Harry Greb Footage

Imo:

ATG's - Walker, Tunney, Loughran x 4, M.Gibbons x 2, T. Gibbons x 2, Dillon, Norfolk, Flowers and Rosenbloom.

Borderline ATGs - Jeff Smith x 6, Jimmy Slattery, Battling Levinsky x 6 and Jimmy Delaney x 3

Non ATG world champion - Mike McTigue x 2

Non ATG, but world class for the time, contenders - 33lbs heavier Willie Meehan x 2, 26lbs heavier Bill Brennan x 4, 24lbs heavier Charley Weinert, 19lbs heavier Billy Miske, 8lbs heavier Gunboat Smith, Soldier Bartfield x 3, George Chip x 2, Jack Blackburn, Bob Moha x 6, Clay Turner x 7, Leo Houck x 3, Jimmy Slattery, Buck Crouse, Gus Christie x 3, Eddie McGoorty, Johnny Wilson x 2, Lou Bogash, Ted Moore x 2 and Bryan Downey.

 

THIS.

 

I don't think some just got in because they were old timers pal.. I think they did actually achieve something that was noteworthy in the sport. But how you value or assess a HOF entry is totally up to you that's your prerogative.

I will just remind u that yes the IBHOF was only established in the 80s.. however an earlier version was created in 1954, the Rings HOF.. when it disbanded in 1987, it had a total of 155 inductees including many of Grebs opponents.. Gibbons, Loughran, Walker, Rosenbloom, Flowers, Levinsky etc.. almost everyone of those 155 have also been inducted to the IBHOF.. so its not necessarily true or the correct way to look at it saying HOFers only come about as some nostalgia trip 80 years or whatever down the line making comparisons with recent fighters unfair because they'll have to wait a century before we can quantify their tally too..

Many HOFers have essentially been in it since as early as the 50s.. but if you aren't interested in the whole hall of fame thing then thats fair enough. Maybe look at Greb like this then.. take 3 of Grebs best wins.. for example WW/MW great Walker, LHW great Loughran & LHW/HW Tunney.. i don't think anyone could argue that those 3 aren't legitimate all time greats.. beating them today would be something akin to the MW champion beating Canelo, Bivol & Usyk.. in fact I'd say its better because i rate Walker over Canelo & i certainly rate Loughran over Bivol & probably Tunney over Usyk too .. then you throw in the fact that he was partially sighted.. can u imagine all that today? Seriously.. then throw in the fact that he fought them multiple times.. 2 of them anyway.. & he didn't age them out or catchweight them.. in fact he was the one who was feeling his age & at a size disadvantage mostly.. that's GREATNESS.

 

I think people forget just how hard it was to see certain things back then. Barely any fights of Grebs were filmed. No-one was watching Greb on TV. It's safe to say no-one was watching Greb on youtube or online. How many were going to his fights to see him live? Comparative to those fans not watching, barely anyone. Nowadays we have every single fight of Tyson's except one or so in excellent quality ready to roll at our fingertips. We have a load of Ali's from his 60's and forward career. Even guys like Marciano, and Louis, are plentiful. You hear the stories all the time about this fight and that from the older era's having to go by word of mouth per how an opponent fights because they simply couldn't watch him.

I don't think I've ever seen Eddie Futch comment on Greb. I bet he never saw him fight.
Joe Louis? Joe's trainer fought Greb but i don't think i ever saw much of Joe talking about him. I dare say Joe never saw him fight and there's not much chance Marciano did.

So access to Greb, even in his day, was miniscule to say the least.

 

I’m not arguing that Greb wasn’t great.

I’m questioning whether every one of his HoF opponents would be in the HoF if they weren’t admitted as old-timers rather than on their merit against others, or if they timed out (say you get 10 years to be admitted as an old-timer/pioneer and after that, you’ve had your chance and you are removed from consideration).

Some of the names I see on there were very good fighters by their records, but were not greats in my estimation. They were just really good, which isn’t what should get someone in the HoF.

Do you not think JCC will have more HoFers on his resume in 100 years than he does now? Don’t you think some guys we kind of say ‘really good, not great, not HoF material but damned fine fighter’ will not get grandfathered in (so to speak) when they become old-timers? I think they will.

Another thing we know a lot more about now that current and more recent fighters face is the knowledge of a fighter’s situation/condition going into a fight that we don’t know about these guys from that era because the press wasn’t looking into every angle:

If Greb fought someone who was weight-drained, I don’t think we’d know it, but we hear about it all the time today and it’s used to minimize the impact of a win. We know JCC was cut over his eye when he got into the ring against de la Hoya, and Oscar ripped that cut open — would we know if that happened in Greb’s day? Or if someone was nursing a hand damaged/broken in a fight a few weeks before? I kind of doubt it.

 

Why should I disregard fighters who competed in the no-decision era? How did you make that leap?

A no-decision is an official result. If you didn't score a KO, you didn't win. Pretty cut and dry.

I have zero problems with no-decisions. NOBODY did.

