking
> Harry Wills.
Other way round. Wills was terified of Tunney. Tunney would of made
him look a lumbering fool and would make Marciano look like a fighter
from the old london prize ring.
Jonah
bob...@webtv.net (Bob Sheehy) wrote in message news:<29838-3D9...@storefull-2352.public.lawson.webtv.net>...
Bob Sheehy
substitute for the facts.
The facts are that Wills would have fought King Kong, Godzilla and
Tunney simultaneously to earn a guaranteed shot at Dempsey. Tunney
pulled every string he could find to avoid having to fight Wills in a
box-off for the right to meet Jack.
What you or I believe would most likely have happened if limber Tunney
had fought lumbering Harry is immaterial. Clean Gene The Fighting
Marine worked overtime to ensure that a Tunney-Wills bout would never
take place. Career LHW Tunney had no appetite for a heavyweight opponent
who dwarfed him. The man must have had his reasons.
charles.beauchamp
> (1) Tunney ducked Harry Wills shamelessly. His refusal to fight Wills
> is documented in his own writings.
>
How long was Tunney champion before retiring? What was Wills' prime? Who
was champ during most of
that period? You have no ammunition to make such a bizarre charge.
> (2) Tunney won 61 of 81 career fights. He has 1 loss, 1 NC and 18 ND's
> on his record. Many fighters have come closer to defeating all their
> career opponents than Tunney did.
>
Many is a vague non sequitor. He won 61 and lost 1. There is exactly 1
Heavyweight
champion with a higher win % and he would certainly have been beaten by
Tunney.
Sliced and diced.
> (3) Better heavyweights than Tunney? Peter Jackson, Jim Jeffries, Jack
> Johnson, Sam Langford, Jack Dempsey, Joe Louis, Ezzard Charles, Jersey
> Joe Walcott, Rocky Marciano, Sonny Liston, Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier,
> George Foreman, Ken Norton, Larry Holmes, Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield,
> Riddick Bowe, Lennox Lewis. How many is that so far?
>
You have no credibility now. Jeffries would have been outboxed in the same
fashion
as he was by Jack Johnson. Ezzard Charles and Tunney would make for perhaps
the best possible 175 Lb matchup ever. Might be the 2 best ever Light
Heavies...maybe.
Walcott NEVER did anything to show he was more accomplished then Tunney or
would
have been able to beat Gene in the ring. Marciano I've already stated.
Liston....was slapped
silly by Cassius Clay. Tunney maybe does the same thing. Norton?
Bowe?!!! And he in
fact defeated Dempsey 2 out of 2 times.
v/r Beau
charles.beauchamp
"Gary Toney" <garye...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:GVRl9.75480$jG2.4...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Fair enough under those rules....but if Gene can stay away it ends in a NC
with Gene getting
the revisionist newspaper decision.
v/r Beau
Gary Toney
decision bouts were over. And, the point is that in my opinion Gene could
not stay away from Rocky in the late rounds. Rocky would have done what he
did best...break down his opponent over the course of the bout even while he
was being outboxed. Then he would stop Tunney in the late rounds. Hey,
I've read a lot about Tunney and I liked him as a skilled boxer and he was
the best of his time. However, I think this dream bout is an oddity in that
Marciano would have defeated Tunney in Tunney's prime and Tunney may have
won in 2002 as you laid out in your scenario.
Gary Toney
Bobby Bearden
Name all the elite pure boxers of the heavyweight division? There haven't
been that many. Tunney and maybe Chris Bird, perhaps Corbett. And that's
about it.
Ali, Louis, Charles, Holyfield are all boxer-punchers.
LaStarza was a very good boxer stylist. However, Ezzard Charles is a better
example, though he was a boxer-puncher. Watch the Charles fights with
Marciano, especially the first one, and his fights with Walcott. Then watch
Dempsey-Tunney I and II. Ezzard Charles would have done just as well against
Dempsey at that stage of Dempsey's career.
It's a misconception that Marciano was stoppable on cuts. The only instance
where he had a cut that might lead to a stoppage even under modern rule
interpretation was when his nose was split by Ezzard Charles's elbow. That
was a freak thing the couldn't happen again in a thousand fights.
