Live Fast, Die Young: The Life and Times of Harry Greb

It all depends on how you treat Gavilan's close decisions. I already mentioned that a draw in the Villemain bout would have been a fairer decision. When changing one even round to a round in favor of the losing fighter or taking one round from the winner and making it a draw changes the final result, that's the proof of a very close bout (before anybody points me to boxrec's 5-3-2 score, it was actually 5-4-1, the next-day newspapers got it wrong). The Costner fight was also controversial. One reporter I read gave Gavilan 8 out of 10 rounds.

That's what puzzled me. I don't recall reading about any judges or secondary referees in no-decision bouts. Now there had been umpires for each fighter many years previous, but why would they use such practice in the 1919 in Minnesota?

Mike McTigue was never close to welterweight limit as a pro, I think? Don't think Colima was either. I don't see Walker's welterweight credentials outweighing those of Gavilan.

Sorry, but I don't see either Gene Tunney or Tommy Gibbons as being anywhere close to Kid Gavilan P4P. We'll just have to disagree that there can be a valid argument made. It has nothing to do with whether he or Robinson could beat Tunney or T. Gibbons.

 

Would love to see you do any actual top 50 p4p list, Senya.
Would surely generate a lot of posts and debate. :good

 

Even my top 10 would generate a lot of criticism, and I'm not willing to spend my spare time defending it. So take it for whatever it is, without asking me any why's or WTF's.
1. Joe Gans
2. Benny Leonard
3. Harry Greb
4. Packey McFarland
5. Sugar Ray Robinson
6. Roy Jones Jr
7. Kid Gavilan
8. Floyd Mayweather Jr
9. Barney Ross
10. Sugar Ray Leonard

 

The top 5 is fine.
6-10 isn't.
Just my opinion though.

 

I'll defend Senya's list to the death.

 

WTF?

Actually, I like your gumption.

Horrible list.

 

Did Mickey Walker ever defeat Pete Latzo? In fairness to Walker, it appears that he had a bit of a rough patch by his high standards in some important bouts during 1925 and 1926. During those years, Walker lost bouts to Harry Greb, Pete Latzo and Joe Dundee in addition to winning highly disputed decisions in bouts with Dave Shade and Tiger Flowers.

- Chuck Johnston

 

You can pick single fights as much as you want to degrade Gavilan, I could do the same thing about Mickey Walker, if I chose to.

I would certainly have given Gavilan a chance with Flowers, who I'm not of very high opinion about.
You can point to Greb and Walker fights as examples of Flowers being great boxer, but to me he wasn't that skilful or clever.

Same goes for Mickey Walker, skills and cleverness, he was clearly inferior to Gavilan as I see it. Just because he looked good vs shitty heavyweights, doesn't mean anything to me. This includes Schmeling, Jack Sharkey, Levisnky, Uzcudun, Risko, and the rest. Third or fourth-raters when considered P4P.
Berlenbach, McTigue, Rosenbloom - again, hardly the fighters I would personally call great.

If I had time, I could go through the clippings I have for Gavilan's close losses and wins, as well as the ones we have on film to judge for ourselves. I recall I thought he edged some of those where his opponents were given decisions, and some that were disputed I thought he won clearly. But I didn't keep note at the time I was watching them, to remember which and how I scored.

 

Both Mickey Walker and Kid Gavilan were great fighters. Gavilan had astounding boxing skills and
was extremely durable. But I still feel that Walker was the greater fighter even in the welterweight division largely due to his big advantage in punching power.

One can make a good case that Max Schmeling, Jack Sharkey, Paulino Uzcudun and Johnny Risko wouldn' rank high on the All-Time Pound-For-Pound list, but to imply that they were less than capable heavyweights is silly. I agree that Paul Berlenbach and Mike McTigue were not great, but Maxie Rosenbloom fought a virtual Who's Who's of Boxing of the 1920s and 1930s, winning more than his share of bouts against such competition while having close to 300 bouts. While not much of a puncher, Rosenbloom is regarded as one of the best defensive fighters in boxing history. Taking a close look at his losses, it appears that so many of them were in very close bouts. Many terrific defensive fighters with little punching power seem to have a quite a number of losses or draw against less-than-great opposition, but still do very well against many of the best fighters of their eras. That description fits Rosenbloom very well.

- Chuck Johnston

 

I saw Keed Gavilan 2 or 3 times ringside in the 1940s...A busy bolo punching fighter with a sturdy chin. No doubt...But I recall that famous boxing writers of that day didn't hold Kid Gavilan in the same lofty regard
that Senya holds him today as an alltime great welterweight...Gavilan fought quite often so the top boxing writers were most able to judge his alltime welterweight status, and he fell short of a Jack Britton, Ted Kid Lewis, Mickey Walker, Dave Shade, or Henry Armstrong and WWs Cocoa Kid and Holman Williams...Truly he was a great welterweight on a par or slightly better than a Billy Graham or Carmine Basillio... And I doubt if Gavilan would have beaten a prime Barney Ross or the original Bolo punching Ceferino Garcia....Still he was an alltime great 147 pound fighter
in my eyes...

 

How could anyone deny your analysis ?