Greatest Middleweight once and for all- Greb? Monzon? Hagler?

K,for the life of me I don't understand your reasoning...I don't even understand your logic...If Harry Greb,at his phenominal peak fought
whatever MW you can name H2H , Greb would be a big favorite BECAUSE
of his record fighting and whipping great MWs of his time, AND taking on and beating a Tunney, Tommy Gibbons, Loughran, Jack Dillon,Rosenbloom,
Miske, Kid Norfolk, Brennan,Willie Meehan ,Gunboat Smith,all much heavier than Greb was repeatedly over his career in 300 bouts...Don't you realize
the unique skills Greb brought to the ring to accomplish this feat ? Do you think a Monzon or Hagler would have the cujons or skills to fight the LHs
and heavyies of their times ? Of course NOT as their record proves my point. So if a Greb could beat the best MWs of his time and top LHs as Tunney, Gibbons, Loughran, Dillon, Norfolk etc,whilst truly a 5ft8" MW,
who when NECESSARY, made 158 pounds and kicked the tar out of Mickey Walker shortly before Harry retired, old, shopworn and HALF BLIND, Greb
on this fantastic record, has to be #1 as best MW in modern times...
You couldn't knock him out, and you couldn't land half as much punches in 15 rounds, so K, howya gonna beat him ? cheers...

 

I don't rate him as one of the better names from what I know but my assumption was that you couldn't be a complete hype job in that era in that division.

Just trying to gauge just how good a champ' Greb dethroned. Thanks :good

 

I think the quality of the average top ten contender or title challenger remained fairly high at middle(though obviously some decades can be pinpointed as the best) until about the mid 90s.It really has been one of boxing's great divisions for depth imo.

Then a lot of them dropped into the mediocre\average bracket.

 

Greb
Monzon
Hagler

 

The hyperbole used to describe some of these fighters is like I'm reading a newspaper from the papers of those days all over again. These guys you mentioned, bar a few names, WEREN'T great fighters as we perceive them now or even then. George Chip wasn't a great fighter nor was he larger than life at the time like you describe. He didn't even hold the title for a year. McTigue wasn't a MW, which as you've noticed by now IS MY POINT. Do I even need to talk about Bob Moha? I mean really... he is on your list of "great" fighters? When did Greb even fight Maxie? When he was green as a 100 dollar bill? Greb had been dead 6 years before Maxie even won a title. McGoorty... Come on.. "Great" you say? Please. Gibbons, while good, was also severely deterioting eye sight when Greb beat him, and he retired shortly there after. Not a great victory considering when Greb fought him. Point is, The top MW he ever faced.. One he has a losing record against.. and then other was a better WW than a MW.

The way you talk about some of the fighters above is really stretching things to be sure. Also, no he greb was OVER the MW limit, then he was over the MW limit. Period. Just because he could make MW, changes nothing. When he fought the bigger guys, he was above the MW limit himself, thus they weren't MW fights. How on God's Green Earth you can conflate that to those counting for his MW resume is beyond me. DId you see my Duran analogy... Should we do the same for him and say.. well when he decided to go up in weight he beat the no. 2 or so WW of time. He could've done so earlier.. thus all his fights at 135 or 140 should count on his 147 resume.. Since ya know. He COULDN'VE made the WW limit? Really? No we don't, and thus we can't do the same for Greb.

 

Burt HE WAS OVER THE MW LIMIT WHEN HE FOUGHT SOME OF THESE GUYS. Period. I'm not sure what is so hard to understand about that. Just because he COULD'VE made the MW limit at any point and fought whoever at that weight (and won no doubt) he was over the MW limit for these fights you want on his MW resume. They WEREN'T MW fights. Jesus what is so hard to understand about this? Did you see my Duran analogy... Should we do the same for him and say.. well when he had at ww before the SRL fight... and clearly with his weight issue.. gone up to WW much sooner than he did. Thus all his wins at 135 and higher before the SRL fight.. should count on his WW resume.. since ya know he could've made the weight.. of course we don't and can't. Come on Burt, I know you love Greb, but this is getting silly now. You want to conflate his wins when he weighed more than a MW and fought guys bigger than MW as MW wins? Jesus.

 

I dont understand how you can chip, Mctigue and Moha by comparing them to todays guys. I think you totally misunderstand the effect of modern weight divisions and alphabet belts. if todays conditions existed today, these guys wouldnt just be champions, they would be multiple world champions in multiple divisions. simply by virtue of their wins over top four contenders and guys slightly over and slightly under the standard middleweight belts.

 

I think you totally misunderstand that these were great fighters period. They weren't. McTigue wasn't even a MW for Christ Sakes. When Greb fought at the MW and the guys he fought were at the MW limit his resume ISN'T that good. What is so hard to undertand about this?

 

Greb does have a great MW resume perhaps the best in the history of the division, I am away from my notes right now but I know it's stacked even counting fights under say 164... However he definitely achieved less than say Monzon and Hagler.

These should be the top 3. I think Hagler is the best of the bunch. Has the best victory of the bunch and achieved the most of the bunch. Maybe with film of Greb I could give him the benefit I can Hagler, but alas no such thing exists.

 

I dont understand your point with regards to mcTigue. According to Boxrec he was a middleweight when he fought greb.

McTigue was an alphabet champion at worst. Realistically, if there were four titles and multiple divisions, at worst McTigue wins a share of the super middleweight title. Realistically, he also wins a middleweight title and maybe even a unification bout or two. He is a world champion fighter and a high quality one, by todays standards.

I am not really taking issue with the other points you make regarding Grebs performance at the weight. Greb is one of the greatest ever at this weight, there is no doubt of that. I do think though that there are other greats who are often overlooked and some times Grebs record could do with a little scrutinisation. I dont think it is as flawless as often portrayed by some, though to placate Burt, i have to confess that outside of Fitzsimmons, i dont think that any other middleweight could have done what he did so it is a tough one. Just to put things into context, i am not one hundred percent certain that Greb rips through his competition the way Ketchell did for example in fact i am confident he doesnt because he woudl leave too much up to the judges to decide.

Here is another side point. In todays environment, Harry Greb might have a losing record, as a don king fighter. He wouldnt be allowed to fight the heavys, was unlikely to get the pull of the judges due to a perceived lack of power. And his unorthodox style would be percieved as a weakness by the internet crowds. With a losing record, he would presumably rarely get a break by judges, meaning maybe, just maybe such a great talent would barely succeed in todays environment.

 

Mike mctigue was a middleweight who happened to win the light heavy title. You dont seem to know much about these fighters or the times but you think you can judge them based on faulty understanding of their careers and a need to compartmentalize them in neat little weight classes. In reality their careers were more complex.

Now for s--ts and giggles go back and look over mctigues record and tell my why this light heavy didnt start weighing significantly more, and often less than the mw limit until after he lost his light heavy title?

 

Volume punchers always do well with the judges.

 

I agree with leeway when discussing greats in a class .

So like any fight were both are between 157 and 164 I'd call a MW fight. Maybe more leeway back then.

But Greb fighting Tunney is proof of his greatness as a lhw, not a mw, for me anyways.

 

But greb beat tunney while weighing 162.

 

I think of it the same way you do, so I understand your logic.

However, we are saying that :

1- Greb, Monzon and Hagler were all middleweights

2- Greb was the better boxer pound for pound.

3- Monzon and Hagler were better middleweights.

The arguments are there, but maybe we are overthinking it because it's a strange conclusion. Maybe Greb was the greatest. I know his story is the better one.