With the depth of his record the amount of "carnie workers" he might or might not have beaten means f*ck all. Besides Greb fought more than 12 fights a year from his second year as a pro to his retirement (including the year Norfolk f*cked his eye. He fought 8 times after the injury that year). Taking on a few second tiers would've been inevitable. And like i said, irrelevant considering the caliber of his top scalps. Yet you're more than convinced he would be teared to pieces by the untouchable boxing demigods of the 40s.
if greb beat all those guys with no skills then he must have been the most incredible physical freak since the elephant man flew to the moon by flapping his disfigured arms.
you can debate with people all day long about grebs skill or lack of or whatever...especially when none of us have any footage you cant get away from his cv though
Is windmilling your arms non stop skill? I read the refs also let him get away with endless fouling. It was a sport of toughness back then.
do you think it's possibe to beat tunneyn ect by simply windmilling? isn't effective fouling a skill? like doug.ie said, there's no real point arguing about a guy we can't see. it was also sort of a joke, and sort of saying that yes, greb could have been very crude if his physical limits were that good.
Anyone who understands boxing would surely be able to spell the most famous boxer of all time's name correctly .:think
I find it odd that every fighter on film can be the subject of some criticism. But the line is drawn on a guy nobody has ever seen fight in their life.
I won't say most but Naseem Hamed is overated imo. Ismael Laguna,Terry Norris,Rocky Marciano ,[by some].
we are all agreed* some of them could fight a bit, hence my comment that he could have been crude but only with damn near superhuman physical abilities. cheating well is cheating, but is also still a skill imo. edit *most of us anyway