Bob Fitzimmons v Harry Greb

I wouldnt say categorically that Fitzsimmons was smarter or faster than even Miske. You comparing apples and oranges. What Fitzsimmons did best was hit. No doubt about it. But he was largely stationary, very methodical, and looked to land the big punch. Not a good combination against Greb. Yes Greb got hit but not a single one of the guys you named short of Norfolk (who was no slouch) even managed to deck him (and Norfolk only did for a flash KD). Fitzsimmons would have to hit Greb and knock him out cold to win. Period. Only one person ever did that and Greb had been a professional for only six months at the time and was fighting a bigger, more experienced fighter. Its easy to say Greb never fought anyone like Fitz (which I dont agree with, he fought plenty of punchers and several were more dynamic than Fitz) but name me one fighter even remotely like Greb that Fitz fought? Corbett? For the reputation that Corbett has as a dancer he didnt move around 1/10th as much as Greb was reputed to have and Corbett made an absolute ****** out of Fitz for the vast majority of that fight. I think this is one comparison where the difference in eras is as important as anything in this match. Fitz boxed in a very archaic style. Some people wont want to hear that and I hate to admit it being a proponent of the old timers but both he and Corbett dont look good at all. That wide stance, those wide swings, porous defense. That worked great when you are fighting in an era where Corbett was considered the most modern thing ever seen. and everyone else was squared up, highly immobile, and didnt even exhibit the greatest punching technique. fast forward 30 years and I dont see Fitz being able to do anything with a jumping jack thats all over the place. He might hit him but lets not pretend that Greb was some kind of cream puff that couldnt take a shot. The guy got hit by heavyweights on occasion without effect and the next instant would beat the hell out of them. Part of what makes this tough is that while Fitz has a lot of KOs he also has a LOT of KOs over complete nobodies. By the time he was regularly fighting classy fighters (and going over 4 or 6 rds) he could be considered past his prime. Even then the best names he beat still werent better than Greb likely head to head wouldnt be favored over Greb. I may be selling Fitzsimmons short a bit because his career before coming to the states is somewhat inconclusive IMO but Ive seen far too many boxer/puncher matchups and most of the time when you get two equally talented guys, one a boxer and one a puncher in the ring the boxer wins (much to my chagrin because I always root for the puncher).

 

This content is protected

 

I wasn't going to join this debate because I rate/like both fighters so much. But I can't resist either. It's one of these threads where you praise one fellow to the highest and then pick the other fighter to beat him. So here goes!
Greb would make pulp of Bob, maybe even drop him but some time, that I haven't a clue of, Fitz springs that trap and knocks him out clean cold.
Bob was awfully clever and disciplined and hit like a mule. For me the bad style match-up for Fitz is a fast boxer-mover-a la Tunney- or a powerful heavyweight that can actually absorb that punch, think Jeff.
But as multiple respected posters have said, I could just as easily be wrong and Fitz spends 15 or more rounds eating leather from all sides and chasing herky-jerky shadows.

 

I'm a huge Dempsey fan , but have to admit, Greb beat some of Jack's foes a lot more convincingly than he did.He has a solid heavyweight pedigree to back up his resume at middle, this points to a good chin.
My opinion may be subject to change,[ I've had a nice bottle of Merlot.]
But I have a feeling Greb stays one jump ahead of the relatively pedestrain Fitz, and steals a decision.
I'm surprised to be saying this but truth will out.

 

Here's the other thing, Billy Miske hit hard as hell. Even Gibbons said he hit as hard as, if not harder, than Dempsey. Bill Brennan and Kid Norfolk could both hit like hell, too. Gibbons (x2), Gunboat Smith, Tunney, McGoorty, Chip, Jeff Smith, Al McCoy... the list goes on... all good whack really well. In 300+ fights, of which I am guessing a good 50 or more were against Hall of Famers, Greb was only lit up once. That qualifies as a great, not good, chin.

 

I would expect Dempsey to catch up with Greb over 15 rds, over 8 he might look like a fool. Don't you think the difference in era styles would be a big factor. As has been said, Fitz was a sharp shooting trap setter, would Greb give him time to get set?
Would all big heavyweight punchers get to land solid on Greb?
What is the distance?

It's really a toss up fight for me, and I'm very big on both men.

 

Robert Edgren said Fitz was head and shoulders above anyone at middleweight...and he actually saw them in action. Might be added though, that on this board Slakka said that Edgren didn't really acknowledge Greb like he should have...So who knows? Do historians generally respect the word of Edgren? He was respected during his time...but is he respected now?
Just a hunch...if Greb would find success getting to, and tearing up Fitzsimmons, and he would..Fitz is very hittable...does Greb become too aggressive? Fitz might spring a trap on him...if Fitz decimated those heavyweights with one punch, he could hurt and stop Greb too. So it's impossible to say...Would Greb attack with abandon?...or be careful with the cannon in front of him?

 

Bob Edgren was not a fan of Greb's to begin with. In fact he didnt like him at all. So his opinion on middleweights is a bit skewed right from the start as it relates to Greb.

Second, there is a possibility that 1890s rules favor Fitz, but that is purely and simply conjecture. To say he would benefit from a finish might or might not be true. BUT the guy NEVER went more than 14 rounds. Period. He went that distance once. The vast majority of his fights, particularly in his prime, were scheduled for no more than 6 rounds. His supposed change in style coinciding in a move to heavyweight also "coincidently" coincided with the length of his fights being scheduled for dramatically longer periods than he was used to fighting. So its not a given that longer fights would favor him against a guy who was known to go 20 brutal rounds at a very fast clip.

Another point: If Tunney is a problem for Fitz because hes fast and mobile then where does that leave Greb who nobody disputed was faster than Tunney and more mobile than him?

All that being said, and regardless of my high respect for Fitz I just think he really only has a punchers chance in this fight. Greb had a habit of doing that to guys who could do a lot more against other opponents. He reduced them to one trick ponys. When you are down on the cards and going into the late rounds the last guy you want across the ring is a durable volume puncher who is a defensive wizard, extremely fast, and is fighting harder in the 20th than he did in the first.

 

Greb is the perfect fighter to beat both Fitz and Langford IMO

 

I think Langford presents Harry with an entirely different set of obstacles to overcome.

 

Those you mentioned are indeed," one off's" .singular in their approach to boxing.

Locche looks like any left hooker should decapitate him but none could.

Wilde looks very raw on film, whereas Lynch ,whom he is often compared to looks modern imo, but there is probably not a gnats **** between them for greatness.
I think Canzoneri was more conventional but I haven't seen a ton of him to make a definitive judgement.

Jones is a bit of an Ali,ie god- given reflexes that hide certain technical deficiences until age and the slowing of those said reflexes make it apparent that they are there. Greb had inhuman stamina, perhaps only Armstrong came close to it, would it be a factor here?

Fitz trained scrupilously running behind a horse and buggy his sparring partners would fall,and flounder by the wayside trying to keep with him.

But he was used to fighting at a much more leisurely pace.

Against Corbett he was behind early, but gradually weakend the boxing stylist, slowing him to a walk with bodyshots,and once you were static against Fitz it was good night for you.
Tunney said the secret to beating Greb was to go for his body specifically the solar plexus and under the heart.
Tunney couldnt hit like Fitz, few could, but he was probably a faster, straighter puncher.
There again would Greb be as attacking against a puncher like Fitz as he was against Tunney who was more of a boxer?
The more I think about this fight the more imponderables come to light,and the less confident I am of making a pick.
Any one who has conviction about the result is either a fool or has a crystal ball at their disposal.
On another note, it's got me thinking about how Greb would do against Corbett? But one at a time.