Why Is SRR Commonly Ranked Ahead of Harry Greb?

From this specific piece of the tremendous post here, particular scrutiny must be applied to the actual ringside reporting and analysis of their entire series. Even Tunney admitted that there was some justification for a third match between them being warranted after the very controversial SD for Gene in their second bout. Grantland Rice thought Harry deserved to be 2-0 over Tunney after that return. Nobody questions that Gene took fights three and five. But a pool of newspapermen gave Harry "all but one round" during fight four in Cleveland. That match took place less than two months after Tunney-Carpentier was filmed. That was no embryonic Gene most professional ringside observers voted Greb to have bested at the Olympic Arena in Ohio that September of 1924.

Consider that Greb was past his peak when that rivalry began. Consider that most observers gave him the first two bouts and match number four.

Harry takes the series with Tunney 3-2! How does anything Robinson did measure up to that?

 

Because one career is fact and the other is part-fiction, losses turned to wins and eyeballs fully removed by dusty old white folk. One is from a golden era and the other is from a pure dog**** looking era

 

Good post .. it's ironic because Robinson missed more than a few of the very best men in his era while Greb essentially fought everyone ...

 

:nono Now, now...There's no need to denigrate Robinson's era like that. There were plenty of fine competitors during Ray's career too.

 

Greb the man with no film. :conf

Don't worry we'll find the film someday in someones Garage.

 

I've been following boxing since the mid '50s and heard of Sugar Ray Robinson all my life - seeing him on TV many times - fighting, and making the rounds on talk shows - a man very much in demand for the rest of his life. In all this time, he was highly touted as either the greatest fighter of all time or the greatest pound-for-pound. I heard very little of Harry Greb until the computerized middleweight tournament of 1968. Greb and Robinson were in it, of course. When interviewing people on the broadcast, Mickey Walker told of his title fight with Greb, and his street fight with him later that night. Sugar Ray said "One guy that I'm glad that I never had to fight was Harry Greb." I took that statement to be one of professional courtesy, rather than a belief that Greb would have beaten him. I don't remember who "beat" Greb in the computerized tournament, but do remember Robinson outpointing Ketchel in the final. While the tournament was fantasy, it did serve to put some all-time great middleweights back in the public eye and generate discussion of their relative merits. Over the years, I have learned much more of Harry Greb, but never in one place as much as on this forum. He was a most interesting and remarkable man, both in the ring and out, and his ring accomplishments were astounding. This thread has showcased a wealth of information about both of these men. Robinson and Greb were two great fighters, and what a fight they would have made!

 

This statement says more about you than either fighter.

 

Honestly, I take Tunney's account with a grain of salt, like I do most boxers statements about their fights and rivals. My point was a direct rebuttal of Burt's earlier contention that Gene Tunney was an expert witness to Greb's abilities and we should believe every word of his testimony, because who could know better than him?

I'm not as gullible as that. But I find that it does explain a few things and is within the realm of possibility. I don't mean to state it as fact. My purpose in bringing up Tunney's autobiography is to introduce the seed of doubt, while at the same time undermining contemporary reports. Tunney's testimony, his autobiography is a document, and Greb's record and reputation is based on a number of such documents. If this part is wrong, then perhaps others are wrong too, the newspaper accounts, other fighters, and so forth.

There are alleged extenuating circumstances to the Maxim fight, the same as there were to the first Tunney/Greb fight though, and we do an injustice when we make allowances for one fighter which we wouldn't make for another. We know that Robinson was winning the Maxim fight up to his collapse from heat exhaustion. Had he stayed on his feet he'd be the light heavyweight champ.

I've already introduced doubt about how good the Tunney win was by backing Tunney's account of it, and then showing that it was a freak one off occurrence which Greb was unable to duplicate. I've further shown that Loughran and Rosenbloom were featherfists and no greater danger to Greb than fellow middleweights, which takes some of the wind out of his best wins. Just starting with that, shouldn't that make you wonder if perhaps there were some similar defect in his other big wins?

I don't hold those losses against him. I find it perfectly reasonable that a guy who's had as many fights as he had and suffered injuries was no longer prime. By mentioning them, my intent is to expose the hypocrisy of those fellows who continually cite how Robinson lost fights to other champions in order to explain why Greb is so much better than Robinson. Those types of unfair tactics can be turned around and used both ways.

 

Perhaps, but I'll take an avalanche of concurring newspaper reports and eyewitness accounts over Tunney's self-serving, factually incorrect (as has been proven) memoir of his greatness any day.

Not really. You've merely quoted a largely discredited document. Tunney's memories of his fights with Greb don't jibe with with what is on the historical record (as Senya has pointed out). It is typical of boxing autobios.

Sure he did. In the second fight. In fact some of the newspapermen reported that Harry dominated Tunney as thoroughly in the second fight as the first:

NY Morning Telegraph: Greb won 10 of 15 rounds

Newark Star Eagle: Gave Tunney only the 14th round

Newark Evening News: Greb gave Tunney as bad a beating as the first fight, it was one of the worst decisions handed out since the Walker Law

Jersey Journal: The only round Tunney won decisively was the 14th.

Pittsburgh Post: Gave Tunney only two rounds.

It takes no wind out of it whatsoever. Take a look at the sterling records of both of those men. It doesn't take KO power to achieve greatness or to be a formidable opponent. So by this argument we can say that Robinson's wins over Fritzie Zivic and Tommy Bell were better wins than Greb's over Loughran and Rosenbloom because they hit harder? :blood Should we strip some of the luster off of SRR's wins over Kid Gavilan because the Kid was a featherfist (143 fights, 28 KOs) too?