Most of those who believe Marciano would be beaten by Tunney or Ali or other
boxer or boxer-punchers concentrate on the fight being stopped because of
cuts. Few think he'd be knocked out or even out pointed (he was an extremely
active fighter who scored a lot of points himself. Joe Frazier called him an
"ultra aggressive fighter")
Here's a run down on Marciano and his cuts:
Rocky didn't get cut at all in his first 28 fights. Not as much as a nose
bleed. Then he was head butted above the left eye in his 29th fight by
Johnny Shkor and it required stitches. Thereafter, it was the same area
above the left eye that seemed to get cut. The skin is very thin there, with
a bone ridge underneath, and it's said a cut there never heals back to the
original condition.
In his 32nd fight, Keene Simmons cut the eye again.
In his 38th fight against Joe Louis he had a very slight cut on the eye and
a small nose bleed. (Cuts so slight you can't see them in the film)
Other than that, in his 43rd fight he was cut on the bridge of the nose
against Walcott and cut with a head butt above the hair line by Walcott.
In the first fight with Charles, 46th he was cut above the eye again and
had his nose split by Charles elbow in the second fight, the 47th.
Against Moore his eye was cut once again, but not seriously.
So, Rocky only bled in 7 fights out of 49, mostly his last fights when the
competition was the best and when old wounds kept re-opening, and only the
split nose was the kind of cut that could stop a fight. I think part of the
bleeder idea comes from the fact that the Walcott and Charles fights were
televised and most people had never seen Rocky until those fights, so their
remembrance of him is with blood streaming down from the left eye or the
split nose.
Almost every cut involved that same area above the left eyebrow. In the
films and the stills, especially the first Charles fight, you can see the
blood always flowed down to the left of the eye and never is a threat to
vision. Remember, they almost never stop a fight over a cut unless the blood
is getting into the eye. With Marciano, it was the same cut opening each
time with the same result.
I have a Ring magazine from 1955 and they mention the cuts and
say, "Marciano isn't what you call a bleeder, if he was, he'd have got cut
in most of his fights rather than in just a few."
So, against Tuney or Ali or most anyone else, it's most likely if he was cut
it would be that same original head butt injury and wouldn't affect the
fight. The idea that he'd be stopped on cuts by many fighters isn't
supportable by the evidence. He didn't get cut in the face, he didn't get
cut in the eye area. His face and eyes didn't swell up from punches as
Frazier's did. Also, it's hard for a referee to stop a fight when the cut
fighter is still being aggressive and effective. The number one
consideration for stoppage is, "the fighter can't defend himself" or he
quits punching back. I can't imagine Marciano in anything but all out
offensive mode.
Bobby Bearden
Isaiah
He has more credibility than anyone here other than pablo. He's wrong
about Norton though. Dempsey was rusty and old when Tunney beat him.
-Isaiah
Bob Sheehy
his prime, he fought the greatest heavyweight in history essentially to
a standstill. Somewhat past his prime, he fought the fourth greatest
heavyweight in history virtually to a standstill. He was starched a few
times in his career by exactly the kind of big, young, power-punching
heavyweights with whom Tunney never contended.
Man-to-man, Norton would be a nightmare for Tunney. Much bigger and
stronger than Gene, harder hitting with good power in both hands, more
aggressive with awkward, unpredictable rhythms, Tunney would discover
himself against Norton to be suddenly a very small man in a very small
ring.
jonah
to rewrite history. He tries to turn Dempsey into a mythological hero.
Dempsey avoided Wills (and of course harry greb) but he tries to make
Tunney out to be the villian. I stick to the facts. I don't care who
wills was supposed to fight the fact remains that he did not want
anything to do with Tunney. Even after he was offered a career biggest
purse of $100,000. Right or wrong all wills wanted was Dempsey. It
seems a cowardly thing to do on Kahns part to write a book after
Tunney's death and try to blacken Tunney's rep with his bullshit. If
thier was any substance to his tales he would of written when Tunney
was alive. For real facts written when Tunney was living try these
sources: Fleiicher, sockers in sepia, page 50.
John Lardner, white hopes and other tigers. page 168.
