A description of the Greb-Dempsey spar

Interesting, considering my opinion is that Greb was a far greater LHW than Conn, and Louis a far greater HW than Dempsey, seems to improve Greb's odds in a Dempsey fight in my mind! Thanks for pointing that out.

 

Thanks "Bro" next time I wont post so I dont hurt your feelings...

 

My feelings aren’t hurt at all. On the contrary I find this whole thing hysterical.

Dubbly so for your newfound lap dog who’s only sucking up to you because his trolling ways have finally caught up to him and are now being noticed by a growing number of posters here.

 

I rarely agree with you but you’ve hit the nail on the head. It’s the epitome of grasping at straws.

Using a sparring session to predict the outcome of a fight is already laughable. But it gets downright hysterical when you take into account that nobody here has actually seen the sparring session at hand and are using it to rate Greb’s chances and dismiss Jack’s.

 

I like Greb’s chance in a 3-rounder.

 

Whilst I am in full agreement with you on the sparring, Ali looked awful in most of the spars I have witnessed, but come the real fight, and he turned up and performed, not so with your " actually seen " assertion, I have not seen the Titanic sink, but I know what happened, I have not see The battle of the Little Big Horn, but I know what happened, I did not see the battle of the Somme, but I know what happened, I will leave you to work out how....
stay safe buddy.

 

I’m not going to go through an entire thread and pick through everything you posted to have an endless exchange. It’s exhausting.

But yes, I think getting the better of a guy in 3 rounds of sparring is far different from winning a distance fight with that person. Do you dispute that in your analysis? Do you hold that anyone who gets the better of a short sparring match will likely win if they step into the ring in a real fight? Are you aware of real-life examples where guys did well in sparring with someone getting beaten, even knocked out, when it’s for real?

And yes, we have evidence that Dempsey can still punch later in fights. Five times as many rounds is five times as many opportunities to do major damage, and I think even you will concede that Dempsey is the better puncher of the two in comparison to Greb.

Heck, for all this bluster you even say you make Dempsey the favorite —upon what do you base that if you hold that being better over three rounds of sparring means a guy would win a fight? You say in so many words that Jack couldn’t lay a meaningful glove on Greb in sparring, then you tell us that your ‘analysis’ is that you favor Dempsey AND you think to win he has to hurt Greb early … but the sparring contradicts that scenario if you put so much emphasis on those rounds of not real fighting.

I do have a question: how did Jack do in the film you saw of him sparring the other guy on the same day? I assume Dempsey probably decapitated him, right? Surely the guy wasn’t still standing given that you use the ‘Jack was known to go hard in sparring and couldn’t pull punches’ card to extrapolate that therefore he never had a day in sparring where he didn’t do the same … that there are no exceptions and we can deduct from any single sparring session on his life how a real fight would go against the same opponent. That, by the way, is an example of let’s just say ‘imperfect analysis’ — trying to apply a general statement to a specific instance. We know for example that Roberto Duran was an animal in the ring and not the type to quit, but we also know he quit … so where does that get us.

Yes, it’s a sparring session. No, it’s not a fight. If we saw it, we might be able to analyze some specifics of ‘he had trouble with this or that,’ or even ‘yes but he’s getting closer to landing that haymaker each round as he gets the timing, another round or two and it might have looked different’ or whatever the case might be. But just ‘witnesses say Fighter A got the better of Fighter B in sparring’ is far from a basis for predicting an outcome in a real fight.

(Also, you come with ‘where did I ever say Jack didn’t get the better of it?’ in a third day of sparring. Are you saying that he did? Because if he did, why can’t that be the basis of what would happen beyond a third round in a real fight?)

 

But he didnt do that did he ? So tbh , I'm not following you .... He gave accounts what the people who were there witnessed , so what is wrong with that? AS that is what is done with Greb since no film of him or the sparring session but yet he is considered to be one of the best p4p fighters ever .. so not seeing him with "our" own eyes really doesn't mean **** .. "boxing" has accepted that already.. so pointing out that Greb has a lot more experience fighting more rounds late is not misleading at all but accurate . .He also said if Jack hurts him early , and Greb stays hurt than Grebs in trouble ... I dont see anything wrong with Steve's analogy at all.... I think he also said he would make Jack the favorite . but Greb a live underdog .. whats wrong with that ?? maybe I'm just not understanding you Swag

 

where does he say that Greb wins a fight with Dempsey because he bested him in sparring? You strawman twat !!!

