I thought of this one realizing it could be a humdinger! so to speak...
There seem a lot of special elements that make this an interesting bout. Both guys had a large tool belt, so to speak, courtesy of totally different circumstances. Tunney trained and learned classical and preclassical technique. He is the only heavyweight I have ever seen who consistently displays elements of both systems... with caveats (get to those shortly). I believe that the Dempsey Tunney fights were underappreciated for what they really were: a watershed historical moment where we got to see the efficacy of two distinct systems of prize fighting.
Proof that the Most High (whatever conceived to be) has a great sense of humor was, despite Tunney "winning" Dempsey ushered in and demonstrated the power of the punch per se! Since Dempsey We saw the epitome of this development with Louis and we saw classical boxing take off. I know that I am a ********** but... if it didn't happen in the heavyweight division, it didn't happen.
Now JJ among other things is our "Caveat." Well before turning over the hand with pronation introduced the jab formally JJ used a jab. JJ was athletic and efficient, using footspeed to close the gap, much like someone like Wilder does today. So JJ had punch selection to spare... He had power, and he was generally defensively responsible. JJ was a fine grappler as well, and could fight inside.
When I ask myself who take this I consider a couple of big and obvious (obvious to me) points: Much like Toney was never going to counter punch Jones because of speed, there is no way JJ parries Tunney, who was a combo guy and an under estimated puncher... To me Tunney controls the "gap" the space that exists between fighters in preclassical times, sometimes called sword length because it is the same 3 feet. JOhnson does well inside, being naturally strong as an oxe lol. Both men are quick, hard to judge who has faster feet, or hands... Both men have power... both men throw all punches... Really tough fight to call!
I give an edge to Tunney but it is slight...
Thoughts?
There seem a lot of special elements that make this an interesting bout. Both guys had a large tool belt, so to speak, courtesy of totally different circumstances. Tunney trained and learned classical and preclassical technique. He is the only heavyweight I have ever seen who consistently displays elements of both systems... with caveats (get to those shortly). I believe that the Dempsey Tunney fights were underappreciated for what they really were: a watershed historical moment where we got to see the efficacy of two distinct systems of prize fighting.
Proof that the Most High (whatever conceived to be) has a great sense of humor was, despite Tunney "winning" Dempsey ushered in and demonstrated the power of the punch per se! Since Dempsey We saw the epitome of this development with Louis and we saw classical boxing take off. I know that I am a ********** but... if it didn't happen in the heavyweight division, it didn't happen.
Now JJ among other things is our "Caveat." Well before turning over the hand with pronation introduced the jab formally JJ used a jab. JJ was athletic and efficient, using footspeed to close the gap, much like someone like Wilder does today. So JJ had punch selection to spare... He had power, and he was generally defensively responsible. JJ was a fine grappler as well, and could fight inside.
When I ask myself who take this I consider a couple of big and obvious (obvious to me) points: Much like Toney was never going to counter punch Jones because of speed, there is no way JJ parries Tunney, who was a combo guy and an under estimated puncher... To me Tunney controls the "gap" the space that exists between fighters in preclassical times, sometimes called sword length because it is the same 3 feet. JOhnson does well inside, being naturally strong as an oxe lol. Both men are quick, hard to judge who has faster feet, or hands... Both men have power... both men throw all punches... Really tough fight to call!
I give an edge to Tunney but it is slight...
Thoughts?
Comment