Jonah
bob...@webtv.net (Bob Sheehy) wrote in message news:<17090-3D...@storefull-2358.public.lawson.webtv.net>...
jonah
> Johnson, Sam Langford, Jack Dempsey, Joe Louis, Ezzard Charles, Jersey
> Joe Walcott, Rocky Marciano, Sonny Liston, Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier,
> George Foreman, Ken Norton, Larry Holmes, Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield,
> Riddick Bowe, Lennox Lewis. How many is that so far?
Good joke.
With the exception of Ali and Maybe Louis the rest would not have an
answer to Tunney's crafty moves and faultless footwork which was
copied 40 year later by the limber and swift Cassius Clay.
Jonah
bob...@webtv.net (Bob Sheehy) wrote in message news:<16700-3D...@storefull-2351.public.lawson.webtv.net>...
Bobby Bearden
jonah <jona...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b1262dd8.02100...@posting.google.com...
> You get your supposed facts I believe from kahns book. Kahn is trying
> to rewrite history. He tries to turn Dempsey into a mythological hero.
Dempsey is a mythological hero. He was during his lifetime. All Kahn did was
show that to modern readers. Nothing Kahn said concerning Dempsey's stature
in the history of boxing was wrong.
Dempsey was chosen by Fleischer to compose the first Top Ten lists for Ring
magazine. He was chosen because he was so well respected.
Ferdie Pacheco said he thought Ali was the greatest heavyweight champion,
but he always thinks of Dempsey as "THE champ".
Tyson copied Dempsey, with his hair cut, his lack of a robe, even his style
of fighting.
Like him or not, Dempsey's name will always mean The Champ.
> Dempsey avoided Wills (and of course harry greb) but he tries to make
> Tunney out to be the villian. I stick to the facts. I don't care who
> wills was supposed to fight the fact remains that he did not want
> anything to do with Tunney.
I don't think Dempsey avoided Wills at all. Others made sure the fight never
happened, but not Dempsey. It wouldn't have been the great fight people like
to claim. Wills was big, slow, and over-the-hill. Dempsey would have handled
him easily. So would Tunney. What Tunney did to an over-the-hill Dempsey,
he'd have done to Wills. And Dempsey would have done it to Wills a few years
earlier.
Harry Wills got into the Hall of Fame more on not getting to fight Dempsey
than for any other reason. He lost to Sam McVey, he was KO'd twice by Sam
Langford, he was KO'd by Jim Johnson. Though he also won fights against some
of those guys, he wasn't as good as any of them. He wasn't in the class of
Jack Johnson or Sam Langford.
He fought Langford and some of the other great black fighters lots of times,
but most of those were in the nature of exhibitions more than real fights.
Charlie Goldman, Marciano's manager, fought over 400 times, and he said he
fought one guy at least 30 times. He said that when you fight the same guy
over and over, you get where you can both fight all night without either one
getting hurt. He pointed out that those repeat fights become just shows for
the crowd, not actual fights.
Bobby Bearden
Bob Sheehy
century resorted to fighting long series against each other because they
were typically avoided by the best white heavyweights of the day, and
were frozen out of the world title picture. That has nothing whatever
to do with whether Charley Goldman had a sideshow boxing career or not.
I think Bobby also knows that some supposedly great fighters spend years
avoiding certain supposedly lesser fighters they would "probably"
defeat. He seems to be very harsh and unforgiving of that practice
among contemporary fighters, but somewhat more lenient towards it as
practiced by the hoary legends of yore.
The unbridled temerity of Kahn to author a biography when both his
subject and the key figures in his subject's life are dead! Who ever
heard of such a thing? Perhaps jonah prefers the WWE-style "bios"
penned five minutes after their subjects become famous and five minutes
before they become obscure again. Nevertheless, Kahn bases his claims
on documented facts and first-hand materials, including Tunney's own
correspondence. That's how a serious biographer and historian does his
work.
super calo
> As Bobby knows well, the elite black heavyweights of the early twentieth
> century resorted to fighting long series against each other because they
> were typically avoided by the best white heavyweights of the day, and
> were frozen out of the world title picture. That has nothing whatever
> to do with whether Charley Goldman had a sideshow boxing career or not.
>
> I think Bobby also knows that some supposedly great fighters spend years
> avoiding certain supposedly lesser fighters they would "probably"
> defeat. He seems to be very harsh and unforgiving of that practice
> among contemporary fighters, but somewhat more lenient towards it as
> practiced by the hoary legends of yore.
