Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-07-2008, 07:07 PM   #46
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,262
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
Your talking about light heavyweights slowing down a guy (who beat them anyway) with body punches. How does that equate to Robinson who couldnt even defeat a very featherfisted light heavyweight in Maxim. One argument does not prove the other. Its a silly analogy.
There are two things relevant to this thread that I don't believe:

1. that Greb was unstoppable.
2. that Klompton understands the rudiments of effective argument.

This paragraph is poor. First of all, I stated an opinion based on evidence that working Greb's body can be effective. Benny Leonard saw it and stated it. Tunney performed better against Greb when he went downstairs more. Loughren got a win with the help of the same tactic. That's good enough for me.

Then you have a problem with my "equating" that with Robinson. Robinson was a murderous body puncher and went downstairs very well. If you think that such things wouldn't be a factor then you are engaging in blind hero-worship and should go take a nap.

Dismissing Robinson as one "who couldn't even defeat a very featherfisted LHW in Maxim" screams a lack of knowledge about the fight and about Maxim.

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
As for the Gibbons and O'Dowd: Gibbons beat Greb once, yes in early 1917 when Greb was still developing and Gibbons was in his prime.
Greb was still developing in his 80th professional fight? I'd bet that you can explain away every one of Greb's losses (---with increasing drama and flimsiness).

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
I thought we were arguing prime vs prime here?
What? You are new out here so I will try to patient with you. When analyzing what would happen, you look at strengths, weaknesses, and styles among other factors. You don't look at it narrowly... like "Greb beat Tunney handily the first time out, therefore he would beat the Ray Robinson who beat LaMotta". That is overly-simplified enough to be worthless. It is also an invalid "if/than" argument.

Looking at what worked or seemed to work against Greb is what you want to do and then consider the opponents tendencies in the ring and effectiveness with those hints.

Arguments like these are not "silly"... you may disagree, but to dismiss them outright with a bad retort like this tells me that you are starting from an assumption.

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
The newspaper accounts of Greb-O'Dowd are split straight down the middle. Three for Greb and three for O'Dowd. Those are O'Dowds hometown papers and the fight was on O'Dowds home turf. Greb was so anxious to make weight and win the title that he melted down to 155 pounds in a turkish bath the night before the fight and still fought even with O'Dowd. Again, this was prior to Greb's prime. A rematch never happened because right after the fight O'Dowd went into the military and didnt get out until the middle of 1919. Greb also entered the military. The war got in the way. After the war Greb pursued a match with O'Dowd but O'Dowd always wanted to too much money, pricing himself out of the fight to protect his title. In the summer of 1920 Pittsburgh promoters offered O'Dowd a match with Greb for the title and gave him the largest gaurentee ever granted a fighter in the history of that city to that point. The match was made but O'Dowd went to Boston and lost a tuneup and the title to Johnny Wilson. After that Greb had no interest in fighting O'Dowd as he was after the title. Wilson, who was a terrific body puncher, much better at body punching than Loughran who you use as an example never slowed Greb down and that was after Greb was beginning to fade a bit and blind in one eye. Wilson ducked Greb for several years to stave off the inevitable beating he recieved.
Thank you for filling in the blanks. So for the record, Greb went 0-1 against O'Dowd with mitigaing factors preventing his avenging the loss.

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
You totally misunderstand Greb and his style.
I don't think so. You totally misunderstand the importance of keeping an open mind and avoiding beginning an analysis on a preceding assumption. In fact, I think it is becoming very clear that your assumption is the following: Greb was God and therefore omnipotent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
It was intensity to be sure but the guy was blazing fast and account of his fights are numerous where opponents failed to land more than a handful of blows over the course of 10 or 15 rounds. He wasnt giving anyone openings, they called him a whirling dirvish because he was leaping in and out flailing about scoring and then bouncing out of danger before an opponent could get shots off. Not because he just stood in front of a guy and took unnecessary punishment. Nobody has 300 fights as successfully as Greb did against that kind of competition and those big guys by getting hit all the time. Thats just silly.
Hero-worship.
And distortions. Who the hell said "he just stood and took unnecessary punishment"? Who the hell said that "he gets hit all the time"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
To that point I totally disagree that Robinson was faster than Greb. Its debateable but not a definate.
Do tell... if it is "debatable and not a definite" that Robinson was faster than Greb then why do you "totally disagree that Robinson was faster than Greb"?

