Nice fight man!
But I HAVE to take Walcott. The man is VERY underrated as a fighter, he was a tactical genius. A defensive master, he had very slick footwork (primitive Ali-like footwork). Both Walcott and Tunney were defensive masters, but the difference is Walcott did everything better. He's very underrated and mostly remembered for losing to Marciano, yes Marciano landed his punch. But imagine if the fight was 12 rounds? How would things be different? I just can't believe how all of these answers have written Walcott off.
Walcott was a counter-puncher. But he was a fast Counter-Puncher, remember the Walcott shuffle? Hardly as good as Ali's, but compared to Tunney, it's very advanced. Walcott was 6''0, had a 74 inch reach and weighed 196lbs. But he was such a smart fighter, the man was perfect with his feints. He feinted, had a sharp jab, quick reflexes, perfect timing and QUICK hands. He threw fast combinations, had a sharp jab, good feints and he made people make mistakes. Compare him to Bernard Hopkins, he was a late bloomer. But just look at the way he out-boxed Louis the first time, it was a completely robbery. And by their second bout, Walcott had lost a lot of heart. So many fighters took from Walcott, Sugar Ray Leonard and Muhammad Ali (who was friends with Walcott) borrowed from him. He'd probably do very well today.
If I had to compare him to someone, I'd say he was very much like the Buster Douglas that beat Mike Tyson.
Tunney, he was a great fighter. And he was capable of beating a prime Jack Dempsey, he had sharp combinations but he was like Ali in the footwork department, for his time he could move around the ring. But he was not as fast as Walcott, however, he didn't always move like Ali. He would at TIMES, but not like Ali, he was very easy to lure into slug-fests (but Dempsey couldn't lure him) and he liked to box from the outside. Not much bigger than Walcott really, but Walcott did EVERYTHING better! He had the better jab, better timing, moved around alot more and had much better timing.
Gene Tunney is fighting a more advanced version of himself.
Walcott UD12.
Tunney was the better fighter with the better skills set and fighting technique than Jersey Joe despite emerging in the earlier era. I think Tunney beats Walcott easily on points.
Tunney was too slick for Walcott and wins a decision.
This would not be a close fight. If Tunney could out point Dempsey twice he would certainly beat Jersey Joe.
Gene Tunney is a better boxer overall. He should win this one by unanimous decision. Jersey Joe Walcott is a better puncher than most people give him credit for, remember he put Ezzard Charles to sleep in their third fight. I wouldn't be too surprise if Gene has to get up from a knock down to win this one.
15 rounds