>
hey cause a boxer today won't fight a boxer who weights 60 pounds more than
them obviously makes him a coward.
cause a boxer today uses a bit of showmanship obviously makes him a coward
also.
Patrick Kehoe
the first 8 or 9 against The Easton Assassin"
I admit my total bias FOR Larry... though I always like Kenny...
P
Bob Sheehy <bob...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:16425-3D...@storefull-2354.public.lawson.webtv.net...
Bobby Bearden
> As Bobby knows well, the elite black heavyweights of the early twentieth
> century resorted to fighting long series against each other because they
> were typically avoided by the best white heavyweights of the day, and
> were frozen out of the world title picture. That has nothing whatever
> to do with whether Charley Goldman had a sideshow boxing career or not.
>
Indeed I do know this, and have mentioned it both on here and in boxing
articles. However, I also know that exhibition bouts were the norm rather
than the exception in the first half of the 20th century. Dempsey and his
main sparring partner, Big Bill Tate, fought lots of exhibitions. Joe Louis
fought lots of exhibitions. Fighters of the era often put on boxing matches
against the local tough guy or against two fighters who came to town for the
purpose. As often as not, they weren't serious fights, as Goldman stated.
Jack Blackburn, Joe Louis's manager, said pretty much the same thing as
Goldman. He fought hundreds of times and scores of them were against the
same people and winner/loser didn't matter, just so the crowd was
entertained and they were paid.
It's very true that black fighters weren't given title shots, and were
frozen out of the picture. But it's equally true that some of those fights
against each other were in the nature of exhibitions.
> I think Bobby also knows that some supposedly great fighters spend years
> avoiding certain supposedly lesser fighters they would "probably"
> defeat. He seems to be very harsh and unforgiving of that practice
> among contemporary fighters, but somewhat more lenient towards it as
> practiced by the hoary legends of yore.
>
I'm harsher on current fighters because there's still a chance to convince
them to try harder. No amount of criticism will put Dempsey and Wills in the
ring together, but perhaps it might make Roy Jones back up his words at
least once and fight a top fighter.
You can flog a dead horse till your arm falls off, but you ain't ever gonna
win a race with him.
> The unbridled temerity of Kahn to author a biography when both his
> subject and the key figures in his subject's life are dead! Who ever
> heard of such a thing? Perhaps jonah prefers the WWE-style "bios"
> penned five minutes after their subjects become famous and five minutes
> before they become obscure again. Nevertheless, Kahn bases his claims
> on documented facts and first-hand materials, including Tunney's own
> correspondence. That's how a serious biographer and historian does his
> work.
>
I thought Kahn's book was excellent. The linking of the events of the time
with Dempsey's career made that period come alive.
Bobby Bearden
Bobby Bearden
super calo <supe...@calo.com> wrote in message
news:and9tu$3ra$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
Of course you're referring to Roy Jones and the unfair treatment he gets
from critics. How dare them suggest to Roy that he fight a bigger man, or a
littler man, or anyone who doesn't have a day job. Or is it that Roy is the
one who tosses out the names?
Is there any fighter with a weight advantage of 60 pounds that Roy didn't
bring up first? Or 15 pounds? Or even 15 pounds less?
You can apologize for him and say it's just showmanship, but where have you
seen such showmanship before in boxing? Did Ali boast of fighting guys he
didn't intend to actually fight? Nope. He boasted, then he fought them.
That's showmanship.
The other is just idle bragging.
It's a pattern so obvious, even his blindest supporters have to have at
least noticed it. It goes like this:
Beat up a nobody "mandatory", disappointing fans of the sport again. Then,
to take the heat off, beat his chest and brag about "my next fight will be
against________" and fill in the blank with everyone from Hopkins to Ruiz.
That's not showmanship. Showmanship implies that after the ballyhoo there
will actually be the show that was promised. With Roy, there never is a
show. It's just a carney con-game.
Bobby Bearden
charles.beauchamp
"Patrick Kehoe" <pke...@sprint.ca> wrote in message
news:qqum9.547$3h6....@newscontent-01.sprint.ca...
> Ya know Howard Cosell aside I didn't see Norton win but MAYBE one round in
> the first 8 or 9 against The Easton Assassin"
>
> I admit my total bias FOR Larry... though I always like Kenny...
