Still barely a man Ezzard spanked the Boogeyman of the era in Burley. I think that’s a better single win then Robinson has, does anyone disagree?
Yes & Yes There hasn't been a fighter at that level since him mostly due to how the game changed over the years. The best bet is to keep finding fighters from way before him. We can't really assess their flaws while we can highlight their strengths.
So you're willing to laud false posts as long as they support your narratives? That tells all we need to know about you.
Feel free, I don’t mean to say that what he did wasn’t effective or good he’s a P4P giant what would we know? it just isn’t a thrilling or an enjoyable viewing.
Sure, anyone has different feelings about what makes player exciting. I think Langford showed a lot of good things in Jeannette fight (less so in other ones) and in some ways he reminds me of Archie Moore. Not with his style, but with his approach. I love watching Moore (and I think you do too), so I thought Langford could be cool to watch as well.
If you’re talking about Armstrong wasn’t he all but finished? Burley still went on to mix it up with Holman Williams and more and most have him considered second to Robinson in the era.
You honestly haven't seen a single fighter from the 20's that impresses you? Even guys considered more 'modern', like Tunney for instance?
Is it? It's actually easier to be viewed as great when no one has seen you. The people who saw Greb fight didn't exactly think he was the greatest fighter ever. He wasn't a dominant champ in his day. And they had a much smaller pool to measure him against. 100 years of boxers have come along since. But most of them we can pick apart. Or pick apart the results. Or say we didn't agree with the scoring. With Greb, he's anything you want him to be. Every no-decison fight where two guys just went through the motions for a payday goes down as a legit Greb win ...even though no one's hand was raised at the end. There are no actual decisions he got that you felt were way off base. You never thought he looked like garbage in this fight or that one. It's really much easier to be considered great when all the people who saw you and didn't think you were all that are dead. Imagination plays a huge role. When Dempsey went on a tour of Europe during his reign and people were introduced to him, the reaction of many was "You're Dempsey?" He wasn't the monster they imagined.
You make some good points. As far as the idea of Greb having the advantage due to no footage, well that can go both ways, because while I agree we never got to see him looking garbage, we also never got to see him looking amazing. I would say, if anything, it hurts him because he gets ridiculed by a lot of people for how bad he looks in that sparring video, shame we don't have 5 minutes of him handling Dempsey in sparring! We can agree Greb's record is not "anything you want it to be", right? Just look at all the ATG's, great, near great & very good fighters he's beaten & the circumstances under which did so. The talent pool was very deep, in my estimation (Stephen Compton's book on Greb has lots of info on this, in case you haven't read it).
Thanks so much for the video, anyone watching Ray's footwork, speed, crisp punching and power has to acknowledge he possesses all the tools. Honestly, did the man really have any weaknesses ?Seeing him rip those left hooks in the blink of an eye that decapitate his foes raises the hair on my arms. I have a difficult time believing that anyone could take 2 out of 3 against him in his prime, If you made me choose a guy who might get him I'd say Greb at 160 pounds, but real film footage might make me change my opinion. As I go into my 7th decade of life I've only seen 2 fighters I would even suggest were practically unbeatable at their weight,, Roberto Duran at 135 and the greatest of all time Ray Robinson at 147
I'm well aware. And Compton also never saw Greb fight. When I and others question or bring up Greb, some often get up in arms. I'm not saying the guy couldn't box. But when people say he's the best fighter EVER ... and they never saw him ... a red flag goes up. You can spend one weekend on this site, and 20 people could be watching a card, and nobody agrees on who won. And people base who "they" think is good and who isn't more often based on who they "thought" won, not on the official decisions. With Greb, who two-thirds of his fights were bouts with NO OFFICIAL DECISION, and no one's hand was raised at the end ... and it was left to reporters on hand to write in the paper who they thought won, and even they didn't agree, and guys a 100 years later go back and count how many papers covered the fight and then try to figure out how many papers thought he lost and how many thought he won and then annoucnce GREB WON ... it rings more than a little false to me. You're taking rules which weren't in place at the time and trying to come up with official results which weren't rendered at the time. It would be like someone 100 years from now saying Roy Jones beat Mike Tyson in their last fights, because the majority of the celebrities on the panel, including Snoop, thought Jones looked better. Even though it was basically a no-decision affair, no official results were given, Tyson agreed beforehand not to try to knock him out, and both guys went in to just make some many and work. It was good for both of them just to box and get paid at the end. To me, that's what a bunch of these "name" Greb fights basically were. No-decisions where name guys just got together to work and get paid. Based on no-decisions like that, people who NEVER saw Greb are now proclaiming he's the best. If you go back and read old newspapers, the day of the fights, for Dempsey let's say, they often list who the challengers faced. When Dempsey fought Brennan, the writer in the NY Times was kind of talking about how Brennan wasn't expected to be much of a challenge. On Boxrec, it looks like Greb beat Brennan a bunch of times before Brennan fought Dempsey. Those weren't even brought up by the Times, because I think all but one were no-decisions, and people knew what those fights were. No official verdict was rendered. They were just guys getting paid. In fact, they bring up everyone who beat Brennan except Greb. He wasn't even on the radar. Like I said, I don't recall anyone who saw Greb fight live who proclaimed him the best fighter who ever lived and that was from a much smaller pool. About 10,000 guys have taken up the sport since then, if not more. The Greb fandom seems to have come in the last few decades by people who never saw him and point to a lot of no-decision fights they and no one else alive ever saw as the reason why he was so "awesome." Who knows if we saw those fights "where no official verdict was given" if we would even think Greb won, let alone looked good. But some today just view all of those as GREAT WINS ... because they never saw them, but in their minds they 'must've been.' Like I said, it's easier to be great when no one has seen you.