Do tell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
and to say Greb never faced any guys who were fast is just silly. Loughran, Tunney, Flowers, Mike Gibbons, Jeff Smith, Maxie Rosenbloom, Augie Ratner, Jimmy Slattery, Chuck Wiggins, Charlie Weinert, Battling Levinsky, Leo Houck, Billy Miske, and Soldier Bartfield where all legendary fast men, many champions, and you can look up their comparitive records with Greb and find out who came out on top in the vast majority of those bouts.
Hero worship.

And still more distortions. Who the hell said that "Greb never faced any guys who were fast"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
You say Robinson became the king of rematches.
No, I didn't. It was said by someone else, and I qualified it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
Look at Greb's resume over 300 fights and tell me how many of those were rematches and how many he lost? Tell you what, lets be fair about and take Greb's first 200 bouts so the wear and tear is comparable. The bottom line is Greb was a big middleweight who was fast, strong, and had stamina to fight the twentieth round as fast as the first in era before air conditioned arenas against welterweights, middleweights, light heavies, and even the cream of the heavyweight crop. Ray Robinson, for all of his greatness couldnt beat a relatively poor light heavyweight in Joey Maxim in ROBINSONS PRIME. You can spin it anyway you like but Robinson would not bring anything to the table that Greb hadnt seen before and defeated so why should we think he would defeat Greb. Greb had fought bigger taller harder hitting men and won. He fought smaller men just as fast and won. He had faced boxers as skilled, opponents as determined, brawlers as durable. He could box a guy silly from the outside or stay as close as the sweat on a guys body. He was tough and durable and knew how to get dirty if you wanted to take the fight there. Greb just had too much for Robinson.
Hero-worship.
And there are more fallacious arguments here than I can keep track of. Your argument against Robinson is just plain silly. Here it is, boiled down to its inherent nonsense:

"Robinson couldn't beat Maxim, and Greb was beating bigger guys all the time, therefore Robinson couldn't beat Greb."

Tell me, did I spin that?

To say that Maxim was a poor LHW is off the wall. And by the way, Robinson wasn't 'in his prime' against Maxim.

To say that Robinson would give Greb nothing he didn't see before is outlandish. Robinson was the most complete fighter ever seen on film according to the overwhelming majority of fighters, trainers, analysts, and historians in the sport. You have a very romantic view of Greb taking on 'Robinson equivalents' throughout his career. And you are not just wrong, you are incredibly wrong.

You not only overstate your case against the consensus choice of the greatest boxer who ever lived --you do so with scant film of Greb or his conquests.
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 02-07-2008, 07:11 PM   #47
dpw417
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,344
vCash: 215
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
Your talking about light heavyweights slowing down a guy (who beat them anyway) with body punches. How does that equate to Robinson who couldnt even defeat a very featherfisted light heavyweight in Maxim. One argument does not prove the other. Its a silly analogy.

As for the Gibbons and O'Dowd: Gibbons beat Greb once, yes in early 1917 when Greb was still developing and Gibbons was in his prime. I thought we were arguing prime vs prime here? The newspaper accounts of Greb-O'Dowd are split straight down the middle. Three for Greb and three for O'Dowd. Those are O'Dowds hometown papers and the fight was on O'Dowds home turf. Greb was so anxious to make weight and win the title that he melted down to 155 pounds in a turkish bath the night before the fight and still fought even with O'Dowd. Again, this was prior to Greb's prime. A rematch never happened because right after the fight O'Dowd went into the military and didnt get out until the middle of 1919. Greb also entered the military. The war got in the way. After the war Greb pursued a match with O'Dowd but O'Dowd always wanted to too much money, pricing himself out of the fight to protect his title. In the summer of 1920 Pittsburgh promoters offered O'Dowd a match with Greb for the title and gave him the largest gaurentee ever granted a fighter in the history of that city to that point. The match was made but O'Dowd went to Boston and lost a tuneup and the title to Johnny Wilson. After that Greb had no interest in fighting O'Dowd as he was after the title. Wilson, who was a terrific body puncher, much better at body punching than Loughran who you use as an example never slowed Greb down and that was after Greb was beginning to fade a bit and blind in one eye. Wilson ducked Greb for several years to stave off the inevitable beating he recieved.