>
>
> P
>
I remember that fight. I was so mad. I thought Norton won at the time. I
was a big Kenny fan.
Strange though, because I don't really know why I liked him. Call it
childhood folly I guess.
v/r Beau
charles.beauchamp
>
> Bob Sheehy <bob...@webtv.net> wrote in message
> news:1905-3D9...@storefull-2355.public.lawson.webtv.net...
> > As Bobby knows well, the elite black heavyweights of the early twentieth
> > century resorted to fighting long series against each other because they
> > were typically avoided by the best white heavyweights of the day, and
> > were frozen out of the world title picture. That has nothing whatever
> > to do with whether Charley Goldman had a sideshow boxing career or not.
> >
>
> Indeed I do know this, and have mentioned it both on here and in boxing
> articles. However, I also know that exhibition bouts were the norm rather
> than the exception in the first half of the 20th century. Dempsey and his
> main sparring partner, Big Bill Tate, fought lots of exhibitions. Joe
Louis
> fought lots of exhibitions. Fighters of the era often put on boxing
matches
> against the local tough guy or against two fighters who came to town for
the
> purpose. As often as not, they weren't serious fights, as Goldman stated.
> Jack Blackburn, Joe Louis's manager, said pretty much the same thing as
> Goldman. He fought hundreds of times and scores of them were against the
> same people and winner/loser didn't matter, just so the crowd was
> entertained and they were paid.
> It's very true that black fighters weren't given title shots, and were
> frozen out of the picture. But it's equally true that some of those fights
> against each other were in the nature of exhibitions.
>
A pointless aside but a memory. In Thailand Muay Thai kickboxing is very
popular.
There are bars with rings in them and young teenagers in ring for endless
hours. One
time in 1988 I was there (US Navy thank your very much). I sat on a stool
in an outdoor
beverage serving facility for hours. Two kids, must have been no older then
14 essentially
tapped each other endlessly all afternoon. There wasn't a single shot that
looked like it
was in anger or could hurt a flea. There was a sign posted saying they
could take challenges
from the audience.
A very large sailor of African American heritage took up the challenge of
the rather smaller
unimpressive looking kid. Now understand this. These two boys had been
kick sparring
for at least 3 hours with occassional "between rounds" breaks. And my
vantage point was maybe
10 feet from the ring so it was obvious to me that no serious contact was
being made.
Big sailor guy laces on gloves. He is at least 220 lbs. Muay Thai boy
perhaps....110. Seriously.
Looks like a mugging about to take place and there was. At the opening bell
big sailor dude clumsily steps
forward and Muay Thai boy charges forward in a blur of punches and kicks to
the head dropping the
big sailor with a busted jaw in what couldn't have been more then one
minute. Probably less. And the
crowd went totally nuts.
It is my understanding that for that bar at least, this was a rather common
occurance and in fact it was
something that we were fairly warned about before going ashore.
I wonder if similar "bouts" in some of those series mentioned above were of
this variet.
v/r Beau
Isaiah
> Ken Norton was absolutely a greater heavyweight than Gene Tunney. In
> his prime, he fought the greatest heavyweight in history essentially to
> a standstill. Somewhat past his prime, he fought the fourth greatest
> heavyweight in history virtually to a standstill. He was starched a few
> times in his career by exactly the kind of big, young, power-punching
> heavyweights with whom Tunney never contended.
Norton didn't give Ali a tough time because he was near him in skill;
it was a quirky style thing. Holmes had a magnificent career, I'll
grant, but he often struggled against B-level opponents. Your last
point is true, but that's not what I base my low opinion of Norton on.
Other than giving Holmes a tough time in defeat and the Ali series,
what did Norton do to indicate that he was more than an ordinary good
contender? His biggest wins were probably Quarry, Young or Kirkman,
unless I'm overlooking someone. That's not too impressive.
I know I'm dismissing his best performance, but Willie Meehan, Roland
LaStarza, Doug Jones, Buster Douglas, Michael Moorer, Andrew Golota
and Hasim Rahman all were solid contenders with wins (or near-wins) of
similar magnitude on their record. What makes Norton any better than
them?
