Greatest Fighter Ever ?

Jung Koo-Chang

 

Hank had three belts at the same time in different weight classes. And, I think he hit harder than Ray. Hank ranks number one for me with Ray and Greb in a toss up for second.

 

The Old Master, in turn, likely would have also cast his vote for Fitz, his own boxing idol.

 

I have to go with SRR, however there ARE loads of other Elite fighters and there won't be much between them. Likewise after Elite there are literally hundreds & hundreds of Greats with little between them either. 150 years times tens of thousands of fighters adds up to LOADS of Great & Top men!

hard though to argue against 25 years at the TOP, Ray Robinson is very likely the greatest of All-time!!!

 

:good:smoke

 

I'm with you on this Burt as I make the same argument for two very special British middleweights. the only thing I will say is Boxing started a bit crude as we all know here, and it wasn't till the mid 20s that Stylish fighters were beginning to become more the norm (odd exception of course). This was certainly in full swing by the mid 30s and rose to an approximate 30 year or so peak. So in argument to SRR or Pep or Louis or Walcott, Charles, Burley and so on & on the list is endless. I say their period/Era was an overall better era than Greb's and all the greats before and especially long before them.

this accounts for much and makes for compounding facts surrounding fighters and their times!

 

In in the minority who plump for Armstrong as my number one, or at the very least sharing the top spot with Ray. To put it simply, as far as I'm concerned no other man in boxing history ACHIEVED as much as Hank did, or defied logic.

Ray had greater longevity, a more easy on the eye classical style and, for what it's worth, carried a faded Hank to a decision in '43. Fair enough. But I'd argue that Armstrong's peak years, 1936-1940, blown any other man's peak years out of the water, and that his list of elite level wins perhaps read better than Robinson's.

He never defended the proper 126 lb crown, but did effectively clear the division out, as by the time he'd absconded the weight class as well as beating Sarron he'd eventually established the upper hand over Arizmendi and been the victory against other some-time titlists in Bass and Belloise. Ross and Ambers, to my mind, are both top tenners of all-time in the Welterweight and Lightweight divisions respectively. No gimmes in Armstrongs triple crown.

And as for the myth that Hank's tilt at the 160 lb title was a manufactured one which wasn't really recognized until later years, well as I said, it's a myth! Between the retirement of Walker and Zale's unification of the division, there was a decade or more of uncertainty in the 160 lb weight class, with various organizations declaring different men as champion, no denying that. But Fred Apostoli had trounced Marcel Thil, who'd defended the IBU version of the title against some good fighters in Europe. The only problem was that the fight took place in New York, and the NYSAC refused to acknowledge anyone other than Freddie Steele, who held their title, as a champion while in that region. Therefore, both Thil and Apostoli were forced to sign a contract saying that neither would proclaim themselves champion regardless of the result. But the fact remains that Apostoli beat one of the (then) 3 titlists at Middleweight for starters (interestingly enough, the IBU would soon wind themselves up in an effort to created unified champions - today's governing bodies, take note).

Meanwhile, the lightly-regarded California State Athletic Commision threw their hat in to an already confused ring by recognising Young Corbett III as their champion when he beat Apostoli. So in effect, by lineage, rights or whatever you want to call it, Corbett should have been seen as both the IBU and California champion. Three months later, the far more respected NYSAC stripped Steele of his title for his failure to defend against Cornett - and so when Corbett and Apostoli rematched, their vacant title was also on the line. This time, Apostoli got it right, and so in effect had won, in the previous 14 months, two of the big three versions of the Middleweight title, as well as another lightly-regarded one.

As such, when Garcia shocked him to defeat (Ceferino was largely considered a soft touch beforehand, having been beaten by both Armstrong and Ross in 147 lb title fights), Ceferino could certainly claim to be the closest thing the division had to a 'man who beat the man' in 1938. Granted, the NBA were busy proclaiming their own individuals as champion, but neither Hostak nor Krieger had been doing the round robin against opposition as good as the aforementioned men - it's not until Zale took their title, AFTER Armstrong boxed a draw against Garcia, that their title really carried the same weight as the others, as far as I'm concerned.

