How do people have the nerve to say Harry Greb would be competitive in any era?

And im give a **** how much he win,he box like **** and thats it

 

<<<<<<<<<<<<<< General Forum is over that way....left !

 

its about skill
when it comes to the record,nobody can beat rocky marciano and sven otke....

 

Ahh, you are being sarcastic.....okay then....

 

This.

But research takes actual WORK. That's too much to ask when we live in an uninformed, sound bite culture. The type of lazy posters that sit around and regurgitate bumper sticker philosophy are unlikely to do any research beyond Boxrec and Youtube.

 

Not making any comments about Greb, but Floyd Mayweather would be competitive in any era.

 

so you can rank a boxer witout see one fight off him ?
ok,how do you rank Elmer Ray ?
http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45651
good luck

 

We have film of some of the 17 hall of famers he beat and they look from very good to brilliant on film. There is no way he beat these guys multiple times with caveman skills or merely adequate talent.

 

Danny Williams would easily knock out Willard and Dempsey, far better technical boxing skill, far more power, better jab, better defence.

This just shows how little you know about boxing, Williams beat Audley when past it, he was past his best against Tyson but at least motivated and mentally right.

Danny Williams win over Tyson is arguably better than Willard's win over Johnson too.

 

Gatekeeper in the early 90s not that he couldn't grab an ABC belt off a weaker titlist. A contender and not a real champion today, a gatekeeper to the top5 in reality today.

Ironically I think he's lucky he didn't get the Calzaghe fight he was calling for, for so long. Joe did him a favour by ducking him

 

In a one time deal perhaps, but with his hand problems, the schedule of the day I think it would break a fighter who needs his comforts like Floyd.

It's not just skillset that make a fighter, and Floyd goes hand in hand with this era as well.

Either that or takes to it like a duck to water, and has 20+ losses and is ranked alongside fellow fistually troubled boxers of the time like Loughran and Slapsie Maxie.

Floyd out of this era would be nowhere near as highly regarded IMO. People know he's picked and chosen, know his workrate is poor (punchwise and in terms of schedule) and yet somehow say 'he's one of the best of all time'.

Meh. George Benton deserves as much credit for skill IMO, and in terms of resume there are hundreds of stronger.

Sorry, I just do not get the hype with Floyd when comparing him to other greats. The feinting masters of the past would totally **** him over IMO. I don't even think he'd be particularly lauded for his defence.

Just another quality operator.

 

Yea I **** on him too much, strong, very fit, good jab, long arms, good dig