> Man-to-man, Norton would be a nightmare for Tunney. Much bigger and
> stronger than Gene, harder hitting with good power in both hands, more
> aggressive with awkward, unpredictable rhythms, Tunney would discover
> himself against Norton to be suddenly a very small man in a very small
> ring.
I tend to agree with your assessment of Tunney, and I don't think
there's much difference between him and Norton. From what I've seen of
Tunney, I think he would be able to figure Norton out, but my
disagreement is more on the historical standing issue.
-Isaiah
Bobby Bearden
Some of them were of that type. Dempsey, after losing to Tunney, toured
doing exhibition fights with whatever local tough guy the area had. He did
very well against these big, but untrained, fighters and said he considered
coming out of retirement based on how easily he was beating the local
barroom brawler. Then he had an exhibition with a guy who was a minor local
pro fighter and it took all Jack could do to hold his own. He said that
convinced him he didn't have it any more, when he couldn't even handle
someone at such a low level of the pro ranks.
Your story reminds me of something that happened when I was in basic
training. We had this guy that was from Chicago and said he had been warlord
of some street gang. He was a rough looking guy with some gang tattoos and
all. We also had a guy that was going through basic with us before going on
to OTS (Officer Training School). He was from New York City, had a college
education, wore glasses, and when we got smoke breaks, he smoked a pipe. We
nicknamed him "professor". Well, the gang tough took an instant dislike to
him and was always goading him, trying to provoke a fight. I guess he
represented everything the guy hated. The professor offered to fight him
with boxing gloves. Finally, one of our TI's suggested they take it to the
gym on our next Sunday break. There was a boxing ring there and all of us
piled down there to see this.
They put on the gloves and someone rings the bell and Surprise! Surprise!
The professor beats him all over the ring, jabs, hooks, body shots. It was
over in one round.
After they get out of the ring and do the "shake hands and make up" the TI
required, someone of course asked the professor where he'd learn to box like
that. He said, "I was New York State Golden Gloves champion twice. You don't
have to run in a street gang to know how to fight."
My father was also a Golden Gloves champion and also boxed in the military
for several years. He worked as a brick layer/stone mason most of his adult
life. I worked with him in the summers and remember seeing him get in fights
a couple times on the job. He would move and jab just like he was in the
ring and none of the big brawlers could take more than a couple shots from
him. He'd always tell me, "Never let them get you on the ground, make it
fast. Break their noses with the first punch if you can. Non-boxers can't
handle a broken nose."
He told me once why he quit boxing. While he was stationed in the
Philippines, a couple guys talked him into going bowling, something he'd
never done. He said after that he didn't box again. I asked him why, and he
said simply, "I didn't piss blood after bowling."
He later became a professional bowler.
Bobby Bearden
Bobby Bearden
> I tend to agree with your assessment of Tunney, and I don't think
> there's much difference between him and Norton. From what I've seen of
> Tunney, I think he would be able to figure Norton out, but my
> disagreement is more on the historical standing issue.
>
>
> -Isaiah
Tunney was much more skilled than Norton. He wasn't as big, but he was
faster. He'd figure Norton out before they ever climbed in the ring. In his
time, Tunney studied an opponent for months before fighting him. He was
ringside at several of Dempsey's fights.
In the 1970s, Tunney would have had films of every Norton fight that was
filmed and would have watched them over and over till he had the man down. I
believe he would outbox him for the decision rather than take a chance on
Norton's power and try to take him out.
Bobby Bearden
jonah
> subject and the key figures in his subject's life are dead! Who ever
> heard of such a thing? Perhaps jonah prefers the WWE-style "bios"
> penned five minutes after their subjects become famous and five minutes
> before they become obscure again. Nevertheless, Kahn bases his claims
> on documented facts and first-hand materials, including Tunney's own
> correspondence. That's how a serious biographer and historian does his
> work.
Your right. I do prefer to read the views of the actual eyewitnesses
to the events in question. This is of course the starting point to any
investigation, logic and reason would tell anyone that. Kahn's
oppinions on certain issues is contary to many serious and respected
biogaraphers and writers, such as lardner and roberts. I simply
believe the cumalative evidence that's all.
Jonah
bob...@webtv.net (Bob Sheehy) wrote in message news:<1905-3D9...@storefull-2355.public.lawson.webtv.net>...