Greb vs Louis. What type of chance does Greb have?

"happy to cut him some slack for off days and hot and cold performances"

A fair point.

But Conn WAS more consistent.

 

You must have meant Soldier Bartfield, who eked out a close decision in
1917 ..Greb beat the tough Soldier Bartfield twice after..Greb just 22 fought the week before and the week after the fight to the more
experienced Bartfield...I personally could vouch for Soldier Bartfield's
toughness...
As I posted before, I as a youngster and my dad was introduced to the
fiftiesh Bartfield by my my uncle who had a luncheonette near where
Soldier Bartfield worked in about 1945...Soldier playfully pulled me close to him and pummeled my ribs.He didnt know his own strength,and my dad pulled me away...I winced in discomfort...So I was in a clinch with a guy
that fought Harry Greb 4 times...He fought everyone his weight in his
time...His nephew Danny Bartfield, was a vey good lightweight i saw in the 1940s, but had bad hands...

 

"You must have meant Soldier Bartfield"

I sure did. It is time to retire, except I am retired. But I better take a nap. Thanks for pointing that out. I edited it.

 

And I enjoy reading your posts also because even if I don't agree, I can drool over that avatar. It is the best of them all.

 

How was conn more consistent when he lost decisions to the likes of-
Dick woodward
Ray Eberl
Ralph Gizzy
Teddy Movan
Teddy Movan
Young Corbett 11
Solly Krieger
Teddy Yarosz
This is not meant to be a knock against wonderful Conn, but to say Conn
with one quarter of the fights Harry Greb fought,was "more consistent"
than Greb ,is blatanly wrong IMO...
They boith were great fighters..Conn was great ! Harry Greb was an immortal !

 

Burt, you are really going to knock Conn for his losing fights at 16 & 17 years old?


After reaching 18, he only lost to champions, Young Corbett III, Solly Krieger, and Teddy Yarosz, and he defeated all of those men. The only man he didn't defeat was Joe Louis.

 

OF,I love Billy Conn....But if Greb lost a decision to Soldier Bartfield, a
"Tiger Jones" of his times, I had to mention that young Billy had his losses
also...
P.S. Old Fogey, Billy Conn's Trainer Johnny Ray was from Pittsburgh and a
stablemate and friend of Harry Greb..
Harry and Billy were from the same mould..They were brave and LOVED to fight..Take care...From an admirer oif Billy Conn..b.b.

 

Conn was a better fighter up to 24 and had achieved more??? How do you figure? When Greb was 24 he had defeated 2 standing world champions in two seperate classes and gone even up (at least) against another. The ONLY reason he wasnt a simultaneous champion in two divisions was because those champions refused to fight him to a decision in order to protect their titles. He had defeated 3 or 4 other past or future champions and several claimants. In addition to that he held wins, in dozens of fights, over men who would be considered top ten contenders (had that distinction existed at the time).

You say that Conn only lost once above 165. True but he had less fights above 165 in his entire career than Greb had in 1919 alone. Out of those fights how many were against great or even very good fighters? So lets not act like he has this massively deep record above 165.

I dont understand your point in stating that the big men Greb fought were mainly LHWs. Big deal the majority of those LHWs were guys who showed many times that they could compete at the highest levels of the HW division. Hell, Mickey Walker was a legitimate top HW contender and Greb kicked his ass. Louis' handlers nixed a match with an ancient Rosenbloom because they were afraid Rosenblooms style would give Louis problems. Greb kicked his ass. You could go on and on but to minimize Greb's accomplishments and record, especially in light of Conns is pretty weak IMO.

Just because the CBZ lists Norfolk as having defeated Greb twice doesnt make it so. Their first fight was a closely contested bout according to all papers with there being a one or two round swing at most. The newspapers were evenly divided as to who won the match and the referee stated that had he been legally allowed to choose a winner he would have chosen Greb. Norfolk led early and dropped Greb for a short count early but by the end of the fight Norfolk was exhausted from fending off Greb's attacks, bleeding, and trapped in a corner taking severe punishment. The rematch Greb was at the height of his partying, came into the match ten pounds overweight (and his unfit condition was noted by the press). The fight was an ugly, dirty mess with both fighters breaking the rules. At the end of the final round Norfolk hit Greb in the back of the head after Greb had turned to walk to his corner, Greb became enraged and retaliated sparking a riot which resulted in Greb being disqualified. Both fighters were banned for a time from fighting in Boston and more than one paper stated that Norfolk should have been disqualified since he was the offender.