You totally misunderstand Greb and his style. It was intensity to be sure but the guy was blazing fast and account of his fights are numerous where opponents failed to land more than a handful of blows over the course of 10 or 15 rounds. He wasnt giving anyone openings, they called him a whirling dirvish because he was leaping in and out flailing about scoring and then bouncing out of danger before an opponent could get shots off. Not because he just stood in front of a guy and took unnecessary punishment. Nobody has 300 fights as successfully as Greb did against that kind of competition and those big guys by getting hit all the time. Thats just silly. To that point I totally disagree that Robinson was faster than Greb. Its debateable but not a definate. and to say Greb never faced any guys who were fast is just silly. Loughran, Tunney, Flowers, Mike Gibbons, Jeff Smith, Maxie Rosenbloom, Augie Ratner, Jimmy Slattery, Chuck Wiggins, Charlie Weinert, Battling Levinsky, Leo Houck, Billy Miske, and Soldier Bartfield where all legendary fast men, many champions, and you can look up their comparitive records with Greb and find out who came out on top in the vast majority of those bouts.

You say Robinson became the king of rematches. Look at Greb's resume over 300 fights and tell me how many of those were rematches and how many he lost? Tell you what, lets be fair about and take Greb's first 200 bouts so the wear and tear is comparable. The bottom line is Greb was a big middleweight who was fast, strong, and had stamina to fight the twentieth round as fast as the first in era before air conditioned arenas against welterweights, middleweights, light heavies, and even the cream of the heavyweight crop. Ray Robinson, for all of his greatness couldnt beat a relatively poor light heavyweight in Joey Maxim in ROBINSONS PRIME. You can spin it anyway you like but Robinson would not bring anything to the table that Greb hadnt seen before and defeated so why should we think he would defeat Greb. Greb had fought bigger taller harder hitting men and won. He fought smaller men just as fast and won. He had faced boxers as skilled, opponents as determined, brawlers as durable. He could box a guy silly from the outside or stay as close as the sweat on a guys body. He was tough and durable and knew how to get dirty if you wanted to take the fight there. Greb just had too much for Robinson.
Do you not consider that Robinson was rated very high as a puncher at 160? Please look at any historian's viewpoint on Robinson's offensive abilities! As far as Robinson's speed is concerned how many other historians would agree with your assessment that Loughran,Tunney,Gibbons, Smith, rosenbloom,Ratner, Weinert, Levinsky, Houck, Miske, and Bartfield...Compare to Ray Robinson in terms of handspeed(?)
In my post I refered as well to Greb being in hard fights with Norfolk and Walker..."give and take"... I wasn't trying to disparage Greb in any way...but the point I was attempting to make was by judging the fighters I'd seen on video...If they were able to hit Greb....Robinson would as well...With 300 or so fights, Greb's record speaks for itself in his ability to fight the best and last as long as he did...
I take exception with your statement that Maxim was a 'relatively poor' light heavyweight...I cannot fathom how a person who studies boxing history can make an assessment like that considering Maxim fought among others; Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Jersey Joe Walcott, Jimmy Bivins,Willie Pastrano, Floyd Patterson, Lloyd Marshall, Gus Lesnevich, Freddie Mills, Eddie Machen, Curtis Sheppard, Nate Bolden....Wow! Shame on you! For that statement...Rationality left the building on that one...
Greb's record speaks for itself...but your arguements appear extremely bias in regards to the points you attempted to make...You are the one 'spinning' here.

