Is Harry Greb a top 3 light heavyweight H2H?

boy.. actually there is no debate.. your opinion is a croquette of trash you are the guy who said that ruddock would ko michael moorer in a single round, the same guy that could not stop david jaco in 7 rounds. enough said

 

The prof proving he DKSAB, again here it is the prof that he in all his wisdom cant accept something contradicting his view of things. Let's ask the prof, is it a fact the Tunney and Carp got together after Tunney beat up Greb? Also please inform us o wise one under what obligation was Carp to fight Greb, the yr before or in any yr? None is the correct answer. The prof, knows the real reason and there are many reports, and articles to that affect. The Carp - Siki fight the prof knows or should know the why's of the fight and his interpretation with choice cherry picked views are demonstrating his lack of understanding of the facts. The prof still doesnt understand that Carp didnt have to fight Greb that it was rightfully Carps choice. I am not going into whether it was a fix or not, so dont point your finger there. This is another excellent example of the prof's cherry pickin, ignoring facts that contradicts his view of things and of his spins to make it seem like he's making a point.
The prof reaches all the way back to cherry pick a 1912 fight Carp had to make a point. Ah prof, how old was Carp at the time? Klaus was in his prime, and vastly more experienced in terms of the men he fought than an 18yr old, and even then Klaus had to go 19rds. Yep, listen to the prof. If you want and like his spins and agenda filled responses.
The freebie sites have some of the best boxing writers of the time, and the prof, of course since it goes against his unique way of looking at things makes it seem like they are not worth looking at. The following, has to be the silliest example of the prof being the prof, "I didnt realize Brisbane sent a reporter to the fight. Lol. Enjoy your free newspapers reporting on fights taking place literally on the other side of the planet. i always enjoy your biased inane spin on things." The prof seems not to know about wire services."
Enjoy prof, the fool you see is the reflection in the mirror.

 

A croquette of trash

 

I feel as though my title of Poet Laureate of this board has been stripped.

 

C'mon be fair ibroresearch, publishes a magazine full of interesting articles and fight reports from all era's of boxing. A good friend of mine, Bruce Trampler, who is in the HOF, gets it and shared a couple of issues with me, which I was to return on the pain of death, spotless. They are full of articles but also have many actual reports and articles from newspapers, and magazines from the different era's. The magazine alone is well worth the subscription price. The issue I saw had a nice article on Holly Mims. If you dont know who Trampler is google his name. I didnt namedrop just to namedrop I wanted to show the high esteem that site is held.

 

He's certainly surpassed everyone with his grasp of the English language!

 

Didn't Mayweather and Pac finally fight? Didn't Tyson and Lewis finally fight? Unlike a child like you I actually know the difference between having names on your resume and having actual meaningful wins. Carpentier chose to fight guys like Gibbons and Tunney when he had nothing to lose and was long in the tooth enough that age alone was an excuse for losing, and guess what, lose he did, in one sided overwhelming fashion. And what was the net result of those fights for him or the victor? Nothing. And, as an aside, Tunney fought Greb less than two months after kicking the living **** out of the overrated French fop and lost. So you tell me, was Carpentier choosing the path of least resistence? This of course is totally besides the point that when the chips were indeed down Carpentier took less money to fight an unknown and still tried to have that fight fixed in his favor and this took place over two years earlier than the Tunney fight and a year after the Dempsey fight. Context is everything and despite you wanting to compress all of this into one event and pretend that Carpentier ducked Greb in 1922 because he wanted to focus on Dempsey in 1921 and then immediately after losing to Dempsey turned around and fought Gibbons and Tunney instead of Greb in 1924 just doesn't add up or make sense. Especially when you consider that between Dempsey and Gibbons Carpentier fought six fights against total no hopers.

As a champion, yes, you are obligated to fight your top contenders. Unless of course you want to be regarded as a cherry picking ducker. Given that you find no fault with Dempsey's refusal to face his top contenders is it any wonder you think it perfectly acceptable for Carpentier to defend his championship against a welterweight and a total unknown? I guess that's where you and I differ. You don't really appreciate fighters for their ability, sportsmanship, or sense of accomplishment but rather you just attach yourself to the personality of a fighter and decide from that point that he can do no wrong. I prefer my fighters to fight the best and challenge themselves. That essentially what sport is all about. You aren't a sports fan.