I follow a fighter's OFFICIAL RECORD. I always have.

Harry Greb has a fine OFFICIAL record.

http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/greb.htm

It was his record for nearly 80 years. Nobody had a problem with it.

Changing the OFFICIAL RESULTS is what I have a problem with.

And should be everyone's concern who follows boxing.

You can't win a decision IN A NO-DECISION. It's literally IN the FREAKING NAME. (NO decision.)

You could only officially win by KO. That's it. And that's how the fighters in those bouts fought. NOT to win the most rounds, to SCORE KOS.

For the life of me, I have no idea how following an OFFICIAL record became ridiculous.

Who proudly announces they follow his ALTERED results (which were made up by internet hacks who came up with their own scoring system a century later and now render fight results based on web searches and counting newspaper accounts)?

Apparently, a lot of you do. But I'll never be a part of it.

Official results are official results.

And I can't believe I actually have to argue the merit of preferring the OFFICIAL results instead of made-up results. Anyway.

 

Let's consider one of his HOF opponents, Mickey Walker. I know it's a highlight vid and that he is a ring bully, but look at the timing, movement, punch selection, insane countering and control of distance (with no reach)... The dude was a welterweight who gave legit 200 pound heavyweights fits. If he ain't HOF, don't preach to me about some prima donna with a curated record against artisanally selected opponents...

This content is protected

Greb was fighting once a week during his prime, training on trains (!) between fights, no recoup, no good doctoring, and he was beating a who's who of his era. I find that more impressive than today's lot that claims a no-show due to a tummy-ache. Dude fought a third of his fights half blind, fer Christ's sake, and to do that he changed his style completely becoming more a mauler than an in and out speed guy.

You certainly have an argument given your positions for some fighters, but Greb's record is so preposterous against the best of his era, you would have to write off the whole era to hold true to your reasoning. I've been re-reading contemporary articles on Greb and it's shocking how many scribes were picking him to pluck Dempsey over ten rounds. He was truly One of One.

 

The problem with someone talking about Greb's preposterously great record is no one knows anymore what record they are talking about.

His official record, with the ACTUAL results, or the record where people this century have decided to give him wins (and his opponent's losses) in fights where no such wins and losses occurred.

This is his official record. And it's always been considered quite good. But this record has been altered almost beyond recognition anymore on other sites by guys who have come up with a totally different way of determining the winner ... a method that isn't used anywhere in the actual sport.

http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/greb.htm

 

The problem is not considering newspaper decisions as legitimate when rendered by multiple writers but then considering a decision by a single ref chosen by the A-side to be the end-all be-all.

 

Here's another neanderthal that Greb beat per multiple newspapers, a dude on a 20 fight win streak since his draw with the amazing Packy McFarland. He seems really unskilled to me...

This content is protected

 

Newspaper decisions were never a legit way to determine an official result in a no-decision fight.

Why?

BECAUSE YOU CAN'T WIN AN OFFICIAL DECISION in a no-decision fight. You have to win by KO.

There have been a lot of ways to determine an official result in boxing.

The points system determined an official result.
The rounds system determined an official result.
A disqualification was an official result.
A no-decision (when both fighters agreed you could only win by KO) was an official result.
A knockout determined an official result.

No fighters we're talking about here EVER participated in a fight where they were told nobody's hand would be raised at the conclusion of the fight ... and a media poll taken afterward determined who the OFFICIAL winner was.

That was never the contract for any of these fights. ANY of them.

No sanctioning body or athletic commission said the winner of any of these fights will be determined by media poll.

But that's what you now believe with these altered results.

He has an official record. Why is everyone not only so insistent but ARROGANT about IGNORING official boxing records?

 

I mentioned Walker and Tunney as legit HoFers to distinguish them from some of the others who got in not when they were originally compared to others up for induction but got in later via the old-timers route when all the deserving guys had already been added.

In fact, I believe ALL of Greb’s opponents who are in the HoF and Greb himself all went in through the ‘old timers’ side door.

Leo Houck, for instance, didn’t become a Hall of Famer until nearly 100 other old-timers got in.

Let’s put it another way: Luis Angelo Firpo is going in this year as an old-timer. In what way does that enhance Jack Dempsey? He just picked up a HoF win … but for the 35 years that the HoF has been in existence, he never was HoF material. All that happened was enough years passed by that they finally got around to him after passing on him for more than a quarter century.

Firpo didn’t get a lick better, nor does Dempsey’s win mean one iota more.

 

Yeah Gibbons was a bad ass and all but we still have a guy on the internet's opinion that Greb wasn't all that so.....I guess it's settled.

 

Ah, gotcha.

I did a thread a couple weeks back about "Why in the hell is Firpo in the IBHOF?"

But Greb beat so many quality fighters it's just mind boggling. You could cut it in a third and it's still GOAT status. And can I remind you that fighters of more recent vintage like Arturo Gatti and Ingemar Johansson are in the hall?

 

I've never heard Bill Gallo mention Bach, so he must suck.