Last edited by counter punc; 02-02-2007 at 09:04 PM.
dpw417 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2008, 07:32 PM   #48
klompton
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,834
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

Your right. Greb would have been destroyed in one round by a beefed up welterweight despite his record of fighting the greatest fighters from welterweight to heavyweight across two or three generations while rarely losing a round much less a decision...

"I take exception with your statement that Maxim was a 'relatively poor' light heavyweight...I cannot fathom how a person who studies boxing history can make an assessment like that considering Maxim fought among others; Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Jersey Joe Walcott, Jimmy Bivins,Willie Pastrano, Floyd Patterson, Lloyd Marshall, Gus Lesnevich, Freddie Mills, Eddie Machen, Curtis Sheppard, Nate Bolden...."

He was a poor champion, a weak champion, and of the thirteen fighters you listed that he fought he lost all of his fights to Charles, Moore, Pastrano, and Machen, two of three to Walcott, 1 of two to Bivins, his lone fight to Marshall and one of three to Sheppard (who wasnt exactly a great fighter anyway). Its my opinion that Patterson was robbed against Maxim but if you are impressed in a 100+ fight veteran former champ winning a close decision over a 13 fight prospect that says more about what impresses you than Maxim's relative ability. As for Mills and Lesnevich it was their last and second to last fights respectively and both fighters were ringworn and over the hill. I know a lot more about Maxim than you give me credit for and Im not impressed by him.

Oh and by the way Stone, as far as me being "new here" is concerned. I was writing articles for this website back in 2000 when it was still in its infancy and quit because back then it was a eurocentric pro-klitchko propaganda site. I wrote an article detailing Klitchkos loss to Ross Purity because at the time most people in the United States hadnt seen that fight. The editor at the time didnt want to publish it because he took offense to an article showing a european fighter in a bad light and I refused to write for them anymore. Furthermore, look at my join date and look at yours. Just because I dont post often doesnt mean Im new here. Another example of you writing before checking your facts...

Last edited by klompton; 02-07-2008 at 07:48 PM.
klompton is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2008, 07:35 PM   #49
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,262
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
Its not hearsay if an eye witness records his impression of the fight.
It sure is ...because you are telling us about news accounts that were written by someone else. And since it is painfully clear that you began from a parti pris, you are anything but a reliable source to begin with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
Its a fact that ONE cleveland newspaper had Greb's fourth bout with Tunney a draw. Its a fact that there three newspapers in Cleveland in 1924 and that two had Greb winning and one had it a draw. If we use the papers as judges (which is exactly what gamblers did and why they were called newspaper decisions) Greb would have been given a majority decision. Sounds like you are picking and choosing the information that best suits your argument, not all of the information available. Or maybe you dont have all the information available in which case you should recuse yourself from this discussion.
Referee stated he would have ruled a draw;
Lima News (AP) called it a draw, but reported that many ringsiders, including those from Pittsburgh thought Tunney had the edge;
Lincoln State Journal stated majority of ringside reporters had it a draw;
Zanesville Signal (INS wire) gave edge to Greb 5-4-1; Oakland Tribune said majority thought it a draw, although Tunney "possibly entitled to the shade";
Wisconsin Rapids Daily Tribune (United News wire) said newspapermen gave Greb "all but the tenth round"


--that's right off of boxrec, Klompton. Or did they "pay off the ref"? Your credibility is sinking like lead, so please consider recusing yourself.

I think I'll leave the rest of this post to simmer in its own poorly prepared stew.
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2008, 07:41 PM   #50
Bummy Davis
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 9,276
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

I think these guys could split a few if they fought 5 times but I rate a prime Greb above Robinson in a close close 1
Bummy Davis is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2008, 07:54 PM   #51
klompton
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,834
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonehands89
It sure is ...because you are telling us about news accounts that were written by someone else. And since it is painfully clear that you began from a parti pris, you are anything but a reliable source to begin with.



