If Greb footage is found and it is mediocre how would it change your view of his opposition??

No, three votes for Tunney, ZERO for Greb. There were three official judges.

You don't add up newspaper accounts when there are three official judges.

You knock a guy out to win, or you go to the cards and win the decision. Tunney won the decision. Unanimously.

You don't add up newspaper opinions to determine a winner. That's not in any boxing rulebook.

 

I have also analyzed the video myself and plan on making a video about it some day soon. Firstly, the Broughton era ended in 1837 so it's pretty hard for me to see what you're getting at here.

I don't think anyone sensible is doubting that Greb looked bad in the shadowboxing footage. He's crossing his legs, he keeps his elbow up when he throws a right hand (leaving him completely exposed for a body counter). Greb does a ton of **** wrong.

But what you neglect mentioning is the fact that people from that time period had the exact same opinion about Greb. As the quotes I sent suggest, Greb was known to have amateurish 'ring skill', so to speak. Greb was a perfect example of when natural gifts (great chin, stamina, endurance, speed) can outdo skill (Mike Gibbons, Tommy Gibbons, Loughran, Walker).

If we judge from that footage and from footage of Greb's opponents, Mickey Walker should've ****ing knocked him out with ease. Loughran should've danced circles around him, Tommy Gibbons should've knocked him out, Mike Gibbons should've gave him a boxing lesson, Tunney should've destroyed him. But reality is often stranger than fiction, Greb was more than a handful to these guys, even if you think Tunney won their series. Look at Tunney on film, and look at Greb on film, and you'll see two people who should NOT be mentioned in the same breath, let alone share 5 fights.

 

And your boy got beat in the fourth fight so by my count he lost 3 of their 5 fights. Oh but newspaper fights dont count. LOL. You could find a film of Greb kicking the **** out of Tunney and somehow youd stick your head in the sand like dubblechin and pretend it didnt happen. The next time a thread pops up about a bad decision I want to see you two jokers arguing until your last breath that the judges were right simply for the sake being judges.

 

Good thing I don't value the opinion of judges in the slightest. Is there a more unreliable opinion than that of a boxing judge? They're the worst part about boxing, which is the most corrupt sport in the world! You'd have to be really bad to be the worst part of the most corrupt sport.

 

Tunney won a unanimous decision in the rematch. He won a unanimous decision in the third fight the same year.

You don't need to add up newspapers when there are official judges and detailed reports from the most established newspaper in the world at that time.

But, if you want to show us the film that overrules the official verdict, go ahead.

Otherwise, I'll stick the official verdict and the best reporting ... and not making up my own rules to come up with a different result.

 

The people of that time period never saw what we saw. The guys in that time were the best they ever saw. They had yet to witness SRR , Roy Jones , Duran

 

Actually you are wrong boxrec warrior. The second Greb-Tunney fight was a split decision. With Patsy Haley, who many considered biased in Tunney's favor, was the deciding vote, as was the rule in New York at the time.

 

Many of the experts who saw Greb later saw Robinson and many of them picked Greb to beat Robinson.

They would have laughed at the idea that a roided overprotected clown like Jones would be considered a fighter in their era. Jones would have **** his pants at the idea of stepping into the ring against someone like Greb.

 

No he didnt. It was a split decision. Yet another one of your many errors when describing these incidents.

 

I think Tommy Gibbons would beat RJJ, it would be a good fight tho

 

No, it was a unanimous decision.

Who do you think voted for Greb in fight three? Charles Mathison? Frank Madden or referee Lou Magnolia? Because those were the three who scored.

Should I post that report, too?

Here. Fight Three. Three official judges. Three votes for Tunney. Zero for Greb.

https://ibb.co/fD7cMGf

 

You said the rematch was a unanimous decision AND the third fight. You are incorrect. The second was a split decision.

 

Who voted for Greb? Charles Meighan or Charles Miles? What was his score?

 

Dont you know? You mean you cant find it on Boxrec? LOL.

Charles Miles voted for Greb. You can check the Herald and the Tribune because we both know you wont believe what I have to say on the subject. Hell, I doubt youd believe Miles if he told you himself.

 

Firstly, I never claimed there were no legit journalists that gave the fight to Tunney. In fact, in my post I cited 4 journalists that thought Tunney won and one of them was your link. I said that there weren't REALLY any, which was meant to emphasize how those who picked Tunney were dwarfed by those who picked Greb. And it's true; 19 out of 23 asked at ringside believed Greb had won the bout.

The fact that the New York Times gave it to Tunney doesn't change anything IMO, I hold them to an equal regard as the other newspapers. 'B-but The Jersey Journal was a county newspaper in New Jersey!' so? Why should I hold the Times to a higher regard? Because they're bigger and more famous? Please lmao, I listed 19 opinions and 14 of them had it in favour of Greb.

The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, New York Daily News, New York Evening World, New York Tribune, Newark Evening News are also examples of news outlets that thought Greb was jobbed. Boxing Blade, a weekly boxing magazine from that period, believed Greb won.

Oh sorry these aren't corporate newspaper juggernauts like the Times so their opinion is completely invalid and should be disregarded!