 

I went back and looked at some newspapers from around the time of Tunney vs Greb 2 and here's what I found:

Feb. 23 1923 The Border City Star
Even if Greb had been close to winning the decision, his foul work probably would have influenced the judges against him.

Greb could not have gone much farther. In a twenty round bout he most certainly would have been knocked out. Tunney started in with a withering body attack that had Greb all puffed, bruised, welted and cut around the middle before the tenth round. Greb was so undisposed that the bucket had to be lifted twice for him. After the twelfth round he hung on for his very life and in the 14th he just missed being knocked out.

Tunney was on top of Greb every time the Pittsburgher elected to do something, besides hold and clinch. He had the edge in at least nine rounds, and Greb did not have a substantial margin in more than four.

Feb. 23 1923 Rochester evening Journal by Davis J Walsh

When he canvased ringside newsmen they said:

Harry Newman, Daily News: "A draw would have been more like it."

Jimmy Dawson, New York Times: "I thought Tunney won."

Walter Trumbull, New York Herald: "A draw would have been the fairer decision."

Jack Lawrence, Tribune: "A draw would have been just."

Igoe, New York World: "Tunney deserved the decision."

Ed Curley, New York American: "Tunney won."

Ed van Every, Evening world: "Greb should have been credited with a draw."


Mar. 6 1923 The Telegraph Herald

Charges that Harry Greb of Pittsburgh, who was recently defeated for the light heavyweight championship by Gene Tunney gave $3,000 to New York boxing writers to boom him for a bout with Jack Dempsey, will be submitted to William Muldoon, chairman for the state athletic commission for investigation, the New York World says today.

 

You are quoting a Minnesota paper and a Canadian paper about a fight that took place in New York. Dont quit your dayjob (which Im sure has nothing to do with historical research).

 

Well, golly gee. If we can't trust the fighters themselves, Tunney's account being suspect, and we can't trust the ref or judges official scoring, who scored the fight for Tunney, and we can't trust the newspapermen who covered the event and were divided about the outcome, who's opinion pray tell should we trust?

I could do this with every fight Greb ever had, because one paper account can be disputed with another paper account.

 

First, let me say I am honored to discussing boxing with a guy who witnessed all these great fighters. Thank you.

Now to the business.

I won't challenge your thoughts on Greb and Henry's style simularity. If you say there weren't any way the same...so beit.

What I would like to do is push a little further on the rest.

You are basing a lot of your argument, rightly so, that Greb beat great fighters in higher weight classes even though he was a smaller fighter. He went up to heavyweight from middleweight. You also state that Greb would beat all of Robinson opponents. I don't disagree with that either.

The thing is none of Robinson opponents except one was over 175. Robinson started out as 126. To win a title at 160 and nearly 175 coming from 126 is amazing. Just as amazing has Greb's wins from 160 to Heavyweight. Greb has not done anything unpresidented. Walker drew with a Heavyweight champion, Fitzsimmons won the Heavyweight title as a large middleweight with one shot.

The difference between these men and Robinson that they started at weights alot closer to Heavyweight than Robinson did. If Robinson is as great as we think he is and if he started fighting at 160 I have no problem seeing accomplishing the same thing against the same fighters that Greb did.

128 wins versus one loss and 84 KO's against all the great fighters he fought up until that time speaks to me. Also way after his prime still beating on prime, strong, great fighters who were way naturally bigger and stronger tells me that he could have competed in any era at any reasonable weight.

I know most of what I am saying is not news to you but, this is the perspective I am rolling with. I have as of yet been convinced otherwise. I will continue to read on.

Thanks

 

Abrams had Robinson by 12 pounds and Mims was dropped in the second round. The scores weren't even close for the Mims bout. He made have had tough fights but he won them all. After his prime he still beat the likes of Fulmer and Basilio. Even that draw at age 40 with Fulmer should have been a win for him. If he outlasted the heat he would won the LHW title.

Robinson fought and beat Zivic with only 25 and 26 fights in the next year after Zivic beat Armstrong for the title. Robinson wasn't exactly all that experienced. He was just better.

 

Very reasonable post on your part...But Greb at 5ft 8" started at close to LW class and was thrown to the wolves right from the start...Ray Robinson at close to 6ft started his pro career in 1940 as a lightweight, and in 1941 morphed into fighting welterweights... But whatever it's worth, Robinson had a big height advantage over his shorter opponents...
As posted before, growing up I saw Robinson as a WW play with a fading Henry Armstrong at MSG, using his reach to just keeg Armstrong at bay, as Ray didn't want to open up and hurt his idol...We in the crowd knew this...
Robinson was the greatest I ever saw ringside, including Willie Pep and
Ike Williams, so I don't mean to demean him when I say that Harry Greb
just tackled every lightheavyweight and heavyweight who would MEET HIM,
avoiding no one of size, colour, style, time after time in a 300 bout career
and handicapped for 100 or so of his last bouts with only ONE EYE...
And remember this sir, when Ray Robinson who avoided Charley Burley
and others ,chose to tackle a LH, he picked the perfect least threat to him,
Joey Maxim, who did not hit as hard as some middleweights of that rich era...Robinson KNEW his limitations, whilst Harry Greb beat the top lhs and heavyweights of his time ,with one eye...How can you not have Greb over Robinson ?