Referee stated he would have ruled a draw;
Lima News (AP) called it a draw, but reported that many ringsiders, including those from Pittsburgh thought Tunney had the edge;
Lincoln State Journal stated majority of ringside reporters had it a draw;
Zanesville Signal (INS wire) gave edge to Greb 5-4-1; Oakland Tribune said majority thought it a draw, although Tunney "possibly entitled to the shade";
Wisconsin Rapids Daily Tribune (United News wire) said newspapermen gave Greb "all but the tenth round"


--that's right off of boxrec, Klompton. Or did they "pay off the ref"? Your credibility is sinking like lead, so please consider recusing yourself.

I think I'll leave the rest of this post to simmer in its own poorly prepared stew.
None of the reports you list from Boxrec are from a ringside source. Period! Now who is quoting heresay. Wire reports, as all of those are and clearly state (INS wire, AP wire, United News wire) were notoriously faulty in those days and more often than not originated from one of the managers of the participating fighters. Or did you not know that? thats the problem with Boxrec, anyon can buy a subscription to newspaper.com or ancestry.com and read wire reports all day long. It takes a little effort to actually track down papers originating from named ringside reporters in the town where the fight took place. Maybe you should get out of your armchair, try to do some detective work, and actually post the three ringside accounts from Cleveland. You wont because that takes work and would sink your little theory that the Cleveland fight was a draw. Its easier for you to quote people as lazy as you and not upset the apple cart by stating something that might go against accepted boxing folklore.
klompton is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2008, 07:57 PM   #52
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,262
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
None of the reports you list from Boxrec are from a ringside source. Period! Now who is quoting heresay. Wire reports, as all of those are and clearly state (INS wire, AP wire, United News wire) were notoriously faulty in those days and more often than not originated from one of the managers of the participating fighters. Or did you not know that? thats the problem with Boxrec, anyon can buy a subscription to newspaper.com or ancestry.com and read wire reports all day long. It takes a little effort to actually track down papers originating from named ringside reporters in the town where the fight took place. Maybe you should get out of your armchair, try to do some detective work, and actually post the three ringside accounts from Cleveland. You wont because that takes work and would sink your little theory that the Cleveland fight was a draw. Its easier for you to quote people as lazy as you and not upset the apple cart by stating something that might go against accepted boxing folklore.
... I forgot, if Klompton doesn't report it, it ain't true.

Your bias has crucified your credibility.
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2008, 08:02 PM   #53
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,262
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
Your right. Greb would have been destroyed in one round by a beefed up welterweight despite his record of fighting the greatest fighters from welterweight to heavyweight across two or three generations while rarely losing a round much less a decision...
Tell me, do you use emoticons in your upcoming book?

...and you continue to distort the record. Where did I say that Greb would have been destroyed in one round? I clearly stated that I'd favor Robinson -slightly.

Please inform me when/if your book is published, so I can be sure not to buy it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
Oh and by the way Stone, as far as me being "new here" is concerned. I was writing articles for this website back in 2000 when it was still in its infancy and quit because back then it was a eurocentric pro-klitchko propaganda site. I wrote an article detailing Klitchkos loss to Ross Purity because at the time most people in the United States hadnt seen that fight. The editor at the time didnt want to publish it because he took offense to an article showing a european fighter in a bad light and I refused to write for them anymore. Furthermore, look at my join date and look at yours. Just because I dont post often doesnt mean Im new here. Another example of you writing before checking your facts...
Thank you for the correction. If you remember, my statement about your being new was followed by an expressed willingness to be patient with the myriad deficiencies in your argument. Now I won't be.

I also see that you are hypocrite. Accusing this site of eurocentrism and propaganda is raising many eyebrows right now from many who read your literary fellation of Harry Greb.

Feel free to send me copies of the article you wrote on Klitschko. I'd be happy to publically shred that too.

(...It may have helped your credibility if you knew how to spell Klitschko's name. Now run along before you get klompt* again.)



