who REALLY is the greatest middleweight?

Hagler was pushed almost all the way by a blown up 33 yr old lightweight (albeit the greatest lightweight and one who 6 yrs later won a 160 lb title).

Marvin was marvellous but not the best.

 

If you could combine the resumes of Hagler and Robinson, Greb's resume would still be better.

 

Greb had arguably the greatest title defense win of any middleweight champion in the history of the division. (I did not say successful defense, because then Antuofermo's draw against Hagler could push Vito very close. But Harry got a conclusively indisputable official decision over Walker.) Robinson only managed three successful defenses at 160, over former knockout victim Olson 2X, and a fading Graziano. By taking a temporary retirement after Maxim, he deprived himself of what may have been his one dominant reign, prematurely cutting short his second stint on top at 160.

Certainly, the case can be made by Hagler's supporters that he officially holds the record for most defenses of the undisputed middleweight crown (as Monzon made three defenses of the WBA Title only). But Harry proved himself against some top heavyweights while never outgrowing 160 (and he did weigh 159 for his final career bout, a match where many witnesses believed he clearly got the best of Flowers).

 

Middleweight is incredibly deep with so many great fighters. I pick Monzon to be the most consistant against the greats, due to jabbing style and a physical presence/strength that enhances that style to the max. Very high boxing IQ. Perhaps played to his strengths better than anyone...It appears that no one was able to ever force pace on Monzon...He always fought at his own tempo. When someone is able to do that...very hard to beat, regardless of the style.

 

dpw, monzon was good, but Harry Greb was amazingly good. Greb did things above his weight class that a Carlos Monzon would never attempt. Greb
frequently whipped great light heavies as tommy Gibbons, jack Dillon, Tommy loughran, Battling Levinsky, Maxie Rosenbloom, the heavy hitting
Gunboat Smith,the tough Heavyweight Bill Brennan[MANY TIMES}in a 300 bout career. He tackled everyone, every color, every style on a 5ft.8"frame.
When did Monzon ever tackle the best American light heavyweights of his time ? I would like to know. None of course,as Monzon knew his limitations.
But as the record books show Harry Greb had no fear or limitations whatsoever. Greb was one of a kind. Monzon to my eyes would have been
beaten by Freddie Steele,who could hit just as hard with more speed.
And Mickey Walker who tackled heavyweights often, would have outfought
and out punched Monzon. cheers,D...

 

Greb is disgustingly overrated. That is what makes me dislike him.

All these ****ing fools acting like experts on what a "windmill" he was in the ring. Ummm.... THERE'S NO ****ING FOOTAGE OF THE ****.


We only have bias writings of the era to rely on. Of course writers of the time are going to paint Greb as the greatest thing ever... BECAUSE HE WHITE!!!!


Also, if Greb is the GOAT (as many of you say on this forum).. then why did most writers and boxers right up to the era of Joe Louis think that JOE GANS AND/OR SAM LANGFORD were the GOAT... and no Greb mentioned.


You can't rely on bias writings of an era and say that fighter is the GOAT.


The will always be SRR's crown.





HOLYFIELD HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK!

 

Exectly **** Greb.










RJJ HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK! :hat:smh

 

The question is should be taken into consideration what happened at other weights than mw? I don´t think so. Greb´s resume is still good enough to put him at very least on par and probably above King Carlos. If you judge the ranking of a fighter at a certain weight only the resume and accomplishments at that weight should be considered. P4p would be something different.

I think Monzon would have beaten Walker. Walker wouldn be able to outbox him like he did Hudkins. Monzon just wouldn´t allow it and he isn´t outfighting Monzon. Monzon himself had too good timing, was too precise and had too much power for this. He would tag Walker again and again coming in and while Walker was better on the inside, Monzon would hold his own. It´s a case of a great big man beating a great little man.
Now Steele would be a fascinating style. Steele had power, speed, a decent technique and chin. But I think Monzon would dictate the flow and pace of the fight. He had the better jab and that would be the key to win the fight. I like Steele but as good as he was, I think he lacked that little bit extra that Monzon had which made Monzon to such a great champ. While Steele won "only" a part of the title.

 

So, what you people are saying is...


I've never seen the greatest FIGHTER of all time FIGHT.


Ummm... yeah... that makes sense.




How do you know he was that good in the ring? From bias writings?

They would paint him as great because he's white. That is not detable. I cannot stress anough how much whites hated blacks back then.


If you want to rely on heavily bias writings as your argument for the greatest of all time, then go ahead.


But you must realize that it's stupid




Holyfield Hooooooooooooooooooooook!

 

hagler

 

And NWS decision are official victories. We cannot deny that.

A NWS decision means that no judges officially announced a winner. The newspapers did - and therefore they are debatable decision, especially in that era.

All the newspapers were controlled by whites and there they would favour Greb over any blacks he fought (VERY few exceptions).




don't argue with...



HOLYFIELD HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK!

 

Monzon.

Although RJJ is a H2H nightmare for anyone.