Well, said. He was a stablemate of Leonard. I always suspected Leonard and Co. had a lot to do with his expedient development. Both were crafty Boxer-Punchers. Gene was a lot like Mayweather, too: he carefully crafted his career, but he really was a genius. I really don't think it's unfair to say that his retirment, while wise and well-deserved, cost us one of the absolute greatest championships Boxing could have ever known.
Like I said in that other thread comparing Stribling and Moore, this era was Boxing's absolute best. So even guys who looked OK, were actually pretty remarkable. I feel bad that after, Tunney and Dempsey, Braddock is probably the best well-known. There really were a lot of remarkable fighters, and it's hard to imagine fighters (like Sam) who excelled in weaker eras having done so well in this time period. For Tunney to rise to the top really says a lot.
Like I said in that other thread comparing Stribling and Moore, this era was Boxing's absolute best. So even guys who looked OK, were actually pretty remarkable. I feel bad that after, Tunney and Dempsey, Braddock is probably the best well-known. There really were a lot of remarkable fighters, and it's hard to imagine fighters (like Sam) who excelled in weaker eras having done so well in this time period. For Tunney to rise to the top really says a lot.
Comment