How long could Tunney have kept Hvywt Title?

[guilalah]

How long could Gene Tunney (b. May 25 ([Only registered and activated users can see links]), 1897 ([Only registered and activated users can see links])) have held onto the Heavyweight Title, had he aspired to hold it as long as possible?

[Dempsey1238]

Until Nov 7 1978 imo.

[Maxmomer]

Schmeling would have taken it from him.

[Brian123]

He was 29 when he won it, 31 when he retired, if he stayed away from Max Schmeling maybe 5 years total.

[Dempsey1238]

I dont see Tunney loseing to Schmeling. Tunney was too fast and quick for Schmeling.

Max would be chaseing Gene all day, getting peaker with that jab.

[janitor]

I dont see Tunney loseing to Schmeling. Tunney was too fast and quick for Schmeling.

Max would be chaseing Gene all day, getting peaker with that jab.

Tunney would not be getting any younger by this point and his footwork would be the first thing to go.

Also if a fighter has a short title reign you never just know how he would fare at the longevity game. It dosnt work out for everybody.

[ChrisPontius]

I think he could've kept it for a few more years, but it would certainly be interesting to see how he'd fare against 200+lbs heavyweights, even if there were few around. A Loughran rematch, although probably not an exciting fight, should provide a good chess match. Plus i read their initial fight was rather close, with Tommy being inexperienced back then. I'd make him a formidable favorite over Sharkey, but Schmeling would probably beat him. Carnera is another tough fight, especially if Tunney starts to slow down from all his ring years. Schaaf, Walker and Levinsky should be win-able.

[red cobra]

I think Tunney was capable of defeating both Schmeling and Sharkey, and being somewhat bigger and a harder hitter than Tommy Loughran, would be too much for Carnera as well. Ditto Max Baer, who was outpointed by Loughran and Braddock, would of course be beaten even more definitively by Tunney. Then Braddock, who though spirited and determined, would be outboxed. Tunney would have beaten these men during his peak years, and it dosen't necessarily follow that he would be fighting them during the timeline of years that these guys contended for the championship. For instance, Tunney could have fought both Schmeling and Sharkey during the year of 1930, Carnera maybe in '31 and Baer in '32, etc. Anyway, Tunney was a superior boxer to any of these guys, and before he would have started slowing down, could have beaten any of the guys that came between his reign and that of Joe Louis. Tunney would have been long retired before Louis came along.

[SuzieQ49]

how come no mention of hall of famer George Godfrey? you know the top rated 6'3 225lb powerful fast superheavyweight who tunney dodged in his prime. heres the guy that would have taken the title from tunney. funny how pontius mentions carnera, who was nowhear near godfreys level a fighter, and it showed on film(despite godfrey not even trying his best still handled carnera).....



Tunney vs Godfrey 1928 or 1929 is the fight to see ladies and gents

[Mendoza]

I dont see Tunney loseing to Schmeling. Tunney was too fast and quick for Schmeling.

Max would be chaseing Gene all day, getting peaker with that jab.

Same here. Tunney would be champ until father time caught up to him.

[janitor]

Same here. Tunney would be champ until father time caught up to him.

If a champion has a short title reign then I am always reluctant to predict that he could have had a long title reign under diferent circumstances.

Longevity of title reing requires a verry diferent set of atributes to short term dominance and most great fighters dont have these atributes.

[McGrain]

Until Nov 7 1978 imo.

:rofl

[Maxmomer]

how come no mention of hall of famer George Godfrey? you know the top rated 6'3 225lb powerful fast superheavyweight who tunney dodged in his prime. heres the guy that would have taken the title from tunney. funny how pontius mentions carnera, who was nowhear near godfreys level a fighter, and it showed on film(despite godfrey not even trying his best still handled carnera).....



Tunney vs Godfrey 1928 or 1929 is the fight to see ladies and gents

Right when I read this I had another tab opened with a post responding to Pontius pointing that out. No need to submit it now, though.

[mcvey]

I think he could've kept it for a few more years, but it would certainly be interesting to see how he'd fare against 200+lbs heavyweights, even if there were few around. A Loughran rematch, although probably not an exciting fight, should provide a good chess match. Plus i read their initial fight was rather close, with Tommy being inexperienced back then. I'd make him a formidable favorite over Sharkey, but Schmeling would probably beat him. Carnera is another tough fight, especially if Tunney starts to slow down from all his ring years. Schaaf, Walker and Levinsky should be win-able.
I don't see Carnera as a tough fight Gains handled Primo easily ,and he was not as good as Tunney,Sharkey would be Gene's hardest fight imo.Tunney could outbox Schmeling and Godfrey ,imo ,but would have his hands full with Schaaf,Loughran I think would be a smaller version of Tunney without the power so I see Tunney winning again.An on form Sharkey give's Tunney his toughest fight.