So Brennan was not a top man at the time? He was a legitimate contender for the title. Certainly more so than Langford whose sun had set by at least 1918 if not earlier. Norfolk was also a top man in the HW division who was at the time streaking toward a shot at Dempsey. When Greb fought Weinert Rickard had been trying to match he and Dempsey which was the reason Greb fought Weinert. He figured if he beat the man they were trying to match with Dempsey he would get the shot. Same with Gibbons, regardless of weight. Dont hold the fact that he didnt fight Dempsey against him because the only reason he didnt fight Dempsey, or Carpentier, or Firpo, or Siki, etc etc. Is because they refused to fight him. That right there speaks volumes.

As for Tunney, Tunney only won their series on paper. Period. Greb dominated the first fight. The 2nd fight was called by a vast majority of people who witnessed it a terrible robbery, one of the worst decisions in NY history etc etc. In fact some papers stated that Greb won the second fight as convincingly as the first. The third fight was close as well but Tunney deserved it and the 4th fight was a ND for Greb. Tunney took the final fight and lets not forget that when he took that fight he was in his prime and allowed to weigh the most he had ever weighed against Greb, while Greb was blind in one eye, had a lot of ring wear, was not training like he used to, and easily entering the final stages of his career.

You continually bring up Soldier Bartfield but of the half a dozen or so times they fought Greb lost once and avenged that loss every other time. Likewise with Wiggins Greb had one newspaper draw against him and defeated him all other times. He also dominated Gus Christie and Clay Turner multiple times, both of whom defeated Kid Norfolk and defeated Jack Renault who was a pretty damn good HW as well. He defeated Homer Smith and Hugh Walker, both of whom were at least as good as any of the lower level HWs on Conns record, and never drew with Jamieson as you state, whoever posted that in any record is incorrect according the newspapers ringside. Bill Brennan who gave Dempsey hell for 12 rounds lost 45 straight rounds to Greb.

Oh, and for the record you can go back and check newspaper sources for the Conn-Bettina 1 bout, it was closer than the scores indicate. The NY Times was not the only paper present in the world at that time. or you can just watch the film.


Your comments on ND fights makes it clear you are one of those people who believe that ND were glorified exhibitions. You couldnt be more wrong. The problem with ND bouts is they take more effort to research and lazy people dont like effort so its easier for them to write them off than defend from a position of ignorance.

Someone also made a point that Conn had no amateur experience, as if Greb's amateur experience was somehow a major plus. The guy had a handful of amateur bouts against decidedly local competition. Hardly a guy with 300 amateur bouts all over the world.

You also state Conn was more consistent. Im not sure how you are quantifying this. Conn had many less fights than Greb, less than a third. If you count Greb's newspaper decisions for/against him Greb's losing percentage was less than half of what Conns was. Even if you only go by the official decisions Greb fought his losing percentage is significantly lower than Conns and the vast majority of those decisions came when Greb was blind in one eye and well past his prime. Greb was only stopped twice in his career, Conn three times but both of Greb's stoppages came early in his career: Once in the first six months of his career against a larger fighter who was the brother and chief sparring partner of the MW champion of the world and the other time based on a broken forearm that came against a WW championship title claimant. Conn, on the other hand Conns first KO loss came early in his career, which like Greb's can be forgiven while his second came in his prime in a fight he was leading on, while the other both Conn and Louis were past their best.


Furthermore from 1917 until the end of his career Greb only lost to champions or hall of famers. In fact the only non HOFer Greb lost to was O'Dowd who should be in the hall and that, as stated above is an arguable loss at worst. With the exception of ODowd (who refused to rematch him) Greb held wins (whether newspaper or official) over every fighter who defeated him after 1917. Conns record cant compete with that kind of consistency in any way shape or form.

 

Klompton, that was a heckuva post! (And I do think O'Dowd will be in the IBHOF shortly.)

 

I hope so he was a heck of a fighter who is sadly forgotten.

 

Excellent post Steve. You are our primary source on Greb. :good (now get that damn book finished!:smoke)

When all is said and done I think everyone here has a healthy respect for both men

 

First time I've ever heard Greb described as anything other than remarkably consistent. But then klompton said it all 10 times better than I could've ever hoped to.

 

Actually I just realized something. Only three fighters defeated Greb in either ND or Decision matches that he did not hold wins over: Hooks Evans, Mike O'Dowd, and Kid Graves. Its pretty impressive when you have had 300 fights and werent able to defeat or avenge only 1% of the fights...

 

I did not say Greb was not consistent. I said I thought Conn was more consistent, which is different.