It's unfortunate that the NYSAC, along with the IBU who were no defunct, refused to fully acknowledge Garcia-Armstrong as a Middleweight title fight on the basis of the two men being so small, as the pair of them had more than proven their credentials. But don't let that California State Athletic Commission title line on BoxRec fool you - Garcia had every right to call himself the legitimate Middleweight champion of the world in 1940, and it's a testament to Armstrong's greatness that he was probably unlucky not to win that title in that fight, too.

Anyway, back on track - put it this way. Azumah Nelson. Great, great Featherweight champion. But having cleared out 126 by 1987, can anyone imagine him jumping up to Welter the very next year to beat Honeyghan, dropping instantly back down to Lightweight to usurp even someone like Ramirez, never mind Pea or Chavez, then spending the next couple of years successfully defending his Welter title, while scaling less than 140 lb, against the likes of Starling, Blocker etc and then, in around about 1990, holding someone like Kalambay to a draw in a Middleweight title tilt?

Nelson must be close to being a top 50 pound for pound great, and yet we're laughing at the idea of him doing that. But that's what Hank DID manage to do. He was a genuine one-off and, for me, deserves to wear the crown of the all-time greatest, or at least come very, very close.

 

Irregardless of who he is, he is wrong. Tunney did not wait for Greb to get old to beat him. Tunney beat him in their next fight. If you REALLY want to read a great account of their fights in a book, read John Jarretts' "Gene Tunney: The Golden Guy Who Beat Jack Dempsey Twice". It is fantastic. But even beyond that, the claim is foolish. Greb beat and lost to Gene before he even won the Middle title. I have read about this guy for close to 70 yrs. They were both great and even Greb had nothing but respect for Gene. If you go back in history and ask who was the best before Robinson, most said Leonard. Look it up. BTW, don"t ever take one person's opinion to be Gospel. Do your own research and form your own. I think Greb is easily one of the top 5 in my mind, but have Leonard ahead. Go find the old books and papers on microfilm and you will see the high esteem Benny was given. I will bet you will see that I am right about most fans and writers of that time considering him the best fighter and not Greb.

 

I agree absolutely. Leonard from that time and decades later was considered the greater fighter. Greb was considered great but for his own reasons and his own style Leonard was the all time great classic textbook fighter.

 

Burt, I have nothing but respect for Harry, but as greatest ever, I am talking head to head. pfp, Greb against Leonard, I would choose Benny. He was, as he was called, simply a {Ghetto} wizard between the ropes. Please Burt, inform the younger audience how great and how highly held Benny was. They seem to think I am attacking you. I am not. I have always been told, way on back of course, that Leonard did things in the ring noone ever did. Then you have Arcel telling how he was in the gym the days Benny taught Tunney how to beat Harry. I believe Gene and Benny had the same manager. Billy Gibson.

 

I heard it forever. As a matter of fact. for a long time, Greb was like the forgotten great. But Benny. Wow! He was also a boxoffice draw and probably the most loved fighter of the time. All the fighters raved about this fighter who retired as champion in his prime. From the time he hit the big time his skills were marveled at and his record holds up to anyones'. People really now know nothing about him, but for me growing up in the 40s , he was always talked about like he was the source. People miss out on not knowing him. Maybe the smartest most astute fighter ever. On a side note, how could a modern like Mayweather who fights 2-3 times a year ever compete against the oldtime guys who fought 20 or more times a year against the best. He would be wore out in half a year and that defense would come apart. Just an observation. In the Ring Record book of 1968, it shows Greb fighting 49 times in 1919 alone. Boxrec has it a diff number but the 7 Ring record books I have have 49. Revisionist history for sure.