* klompt: (v) to expose the flimsy arguments of biased, hero-worshipping hypocrites who should be chased out of ESB for purposes of quality control.
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2008, 08:25 PM   #54
dpw417
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,344
vCash: 215
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

Quote:
Originally Posted by klompton
Your right. Greb would have been destroyed in one round by a beefed up welterweight despite his record of fighting the greatest fighters from welterweight to heavyweight across two or three generations while rarely losing a round much less a decision...

"I take exception with your statement that Maxim was a 'relatively poor' light heavyweight...I cannot fathom how a person who studies boxing history can make an assessment like that considering Maxim fought among others; Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Jersey Joe Walcott, Jimmy Bivins,Willie Pastrano, Floyd Patterson, Lloyd Marshall, Gus Lesnevich, Freddie Mills, Eddie Machen, Curtis Sheppard, Nate Bolden...."

He was a poor champion, a weak champion, and of the thirteen fighters you listed that he fought he lost all of his fights to Charles, Moore, Pastrano, and Machen, two of three to Walcott, 1 of two to Bivins, his lone fight to Marshall and one of three to Sheppard (who wasnt exactly a great fighter anyway). Its my opinion that Patterson was robbed against Maxim but if you are impressed in a 100+ fight veteran former champ winning a close decision over a 13 fight prospect that says more about what impresses you than Maxim's relative ability. As for Mills and Lesnevich it was their last and second to last fights respectively and both fighters were ringworn and over the hill. I know a lot more about Maxim than you give me credit for and Im not impressed by him.
Oh and by the way Stone, as far as me being "new here" is concerned. I was writing articles for this website back in 2000 when it was still in its infancy and quit because back then it was a eurocentric pro-klitchko propaganda site. I wrote an article detailing Klitchkos loss to Ross Purity because at the time most people in the United States hadnt seen that fight. The editor at the time didnt want to publish it because he took offense to an article showing a european fighter in a bad light and I refused to write for them anymore. Furthermore, look at my join date and look at yours. Just because I dont post often doesnt mean Im new here. Another example of you writing before checking your facts...
My goodness...I've never seen a HOF fighter being rated as 'poor' before...Your viewpoints are very skewed towards your bias...Your retorts lack any substance other than nostalgic hyperbole...and your degradation of a HOF caliber fighter totally lacks merit...and further consideration.
For the record. I only slightly lean towards the best Robinson at middleweight to edge Greb by decision. Very close between the two ATG's.
dpw417 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2008, 08:39 PM   #55
werety
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 408
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