[robert ungurean]

I think Tunney was capable of defeating both Schmeling and Sharkey, and being somewhat bigger and a harder hitter than Tommy Loughran, would be too much for Carnera as well. Ditto Max Baer, who was outpointed by Loughran and Braddock, would of course be beaten even more definitively by Tunney. Then Braddock, who though spirited and determined, would be outboxed. Tunney would have beaten these men during his peak years, and it dosen't necessarily follow that he would be fighting them during the timeline of years that these guys contended for the championship. For instance, Tunney could have fought both Schmeling and Sharkey during the year of 1930, Carnera maybe in '31 and Baer in '32, etc. Anyway, Tunney was a superior boxer to any of these guys, and before he would have started slowing down, could have beaten any of the guys that came between his reign and that of Joe Louis. Tunney would have been long retired before Louis came along.
Great post

[Russell]

Until Nov 7 1978 imo.

:lol::lol::lol:

[Dempsey1238]

:rofl

Seems you the only one that caught that. For people that miss it, that was Gene Tunney's death date.

[Dempsey1238]

If a champion has a short title reign then I am always reluctant to predict that he could have had a long title reign under diferent circumstances.

Longevity of title reing requires a verry diferent set of atributes to short term dominance and most great fighters dont have these atributes.

Well this is not like Liston loseing the title shortly after winning it from Patterson, or Baer losing to Braddock, or even L Spinks. Tunney was at the top of his game, and he RETIRE.
In truely fact, we never know how long he rein. He might have rein until 37 or so, or he could have lost it in his next defense, Boxing is strange that way.

I think Tunney would have rein though out the early part of the 30's pretty well, until he loses his speed. I think Tunney has the chin to pull a Ali on Baer and most of the early 30's guys. The only guy I DO see beating Tunney is a up and coming Joe Louis. So I belive he would have taking Louis in 35 or so(Shortly after Louis beat Baer) to pull in other big pay day before he retires.

[Seamus]

how come no mention of hall of famer George Godfrey? you know the top rated 6'3 225lb powerful fast superheavyweight who tunney dodged in his prime. heres the guy that would have taken the title from tunney. funny how pontius mentions carnera, who was nowhear near godfreys level a fighter, and it showed on film(despite godfrey not even trying his best still handled carnera).....



Tunney vs Godfrey 1928 or 1929 is the fight to see ladies and gents

Good point. However, Godfrey got beat by many a lesser fighter than Tunney. And Tunney fought some tough nuts.

[janitor]

Well this is not like Liston loseing the title shortly after winning it from Patterson, or Baer losing to Braddock, or even L Spinks. Tunney was at the top of his game, and he RETIRE.
In truely fact, we never know how long he rein. He might have rein until 37 or so, or he could have lost it in his next defense, Boxing is strange that way.

I think Tunney would have rein though out the early part of the 30's pretty well, until he loses his speed. I think Tunney has the chin to pull a Ali on Baer and most of the early 30's guys. The only guy I DO see beating Tunney is a up and coming Joe Louis. So I belive he would have taking Louis in 35 or so(Shortly after Louis beat Baer) to pull in other big pay day before he retires.

I am not quite sold.

Virtualy every champion has been focused and dedicated while challenging for the title but the hardest challenge is to remain focused and dedicated once they hold the title.

Verry few great fighters can.

That is why guys who were predicted to dominate for years like Baer, Liston and Tyson didnt. Louis and Holmes stretched their reigns out as long as they did as much because they were able to retain focus in training for multiple defences ans any ability in the ring.

So it is honestly imposible to say whether Tunney could have stayed on top of his game through the 30s. The fact that he chose to retire is a prety clear indication that he didnt want to. That is going to make it verry hard for him to dedicate himself if you efectivley force him to stay on as champion which is what you are doing in this hypothetical scenario.

[ChrisPontius]

how come no mention of hall of famer George Godfrey? you know the top rated 6'3 225lb powerful fast superheavyweight who tunney dodged in his prime. heres the guy that would have taken the title from tunney. funny how pontius mentions carnera, who was nowhear near godfreys level a fighter, and it showed on film(despite godfrey not even trying his best still handled carnera).....