" Ive thought about this match as much as anyone and probably more and while Ive always said youd have to make Dempsey the favorite Greb is a very live underdog and it wouldnt have surprised me a bit to see him pull out what I would consider to be a minor upset. Dempsey wasnt a huge heavyweight and had very little experience against fast tricky guys like Greb who could pile on points while punishing you enough to keep you honest and staying out of trouble. No, I think Dempsey's best shot is to catch Greb early, hurt him and keep him hurt. Thats the big question mark for me. If Dempsey could catch Greb with a really good shot early could he hurt him enough to change the dynamic. If he couldnt I think Dempsey loses a decision. If he does then he probably stops Greb or forces him into a defensive shell but the amount of times that happened to the point of Greb losing a fight across four divisions you could count on one hand."

 

I thought Dempsey vs Carpentier might be a nice multi purposed example highlighting the differences between sparring and a real fight and cases in which a fighter might hold back in either sparring or a real fight.

If the fight was abruptly called off after 2 rounds one might've extrapolated even greater success for Carps thereafter. He looked very good, and he did appear to wobble Dempsey with the right hand. But this wasn't abbreviated sparring. Dempsey stepped it up and Carps was flat on his back less then 2 rounds later.

It appeared that Dempsey did carry Carps a bit, for the huge live attendance and for the fight films. So that might be considered an example of Dempsey pulling his punches for a particular motive, not just in sparring but in a REAL fight.

And, when a fighter does pull his punches, he can be taken advantage of and made to look bad - simply because he isn't doing what he does best with full commitment. It's actually a lot harder to carry someone without a glitch than it is to just get out there and end matters asap.

 

I don't see the sense in thinking Dempsey went easy on Greb, Jack was known to be ruthless with sparring partners, why would he take it easy on a guy that was whupping him?

 

All due respect Mike, the Titanic sinking, the battle of the Little Big Horn, etc were all extensively recorded and documented. The Dempsey-Greb sparring footage was witnessed by a handful or so of witnesses. Not quite the same thing.

 

As you well know, I said he excels in his knowledge of the era and imo lacks in his impartiality. You then quoted my post and removed the bit where I said his knowledge excelled to misrepresent what I said and make it appear i said his knowledge was lacking. I.e. the exact opposite of what i said. This is documented fact that anyone reading our exchange in this thread can verify.

John didn't need to edit any your posts to have the desired effect.

I read you say yesterday you were a similar age to Mike Tyson. And you quote people's posts, editing them so they read as the exact opposite message of the original post. You won't get a rise out of me, because I feel sorry for you.

 

No, I read all that, & from what I have read about Klompton for some years others will too.
So far it seems that he has the best case.
He even is fair & balanced-not like Fox News, but driven by conscience to be fair to the other guy he no longer worships, not even predicting a Dempsey win.

You should read what he wrote.
It took some effort & I do not think everyone is lying about his years of scholarship, research & reputation in the field.
If you doubt anything he says, ask for sources.

So far nobody has posted anything of depth or specific validity to contradict him.

Remember Greb was basically a MW, peak weight at most mid 160's.
Greb was very deserving of a title shot based upon his record, & how good he was compared to The Manassa Mauler against common opponents.

One thing that surprised me from a recent thread is the fighter "Soldier" that managed a single win in a handful of fights against Greb. And he was only 147 lbs.

Klompton, was it true that Greb was the slower man in the ring that day?

 

Well,the cherry picking was kind of the point since Tunney evidently did some cherry picking of his own in coming up with his account of Dempsey being outclassed by Greb.

On balance, it seems like Greb outboxed Dempsey on one day, but Dempsey overpowered him by working the body on the next. As this account puts it:

Greb got away from the hook, but he could not avoid the body wallops from both mitts at close quarters, and it was with these punches that Dempsey finished fairly well in front on the actual fighting done.

https://ibb.co/Cwctr32