Swap out Gene Tunney with Larry Holmes?

[louis54]

to me tunney is in top 5 heavywieghts ever; not holmes. tunney would have outmanuvered and outsmarted holmes.

[sonnyboyx2]

Should Gene Tunney be swapped out with Larry Holmes on the top 10 list of all time heavyweight greats? I have always been a fan of Tunney, and he had an extremely good record of 66-1. He beat very good fighters of the era. He knocked out Georges Carpentier, Bartley Madden, Johnny Risko, Jeff Smith, Erminio Spalla, the Italian Heavyweight Champion, Tommy Loughran, beat Harry Greb 4 times, knocked out Tommy Gibbons, whom Jack Dempsey couldn't KO in 15 rounds, and beat Jack Dempsey twice. He beat Battling Levinsky for the American Light Heavyweight title, lost it and then regained it from Greb. Tunney was long respected by the Old Timers as a great scientific boxer, perhaps the best since Corbett. He achieved every ambition he set out for and carried himself with dignity. Though never in the top 5, the old historians always had Gene as one of the best, almost unanimous in having him in the top 10, and many times even above Marciano. In modern times Tunney is underrated by some and overrated by others, but generally underappreciated. Due to the respect he was shown by the Old Timers, and his amazing boxing abilities, I have always rated Gene in the top 10. But in doing mroe recent research I am tempted to swap him otu with Holmes. Holmes fought many more name fighters. Virtually all of which had winning records, while Tunney fought many tomato cans and bums on the way up. Holmes beat the likes of Leon Spinks, Shavers twice, Scott Ledoux, Mike Weaver, Tim Witherspoon, Trevor Berbick, Muhammad Ali, Randall Cobb and Lucien Rodriguez, Ken Norton, Bonecrusher Smith, Jose Ribalta, Ray Mercer, Soctt Frank, Gerry Cooney, Renaldo Snipes, Lorenzo Zanon, and Leroy Jones. Comparing them physically, Holems was bigger, stronger, iron chin, better jab, and superior height and reach. Comapring their careers, Larry ofught betetr opposition, had 21 title defenses in comparison to Gene's mere 2 defenses of the Heavyweight title, and Larry held the title for 7 years when Gene held it for 2. Gene's best opponent was a past prime Jack Dempsey, while Larry fought many great fighters. With the possible exception of a prime Jack Dempsey, I don't believe that there is any fighter on Gene's record that Holmes couldn't beat. Larry fought betetr opponents, was bigger and stronegr physically, with an iron chin that was proven numerous times, and what many call one of the best left jabs in hsitory, with the second longest reign and second most title defenses after the Great Joe Louis. Taking all of this into consideration, do you feel that Gene Tunney should be replaced with Larry Holmes. If I add Holems to the lsit I may ahve to rearrange the order of the lower rankign fighters ony my list, but is Larry worthy of being in possession of a spot in the top with Gene being downgraded to an honorable mention?

most of the fighters Holmes fought in title defences was very mediocre journeymen.. Tunney was far superior to Holmes and in a H2H i would favor Tunney to beat Holmes due to Larry having a weak chin and no power in his right hand as well as having a tendency to being dropped by right hands, IMO Tunney would out-point Holmes fairly easily and may drop Larry on the way.

[Barn]

most of the fighters Holmes fought in title defences was very mediocre journeymen.. Tunney was far superior to Holmes and in a H2H i would favor Tunney to beat Holmes due to Larry having a weak chin and no power in his right hand as well as having a tendency to being dropped by right hands, IMO Tunney would out-point Holmes fairly easily and may drop Larry on the way.

I think Tunney could defeat Larry by decision but, I think it's very, very unfair saying Larry had "a weak chin."

[sonnyboyx2]

I think Tunney could defeat Larry by decision but, I think it's very, very unfair saying Larry had "a weak chin."

it was always thought that Larry had a weak chin due to his fights with Roy Williams, Kevin Isaacs & ibar Arrington before he was champion and then his knock downs to Weaver, Snipes, Shavers & Tyson with them all coming from a right-hand over the left jab.. Gene Tunney worked out the great Harry Greb so would easilt work -out Larry Holmes and i see Tunney's footwork and mobility being the deciding factor in the fight and Tunney winning a clear decision.. should Tunney be ranked higher than Holmes, yes he should... Tunney has to be rated as a Heavyweight because he was Heavyweight champion, we don't rate Manny Pacquiao as a light-flyweight

[Tyson.]

Larry Holmes is very overrated.

He fought unranked opposition resulting in him being stripped of his title. He never unified the division and has gift decisons over Norton and Witherspoon. He was a good fighter but was matched very carefully ducking alot of the top contenders and failing to give rematches.

Holmes is nowhere near a top 5 heavyweight.

[sonnyboyx2]

Larry Holmes is very overrated.