 

He did not score a clean-cut, inarguable win over Greb until their fifth and final fight. All you need to do is look it up. You're right. Tunney didn't "wait" for Harry to get old. But he wasn't able to truly dominate him until Harry was well past his best and fighting with only one eye.

A fight that was considered highway robbery. 19 of 23 newspapermen felt that Greb should have left the ring with his crown. Tunney CLEARLY lost this fight. And in their "draw" in Cleveland, two out of the three Cleveland newspapers gave it to Greb (the third called it a draw).

I'm sure Klompton can give you a whole list of inaccuracies in this book and the primary source references to back it up. So I'll leave this to him. The best accounts I know of to go to for accounts of fights were the next-day newspaper reports and interviews. They tell the story much more clearly (and accurately) than books written decades after the fact.

 

I don't mean for it to seem like I'm "picking" at you here, but Boxrec is a far more accurate and reliable source than The Ring record books, which at times are horribly inaccurate.

 

I've been doing some research regarding the Tunney Greb second bout in NY. The round by round descriptions show Tunney got off to a great start and then faltered around the 7th round. Greb who seemed to have limitless endurance started to come on strong until the late stages where Tunney surged and the rounds went back and forth.

What hasn't been mentioned is the role of Billy Gibson. He was in Greb's corner as his second for the first fight but by the second fight he was Tunney's manager.
Gibson lobbied the New York boxing commission to protect Tunney against Greb's fouling.
This certainly loomed large over the fight and before the fight began there was the amusing sight of Tunney standing still while Greb demonstrated on Tunney's body various blows he would use and asking for the referee Haley's ruling.

The judges were split and the referee having the deciding vote gave it to Tunney.

The next day Haley declared "that Greb's foul tactics, including holding and butting, influenced the verdict which he and the judges gave to Tunney, despite the Pittsburgher's apparent margin on points"

So here we have it the justification for the Tunney decision win by the ref himself was because of Grebs continual fouling. If indeed true and this is the ref himself talking this gives credibility to the Tunney win.....not so via scoring more points but because his opponent lost points via fouling.

 

Stoney, EVEN I was not born when Benny leonard fought before he retired...But my dad saw Leonard fight [forgot who], but saw him train in NYC several times...He would always tell me that Benny Leonard was held in such high esteem that, when he sparred in the ring all the boxers would stop what they were doing and watch the great"Bennah" do his thing....He was so great that the great underrated Welterweight champion Jack Britton
of 344 fights claimed that Benny Leonard would have beaten Joe Gans both in their primes...Why would Jack Britton say this.? Well when Britton was young he boxed with the veteran Joe Gans ,sparring with Gans...
For about 7 years Leonard absolutely dominated a rich division of lightweight great contenders, many alltime great lightweights as Freddie Welch, Johnny kilbane, johnny Dundee, Richie Mitchell, Charlie White,
Lew Tendler, Ever Hammer, the powerful bullish Rocky Kansas, Joe Welling, and in 3 weeks flattened the best black lightweight of those days, Leo
Johnson from Harlem who made the psychological mistake of mussing up
Leonard's well plastered hair after shaking hands for the opening bell.
Big mistake as the angry leonard flattened Johnson in the very first round. A couple weeks later Leonard kod Eddie Dorsey in short order...It was said that to get money fights Leonard had to "carry' some opponents so he could get a lucrative rematch....Just before benny Leonard retired in 1924
there was strong demand for a Leonard match against the powerful 147 champion Mickey Walker, but Leonard's momma, pleaded for Leonard to quit boxing and out of love for his widowed mom, Benny Leonard retired
finally...When my dad and I went to the Friday night fights at MSG, we would see the portly Benny Leonard refereeing bouts, and receiving great ovations upon being announced....Beloved by everyone in boxing til he died at the young age of 51, while suffering a heart attack refereeing bouts at the old St Nicholas Arena in NYC...The great "Bennah"....