Although I may favor Robinson in the rematch, I think the initial fight would most likely lead to a Greb win with his previously stated "shock and awe" strategy. Stonehands you effectively do point out the factors necessary to deal with Greb, straight right hands, and a body attack. Due to Robinson's abilities all around he would of course have great skill in both, but judging by the way Robinson fought I don't know if he could initially identify these as the key factors to slowing Greb down. In a rematch Robinson may very well beat Greb but in the initial fight I see him dealing with Greb as he did with most come forward pressure fighters. Moving, sticking out his great jab, timing those incredible combinations at mid range, and throwing those LONG right hooks to the body. The problem is that this is a horrible way to fight Greb. Greb was affected most by short hooking shots to the chest and straight right hands as he entered range. Robinson would most likely be trying to keep him off with his jab and movement or trying to time those short mid-range punches as Greb came in. I see this giving Greb the advantage as none of these techniques specifically gave him trouble. I say he gets inside and overwhelms Robinson with his speed and strength. In a rematch however, I can see Robinson changing his style to maybe adapt and beat Greb. Essentially, I believe Robinson does have the tools to MAYBE beat Greb, again Robinson is fighting Greb at middle weight not light heavy, but on the initial match I'm not quite sure he would use them correctly.
werety is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2008, 12:54 AM   #56
Senya13
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Russia
Posts: 3,736
vCash: 1210
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonehands89
Robinson was the most complete fighter ever seen on film according to the overwhelming majority of fighters, trainers, analysts, and historians in the sport.
It was being repeated that Robinson was rather poor at in-fighting, throughout his career. In-fighting is a huge part of the game, to be poor at it means being very far from complete. Robinson was great at offense and at long-range fighting, only at that he was one of the most complete fighters in history.
Every time Robinson fought LaMotta, he was going to the head most of the time, he wasn't going to the body, because with his lack of head movement and rolling with punches and blocking skills, he didn't want to give LaMotta a chance, with those wild swings. Whenever Robinson was able to stun LaMotta (he did several times almost every time they fought), it was by punches to the head. At close range Robinson also didn't go to the body too often with LaMotta, preferring to clinch or just cover up.
In all, citing that unnamed "overwhelming majority" sounds very poor, especially with the "on film" remark (considering his major bouts at welter weren't preserved on film).
Senya13 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2008, 07:02 AM   #57
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,262
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Senya13
It was being repeated that Robinson was rather poor at in-fighting, throughout his career. In-fighting is a huge part of the game, to be poor at it means being very far from complete. Robinson was great at offense and at long-range fighting, only at that he was one of the most complete fighters in history.
Every time Robinson fought LaMotta, he was going to the head most of the time, he wasn't going to the body, because with his lack of head movement and rolling with punches and blocking skills, he didn't want to give LaMotta a chance, with those wild swings. Whenever Robinson was able to stun LaMotta (he did several times almost every time they fought), it was by punches to the head. At close range Robinson also didn't go to the body too often with LaMotta, preferring to clinch or just cover up.
In all, citing that unnamed "overwhelming majority" sounds very poor, especially with the "on film" remark (considering his major bouts at welter weren't preserved on film).
Let's sum this up:

"Robinson was rather poor at infighting."

"Robinson did not go to the body very well because he concentrated on LaMotta's head during their sixth bout."

"Robinson was not really one of the most complete fighters in history."

"Robinson cannot be rightfully considered the consensus pick as the greatest fighter who ever lived."

...
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2008, 07:04 AM   #58
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,262
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

Quote:
Originally Posted by werety
Although I may favor Robinson in the rematch, I think the initial fight would most likely lead to a Greb win with his previously stated "shock and awe" strategy. Stonehands you effectively do point out the factors necessary to deal with Greb, straight right hands, and a body attack. Due to Robinson's abilities all around he would of course have great skill in both, but judging by the way Robinson fought I don't know if he could initially identify these as the key factors to slowing Greb down. In a rematch Robinson may very well beat Greb but in the initial fight I see him dealing with Greb as he did with most come forward pressure fighters. Moving, sticking out his great jab, timing those incredible combinations at mid range, and throwing those LONG right hooks to the body. The problem is that this is a horrible way to fight Greb. Greb was affected most by short hooking shots to the chest and straight right hands as he entered range. Robinson would most likely be trying to keep him off with his jab and movement or trying to time those short mid-range punches as Greb came in. I see this giving Greb the advantage as none of these techniques specifically gave him trouble. I say he gets inside and overwhelms Robinson with his speed and strength. In a rematch however, I can see Robinson changing his style to maybe adapt and beat Greb. Essentially, I believe Robinson does have the tools to MAYBE beat Greb, again Robinson is fighting Greb at middle weight not light heavy, but on the initial match I'm not quite sure he would use them correctly.
I see Robinson as more adaptable in there than you, but your analysis is fair. Good stuff.
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2008, 07:11 AM   #59
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,262
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

BORKED
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2008, 07:31 AM   #60
Senya13
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Russia
Posts: 3,736
vCash: 1210
Default Re: Harry Greb vs. Ray Robinson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonehands89
"Robinson was not really one of the most complete fighters in history."

"Robinson cannot be rightfully considered the consensus pick as the greatest fighter who ever lived."
Muhammad Ali was very far from being complete boxer, that doesn't prevent him from being a consensus Top 3 heavyweight of all time.
Senya13 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013