Tunney vs Godfrey 1928 or 1929 is the fight to see ladies and gents

Because Carnera was reaching his prime in the years after Tunney's reign, when he may have been there for the taking. Godfrey also lost to some lesser fighters and to Carnera himself. Yes, i've seen the fight, it may have been dodgy, but it was a power punch to the nuts and for all we know, he was a Golota-like fighter with great ability but not the mental capability to cash in on that. And then there's the question as to whether Godfrey would've gotten a shot at Tunney in the first place. Based on his record, he hardly earned one.

[PowerPuncher]

Depends how well he'd do when he faced Sharkey, Gains and Godfrey and depends when he faces them if ever

[SuzieQ49]

but it was a power punch to the nuts and for all we know, he was a Golota-like fighter with great ability but not the mental capability to cash in on that. And then there's the question as to whether Godfrey would've gotten a shot at Tunney in the first place. Based on his record, he hardly earned one.

no not at all! while golota was a mental wreck who hit his opponents low on purpose, godfrey was FORCED to hit white fighters low so he could DQ himself, because he was on the cuffs! big difference.


Boxing Historian and author Kevin Smith believe godfrey with no cuffs allowed to try his best would have beaten tunney

[Dempsey1238]

I am not quite sold.

Virtualy every champion has been focused and dedicated while challenging for the title but the hardest challenge is to remain focused and dedicated once they hold the title.

Verry few great fighters can.

That is why guys who were predicted to dominate for years like Baer, Liston and Tyson didnt. Louis and Holmes stretched their reigns out as long as they did as much because they were able to retain focus in training for multiple defences ans any ability in the ring.

So it is honestly imposible to say whether Tunney could have stayed on top of his game through the 30s. The fact that he chose to retire is a prety clear indication that he didnt want to. That is going to make it verry hard for him to dedicate himself if you efectivley force him to stay on as champion which is what you are doing in this hypothetical scenario.

Perhaps, but I dont think Tunney is the guy to lose focus if he keep at it. He already had over 80 fights.
All he wanted was to make a million(Tunney II) ad married into wealth. And he did that. Once he did that, there relly was no need to go on.
Suppose Tunney did not married Polly, I think sooner or later he be force to go on.

[ChrisPontius]

no not at all! while golota was a mental wreck who hit his opponents low on purpose, godfrey was FORCED to hit white fighters low so he could DQ himself, because he was on the cuffs! big difference.



How can you be sure about that though?

[SuzieQ49]

How can you be sure about that though?


Ive talked to whats in my opinion very reliable sources and opinions of respected boxing historians kevin smith and chuck hasson and others that I like there versions over other people who simply claim "godfrey couldnt have been on the cuffs" without offering proof. theres more proof godfrey was ON the cuffs, than off them. I also read many contemporary fighter accounts and newspaper articles of during the era that backup my opinion that godfrey was extremley dangerous all time contender a big threat to tunney and dempsey off the cuffs, HENCE the reason he was voted in the hall of fame recently. Also despite your claims, if you take a close look at godfreys record, you will see he actually beat pretty decent competition(impressive considering he wasnt allowed to try his best for at least half his fights)

[ChrisPontius]

Well so far you've only offered opinions of people looking back at the time, and that's not proof. I'm not saying he wasn't, but i've never seen any convincing piece of evidence that he was. Just because Mr. Smith or Hasson says so doesn't make it so. To be honest, i'm not that impressed with most boxing historians anyway and by no means should their opinion be taken as fact or strong argument. I've seen historians claim that Monzon was not a top10 middleweight. That Fitzsimmons was a top5 heavyweight of all time. That Lennox Lewis does not make the top15. Etc, etc.

[flamengo]

wow, the equations are numerous and possibilities on par with the equations... From late `25- mid `28 Tunney had 3 fights.. Dempsey x2.. and Heeney.... Had remained more active in the ring defending the title, he was well within the realms of continuing his career, dispensing several more notables and gaining higher rewards..... "HAD HE REMAINED MORE ACTIVE..."

Its total speculation again, and the reasoning for the question at hand, but I wonder if Tunney would have dispensed of Sharkey, due to his inactivity, let alone the younger Schmeling of the time??? I respect all views, as I should do.... and I offer a further ???.. Has anyone compared the delivery of both Dempsey and Schmelings right hand punch??? Hardly the standard 'straight right" as the recommendations would suggest.... although, very similar in style..