Salvador Sanchez KO2 Harry Greb

Tunney, probably worse lol

 

I have never quite understood those who argue that the low guard of this era is primitive.

They seem to think that for many decades boxers just got hit on the chin constantly and they didn't like it but there was not much that they could do about it.
Then one day a boxer had an idea and held his hands a bit higher and didn't get hit as much and soon everybody was doing it.

It simply dose not work like that.

Boxing manuals from the turn of the century emphasize that the guard hand should be held low so that it can protect against a blow to the head or body with equal rapidity. In the days of 4oz gloves a shot to the solar plexus could be more debilitating than a flush shot tho the chin so this was logical.

You will notice that when these fighters go into a crouch they often raised their guard higher because the crouch protected the body.

 

But we are debating whether Greb would do as well under modern conditions, not under his own rules. Under modern conditions, the body shots that lead to the lower guard are much less of an issue.

 

As far as the opening post implies the fight might just as easily be under rules from Greb's era.

 

Hmmm...true. This is a crazy thread. :think

 

To be honest I am not sure quite where it is going.

Either you think that every boxer pre 1940 was a glorified bar brawler or you would expect Greb to eat his cornflakes out of the skull of any featherweight.

 

Nonsensical thread thread ,I bailed out a couple of pages ago.

 

Amsterdam has to be joking, right? Sanchez was a great featherweight, but he doesn't beat Gene Tunney or Harry Greb. I would agree that Marvin Hagler beats Greb, but not Sanchez.

Boxing evolves. No ****. But it isn't so primitive in Greb's day that a 126 pounder beats an elite 160 pounder. There is no footage of Greb fighting, but we have video of Tunney and he looks great!

 

This thread is a good reason I rarely post on boxing message boards anymore. It's a waste of time debating with someone in kindergarten in their understanding of boxing.

Anyone who thinks a fighter is better just because its now is a ******. Anyone who thinks a featherweight can beat Harry Greb is really unworthy of a response.

Obviously these children have never studied films of Gene Tunney, Tommy Loughran, Mickey Walker and other great fighters that Greb beat.

-Monte Cox

 

I get the idea that the forum is geting the worst side of the exchange in trades like these.

 

Instead of becoming offended about it, would it not make more sense to explain exactly why such a thought is ridiculous--in other words, to educate those who you see as wrong? I imagine that it will create a more enlightening discussion than mere dismissal.

 

Yeah.

Why dose it have to fall to poor anoraks like us to maintain a modicum of common sense around here.