Yeah, and he did. What would you expect upon an all time great middleweight meeting an all time great light-heavyweight? And there are some very very close fights here. The idea that Gibbons was "prime" in March of 1915 but "past prime" in July of the same year seems a strange one. Greb won the third fight clean, both men had to fight in the rain. As for Gibbons "carrer-trajectory" thereafter, he showed form. Only two men beat him outside of Greb (Exluding a dq loss), and those were Dempsey and Tunney. After losing to Greb the SECOND time, he would go onto beat Kid Norfolk and Carpantier, as well as turning in that famous performance versus Dempsey. What is your evidence for seeing Gibbons as past prime for the two losses to Greb, as opposed to prime for the wins? Not true at all. The great "boxer types" that Walker beat include Maxie Rosenbloom, Mike McTigue, Dave Shade, Jack Britton and he boxed a draw with the best technical heavyweight of his era, in Sharkey. These are some of the best of his time. And painting Walker as somehow "vulnerable" to Greb's unqiue style is ridiculous to begin with, I don't accept he has more in common with the men above than the handful of boxers that managed to beat Mickey. I don't think your point has any merit at all. Greb's victory over Walker represents nothing other than a dominating victory over a fellow top 10 inhabitant at his weight. Astonishing. Not a "good win" at all, a crushing series of victories over one of the best of his time. You keep repeating that he "consistantly lost to the best men of the period". Take the ten best men that Greb ever faced, add up the wins and losses and you'll have an overwhelming positive outcome even outside of the fact that at least three of the losses (two to Flowers and one to Tunney) are controversial at best.
The five best fighers that Ali ever faced - George Foreman Larry Holmes Sonny Liston Joe Frazier Ken Norton Overall record - 7-3 Roy Jones - Bernard Hopkins James Toney John Ruiz Joe Calzaghe Antonio Tarver Overall record - 4-4 Just two examples, but I think it helps to indicate how useless all of that nonsense is. Allowing for the fact that Greb would sometimes fight three or four times a month...of course he lost.
Burt your working on the basis of 'if he can beat good bigger men, he must be able to beat a great'. Boxing doesn't work like that, following your logic you'd pick Jones Jr over Robinson too as he beat much bigger men, according to this logic Manny Pacquaio would easily beat Willie Pep, Archie Moore would beat Charles Burley (as we know it didnt happen). I could go on but I think you see my point Anyway Robinson at his best may well have beat all those men, he would have beat Joey Maxim if it wasnt in blistering heat after all
Power Puncher You overlook the fact that prior to Greb beating Tommy Gibbons March 13,1922,tommy Gibbons had won 48 out of 50 bouts with many knockouts...Gibbons who outweighed Harry Greb by 8 pounds was a force to be reckoned with then...Just look at film of Gibbons flattening Jack Bloomfield of England with devastating punches...Very, very impressive to see...
The difference is the above 2 men looked unbeatable in their prime, Greb only fought on until the age of 32, its also taking a few 'of their best' out, ie Patterson. I suppose you can also argue 'well all those fights put him past prime earlier and he was blinded in 1 eye', but then their the prior losses to Gibbons, O'Dowd, and a 146lb Bartfield. Can you imagine a Prime Jones Jr losing to a WW that hes outweighing by 20lbs? I'll answer your prior post later as I'm behind on work, I was banned for 2days this week and got shedloads done
No, the difference is that Greb fought more great fighters and had more fights. As for age, being blinded in one eye more than compensates, although to paraphrase you "boxing is in part about adapting". Which applies to losing an eye, but not fighting on past 32, apparently...come on. Can you imagine Jones fighting 30 times in a year, many of them against world class opposition? It's very difficult. Pound for pound? Actual? Are we limited to just five? Because he fought across three weights it's a very very complicated issue.
Here you run up against another complication; weights for many of his fights are unknown. Playing it super safe: Tiger Flowers 0-2 Mickey Walker 1-0 Ted Moore 1-0 Johnny Wilson 2-0 Boxrec would add guys like Billy Miske, George Chip, Jeff Smith and Mike McTigue; likely he beat Jack Dillon, Battlink Levinsky and others, but it's hard to be certain. Klompton is probably the man to ask.
Good point about beating LaMotta was a welter but it still singles out LaMotta as his toughest opponent ... I would put Tunney, Loughran and Gibbons as all bigger and able to beat Robinson and all were Greb victims ... my pont in singling these guys out is to shoe how Greb could handle big, taller, lightning fast boxers ....
This indicates that you do not fully grasp what a comparison is and how it can be used in argument. This indicates that you are not familiar with Greb's opponents. Here you are trying to at once confirm and invalidate a strong point. You need a plan B. Overwhelmed? I offered you a perspective using two numbers. It actually sounds as if you have no answer to plain facts and so use distortion -which is often a common part of your style of argument out here. Unfortunately. Here you are again confirming Greb's "quality" and simultaneously trying to invalidate it. "DelahoyaEsque"? That's just silly. Dominant? Isn't this thread about who's greater? Weren't you already asked to stop with the straw men? You need a crash course on Greb. What you think you know about him is questionable enough to make me guess you are looking things up on the web just to find little factoids to throw out here.