Deepest Resumes?

You are confusing no decisions with newspaper decisions. Newspaper decisions were a way of sorting bets out, nothing more. Many of the fighters listed as being 'defeated' were well known for just going though the motions in no decision bouts.

If you were Maxie Rosenbloom, you were hardly going to stop Greb, so going the full 10 rounds was best you could do. On top of this maybe a small wager against yourself to boost your pay? Also Maxie had 13 bouts in the first eight months of 1925, so he was unlikely to give more than the minimum required...

 

Yes 38 fights (62%) of his 61 career pro fights were against Champions or top 10 fighters at Heavyweight. On top of this he also fought and beat Henry Cooper (twice), Cleveland Williams, Buster Mathis, George Chuvalo (fight two) and Bob Foster when they were not top 10 rated Ring Heavyweights...

 

exactly most of the guys he mentioned were just contenders anways. Ali has the better resume and we have seen how great liston and patterson are on film. They look much better and far more skilled on film than a tommy loughran or gibbons does.

 

Newsflash: The guy who isn't the champ is a contender, so most of the guys TBooze mentioned as wins for Ali were just contenders as well.

 

the only difference is that there isnt footage of most of greb's contenders. newspaper Decisions dont count asd wins, they are nothing but opinions. I could go and make a newspaper decision on a fight that was ruled a draw if i wanted to.

Greb would have been dq'd in so many of his fights, if it was in modern standards anyways.

 

Ali would have been roughed up if it were in Greb's time, what is your point? These names have to be considered on an era by era basis. If someone was a top contender in Greb's day, it should be taken as seriously as if someone was a top contender in Ali's day, providing they both fought fighters or similar standing in their time frames.

Whether or not you think fighters of Greb's time could beat fighters of Ali's time has no bearing on whether or not they are still considered top wins because they were the best of that time. Greb fought and beat(in reality) the best of his time, just like Ali did of his time. Only difference is, Greb fought more of them, and fought a hell of a lot more than Ali.

 

Greb in todays boxing scene would have been interesting. Not sure he's as refined as todays greats, but what he lacked in refinement, he almost certainly made up things when it came to power, heart, and sheer will to win. Poverty was worse back in those days than it has been recently. Todays greats would probably need a shotgun to floor Greb.

What about Sam Langford. He jumped off a train with his dog and explained to a guy who owned a gym that he hadn't eaten for two days and was sleeping rough at the time. Sam got a job as a janitor at the gym then went onto become a fighter himself.

 

To me its irrelevant if greb fought more. Ali beat 33 ranked fighters, thats 60% of his career.

 

have you seen loughran on film?

He was a brilliant boxer

 

Which is why I said in my first post in this thread, that, by the threadstarter's criteria, Ali is definitely one of the, if not the best in terms of deepest resume. I also said that in terms of overall resume, Greb's is the best. Read it more carefully.

 

compared to patterson on film, please? Floyd would have whooped him.

 

well when it comes to overall resume, robinson fought ALOT of people. I could probably list like 30-40 guys for him too. Thas why hes the Greatest. Not armstrong, not ali, not greb. Robinson is the greatest!:good

 

The depth of Greb's resume still outdoes his. As do Greb's top wins.

 

robinson is 22-7-1 against hall of famers. This doesnt include wins over at least 15-20 contenders.