The Most Complete Boxer Ever

[Rusty Tromboni]

It's funny, but he probably doesn't get a "10" in any category, but he's also probably a 9 in all of them. Is there really anyone else that scores out with all nines?

I think that puts it perfectly.

Pre-Pep, he and Leonard get my vote.

I do believe Leonard probably tied it together better, but he also had a longer prime to showcase his skills. I do believe he also pursued his competition more aggressively than Gene. Tunney never gave Loughran a rematch. And seemed happy not to fight anyone who wasn't standing directly in front of what he wanted. Leonard looked for trouble like Greb and Canzoneri.

Speaking of Canzoneri, he was very complete. But he was not exactly technically sound. I dunno if we can include him. He was the antithesis of Harold Johnson and Finito Lopez. He looks all wrong, but his results are a sight to behold.

[Rusty Tromboni]

Marvin Hagler deserves a mention. He could even fight in both stances effectively.

I'm glad you mentioned him.

I hesitate to mention him:
1) he wasn't the best
2) he had a habit of pursuing poor strategies.
3) he could be out-boxed.

But he definitely was a very complete and versatile fighter.

[Rusty Tromboni]

Yes, a hell of a career. He did a great job of dodging black fighters--hell of a career. Only problem is, he missed most of the great fighters of his era. What a career!

So not rematching Loughran doesn't bother you, but not fighting some bru'vas does!?!?!?!?

[Rusty Tromboni]

I hear ya, but in the Maxim fight what was the temperature that night. Where the ref had to be replaced because of the heat. And that's just the referee walking around, keeping it clean. Could you imagine having to fight in those temperatures? Those were the temperatures that James had to have it up in Galaxy. Extreme heat!

That fight? ……..Rockin'

Cooney would've been the greatest Heavyweight ever if he didn't fight Holmes in the desert.


See how that works?


Go watch the fight. Then watch his fight with Basilio and the first fight with Turpin.

[Rusty Tromboni]

Emile Griffith definitely is top tier.

Midget Wolgast gets a nod.

I like suggestions for guys like Marquez, Harold Johnson and Lopez, but is technically-sound the same as complete?

Like I consider Holmes, Tunney and maybe even Vitali more complete Heavyweights than Johnson and Holyfield, but they're definitely not more technically sound.

[Rusty Tromboni]

Yup and it isn't even close.

Not even close!?

What about Holmes? Holyfield? Byrd? Wlad? Fury?

Tunney reminds me of a combination of Ali, Foreman and Terrell.

Unlike Marquez and Harold Johnson, he's not technically perfect, but he could definitely do it all.

[HOUDINI563]

One of Tunney’s trainers lived into the 60’s his comment concerning Tunneys punching power:

“It not understood today but Tunneys right hand was as feared as Listons”

His opinion that the Tunney who beat Dempsey in 26 was so finely honed that he would have beaten all other heavyweight champions.

Back in 26 Tunney trained near Harvey’s Lake Pa. My Dad was 14 years old at that time and remembered Tunney running around the lake alternating running forwards and backwards for long spurts.

[billeau2]

Not even close!?

What about Holmes? Holyfield? Byrd? Wlad? Fury?

Tunney reminds me of a combination of Ali, Foreman and Terrell.

Unlike Marquez and Harold Johnson, he's not technically perfect, but he could definitely do it all.

Vlad could do it all? Foreman?! really? Vlad who cringes and lunges in to hold? Same fighter?Tunney was technically expert in two styles of boxing. I don't think many, if any, other fighter was in that position. he was thoroughly versed in Corbet's bare knuckle paradigm, and familiar with dempsey and the punching machines that preceded louis.

[billeau2]

Emile Griffith definitely is top tier.

Midget Wolgast gets a nod.

I like suggestions for guys like Marquez, Harold Johnson and Lopez, but is technically-sound the same as complete?

Like I consider Holmes, Tunney and maybe even Vitali more complete Heavyweights than Johnson and Holyfield, but they're definitely not more technically sound.

What distinction are you making? Yes technically sound is the same as complete. You cannot be complete without being technically sound and vice versa. When one is comprehensively technically sound they are complete. Are you taking Queenie's moron pills again?

[Rusty Tromboni]

What distinction are you making? Yes technically sound is the same as complete. You cannot be complete without being technically sound and vice versa. When one is comprehensively technically sound they are complete. Are you taking Queenie's moron pills again?

It's cute watching you try to be relevant.

Who was more complete at Junior Lightweight, Mayweather or Marquez?