This oft repeated statement by you is absolutely asinine. Its a champions choice to fight who he wants? If that's the case then "champions" would simply camp on the title for seven years and refuse to fight anyone who might hope to beat them... oh wait, that's exactly what you think should happen. Its ridiculous. Any "champion" who refuses to fight his top contenders is a ****ing coward and certainly no champion by any definition you care to put forth.

Lol, yeah god forbid I ignore Carpentiers own words where he admitted it was an attempted fix. Just like I ignore Dempsey's own words where he admitted his "contract" to fight Wills was a sham. Oh wait, no, that was you who chose to ignore those facts. Wait, I'm cherry picking?

I'm sorry but if you have the stones to call yourself a world champion, which Carpentier was, and climb into the ring to dispute that claim then don't ***** to me about your age. The fact is that in the 1911,12,13,and 14 when idiots like you want to use Carpentier's age as an excuse for his losses he was fighting MUCH better fighters than he was when Dempsey chose to defend against him in 1921 and when he ducked Greb in 1922. So please, don't **** on my leg and tell me it raining by complaining about his age in fights he CHOSE to take.

LOL. I don't know about wire services... This coming from a guy who admits Ive done 1000 times the research into these old newspapers that you have. Enjoy the view from my coat tails Spec.

 

You can get thousands of reports for free, don't need to be in IBRO. Especially when they have a lot of New York Times wire reports clippings about fights held in other cities.

 

I know who Trampler is,I'm saying being a member of IBRO means jack sh*t because they will accept anyone who hands over $64 . I didn't mention any articles or point the finger at all the members ,just the twats like Mendoza.

 

Didnt mean my response as an attack and only used Bruce's name to show, it's not just a rag. Senya is right about the ton's of articles on the freebie sites.

 

Its true, you can get tons of articles on freebie websites. But the people who begin and end their research with the freebie websites, such as quoting a wire report from a newspaper across the globe, might as well give up.

So you can log onto Trove and pull a wire report from the Brisbane ****ing Courier about a fight in New York and you think you have the whole story? Really? Do you know how many newspapers there were in New York at any one time? What makes you think that the one opinion responsible for the Brisbane Couriers article outweights the 30 or 40+ others? Who even wrote the Brisbane Courier's article? Without a byline most people of journalistic integrity wouldn't even repeat it without multiple sources confirming its contents. I remember when Boxrec first got started and was absolutely filled with results that came from wire reports. Wire reports that were completely incorrect and in some cases for fights that didn't even happen. Boxrec still has tons of those as a matter of fact. So would I be a good historian if I read wire report from the New York Times on a free site about a fight that happened in Paducah, KY and just ended there without actually looking up the Paducah Sun's results? That's essentially what you are advocating.

I mean, how can this clown falsely accuse me of selectively posting articles (when I post BY FAR more articles than anyone to support my arguments) and of cherrypicking (when he accuses me of ignoring sources that are actually cited in my work) but then quotes a ****ing newspaper that wasn't in the same state, country, continent, or even hemisphere as the fight in question. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. And frankly, when ANYONE wants to accuse me of cherry picking my research they can come up with a more comprehensive list of sources that I based my research and book on. Hasn't been done yet. Or maybe they can name sources I left out? Nope. Anyone? I didn't think so. You wanna quote from the Brisbane Courier then while saying I'm cherrypicking then just go look at my list of sources for that fight GS. You wont see the Brisbane Courier there but you also wont see any missing papers that actually had boots on the ground and asses in the seats. "IBRO" LOL. My 11 year old could pay the IBRO admission fee and be a member of IBRO. That's how much it means to be a member of IBRO. Its the equivalent of fishing a detective badge out of a box of crackerjacks. IBRO itself is meaningless just as claiming to be a member of IBRO is meaningless. There are some very VERY good historians in IBRO but then there are some absolute clowns in it as well.


And yes the IBRO journal is a rag. 90 percent of it is nothing but literally cut and pasted articles from old magazines and newspapers. What could be more clearly defined as a rag than that? A journal that took absolutely minimal effort to produce. Yes, there are some gems in there and usually those come from serious researchers but they make up a small percentage of the overall content.

 

Best thread of 2016.

 

the precise definition was a croquette of shi7 but it sounds too hard