He fought unranked opposition resulting in him being stripped of his title. He never unified the division and has gift decisons over Norton and Witherspoon. He was a good fighter but was matched very carefully ducking alot of the top contenders and failing to give rematches.

Holmes is nowhere near a top 5 heavyweight.

IMO Holmes beat Witherspoon yet i have watched his fight with Norton many times over the years and Norton always takes the fight in my opinion.

[Great John L]

I can't help but feel that Holmes just did more at the veayweight level, was a more natural heavyweight, and his average oppsoitionw as better than Tunney's at heavyweight.Realistically, Carpentier was a rather small light heavyweight naturally, and weighed only 173 when Tunney fought him. Gibbons, who was a very etchnically skille boxer, was past his best. think the records of who they beat when they fought them should be given some weight too. I'm surprised that many feel Tunney could beat Holmes. A lot of tiems I rarely even see Tunney on top 10 lists, but I supposed the lists aren't on a "who beats who" quality.

Here are 10 of the worst records of Tunney's opponents in no order.
1. Ole Anderson 7-6-5
2. Soldier Jones 11-10-0
3. Ray Thompson 0-8-0
4. Dan O Dowd 15-18-1
5. Young Guerini 2-8-0
6. Tommy Gavigan 18-8-4
7. Whitey Allen 3-6-0
8. Jack Clifford 0-3-0
9. Jeff Madden 2-7-1
10. Eddie Josephs 3-5-0

Now Holmes' worst opponents in no order.
1. Charley Green 13-14-0
2. Howard Darlington 1-18-1
3. Bob Mashburn 7-6-2
4. Robert Yarborough 8-7-3
5. Billy Joiner 10-10-3
6. Fred Askew 15-12-1
7. Don Branch 1-6-0
8. Oliver Wright 12-8-0
9. Charlie James 5-5-1
10. Leon Shaw 9-9-1

Larry's best fights at heavyweight were against better opponents than the very few fighters that Tunney faced as heavyweight. I just don't think Gene did enough compared to Holmes reign and defenses. Opponents I think Larry had far better heavyweight opponents on average. Sure Tunney had Dempsey, but he was past his best and he was the best fighter Tunney fought as heavyweight. Larry fought Norton, and Shavers, two very good heavyweights, beat Ray Mercer, Gerry Cooney, went the distance with Holyfield when he was well past his best, he beat Ribalta, plus, he beat Witherspoon, Weaver, Smith, Berbick, and Spinks, who were pretty good fighters, all being champions at some point. Not great but head and shoulders above many Tunney fighters outside of Dempsey. During Tunney's reign, he beat Dempsey again, but very nearly lost in the Long Count fight, and beat a mediocre Australian Heavyweight Tom Heeney before hanging it up for good. Two year Reign, 2 defenses, one for each year. Past Prime Demspey being the only good fighter he fought in his reign. Realistically speaking, I can't see Gibbons or Carpentier beating Shavers, Norton, Weaver, Cooney, Mercer, or Smith.

[Wild Blue Yonda]

Take note of the records of Holmes' best opposition too, John L. Notice how green many of them are? It's a little alarming on closer inspection. No one who ran him close got a return fight, either, & I don't fancy that a coincidence.

[Great John L]

You have a point. Witherspoon and some of the others were very inexperienced and sill gave Holmes a hard time. And Holmes wasn't really a great mover. Left jabs over and over left him vulnerable to right hands from even somebody as slow as Shavers. But he fought all the best fighters of the 80s. And even if they weren't great, they were still champions. Tunney's opposition, with ony several exceptions, looks much weaker by comparison. The names on his record are unknown to many. He fought many fighters with terrible records nobody has ever heard of. Larry on the other hand never fought an ATG and won, but fought fighters that were on average, a lot better than Gene's fighters and more well known and proven on film. It's also easier to study Larry and his fights were few films are available of Gene and his opponents. I think Holmes's record is just better overall. Better competition excepting Dempsey, better jab, longer reign and more defenses than anyone except Louis. I mean, when you get right down to it, I don't know if there is enough to rate Tunney as a Heavyweight GREAT. Light heavyweight, absolutely. Heavyweight, not so much imo. He really ddin't do enough.

[bklynboy]

Another thing to consider is that Tunney retired in his prime. He left boxing to marry his wife, the heiress to the Carniege fortune. She didn't want him to fight any more and he didn't particularly care. At 30 years old he retired as champion of the world, married to a beautiful and wealthy woman. If not for that he could have held on to the belt until Joe Louis came around. Max Schmeling, Jack Sharkey, Primo Carnera wouldn't have beaten him. Maybe a Max Baer would have beaten a 36 year old Tunney.

But one thing is for certain. If he chose boxing he would have easily won his next 10+ fights.

He made the right choice. He married his love, had his health and fortune and lived a good life.