Harry Greb vs. Fritzie Zivic 15rds.

The last 2 days have been some of the most eye popping **** I've ever read in the GF and the Classic :rofl

 

I never claimed i was right, ive repeatadly said so, you're only reading what you want to read. ......... Im not educated enough to pass judgement on Greb , but i am to pass judgment on the times and what would of had influence and an impact on his standing. On top of that the non existant footage of him to back up the claims of everything that was written........ If you dont agree with my fine , you and surf bat made good points but dont expect me to bend down to you because you dont like my way of thinking....

 

I was excited that this was 5 pages because I thought, oh **** some Zivic fan made a great case and is defending it to the death (a young greb was a welter remember). Sadness...

 

If you believe that you'll believe anything.

 

So why didn't you make a contribution to the thread and discuss Greb?...You're just a cheeser like the rest of em.

 

You made this emphatic and quite unambiguous statement:

You have not retracted this statement, despite admitting you are ignorant about Greb, despite more knowledgeable posters putting the hard facts and sources right under your nose.

It's not about disliking your way of thinking. It's about despairing of your methodology. You make erroneous claims in ignorance, and then you stubbornly ignore posters who've actually done the research you haven't.

Yes, you can say that the times were usually biased against black fighters, and you'd be right. However, based on Greb's record, and the HARD EVIDENCE that Surf-Bat posted, Greb was an exception to the rule. He did risk his title against black challengers, and was respected by the black press for doing so. They wrote a glowing tribute after his death, which has been posted and sourced here.

It's at this point, that a rational person holds up his hand and says "OK, it looks like I was wrong, and that Greb was an exception to the rule. I'm going to look into this more deeply...but I spoke out of turn, before realizing the facts."

If you do that, then people tend to respect you more than if you blindly stick to your guns, when all the evidence is against you.

Anyway, I've read up a bit on great fighters like Bob Fitzsimmons, Jack Johnson, Harry Greb and Sam Langford. And I admire all these incredible fighters for their skills, courage and achievements, whatever colour they happened to be.

 

:admin

Holy ****. :rofl

This is more outlandish than anything Seamus or PowerPuncher have ever dropped.

 

His fighting style was propably not far removed from the days of the broughton rules and i dont put much faith in him being top 5 best in history based on second hand reports...The sweet science had not evolved to what it would become and he would most likly be slaughterd by any great past 1940....Top HW lists from the time dont exsit, so how good they were nobody knows.....

 

Man, just stop. Stop already.

 

But that wasn't what your argument was about in this thread. That's another debate.

Your argument was: "Greb was a faux legend created by white people desperate to have an invincible champ who wasn't black"

Were you right or were you wrong?

 

I believe there to be a degree of truth in that statment. In hindsight i sould of typed it out in a less offensive manner.

 

then why did he finish his career with controversial losses to a black man?

if i was trying to create a legend i could have paid a couple judges

 

And why disqualify Greb in the second fight with Kid Norfolk? Norfolk was the black man (and by reports, more guilty of fouling in this fight than Greb).

So if boxing was so unfairly racist why not DQ Norfolk and, more to the point, let Harry keep his title vs. Flowers?

2 perfect examples of black fighters getting favorable treatment over Greb. Even to the point of it being unjust!

 

You're right, even if that comes off assholish (and I don't know what a cheeser is).

Anyway Greb is a little shorter, a little bigger, and much more consistent. Zivic took on bigger guys so that's not an issue. Hes dirty but it's nothing greb hasn't seen before and the combination if size and speed should give him an ugly UD. Greb isn't a big enough puncher to stop Zivic but he'll hurt him, with Zivics ability to spoil and roughhouse seeing him through (although he'll probably lose that battle too).

 

Right, so evidence where precisely you think that "degree of truth" exists in relation to Greb's career...what specific fights do you think Harry Greb had the white boxing establishment giving him unfair advantages. On the Classic Forum, we demand sourced evidence, or you have nothing but hollow rhetoric.

Currently, based on what I've read here, the evidence is completely against what you claim. You have done nothing to back up your position on Greb. The burden of proof is always upon whoever makes controversial claims.

For example, McGrain went against current orthodoxy and said he was beginning to think that Louis's first win against Walcott was the right verdict. But unlike you, he was entitled to offer a controversial opinion, as it was made after doing a ton of research.

In hindsight, it was a bloody stupid thing to post on a forum populated with boxing historians. You're just not big enough to admit it, though.