Greb and the Heavyweights- Tommy Gibbons

Starting with this one, Greb is a MW... why would Dempsey fight a middleweight when he is trying to establish his credentials as a heavyweight ??? that is called going backwards

 

Schooled my butt... the only one doing any schooling here is Perry.

 

I read one of his court reports... I didn't see that Klompton beat his missus just that there was a custody battle...... oooops.... hell anyway, there may be another source you got that from but lets not hit below the belt. All that matters is the debate.

 

I did say only Perry has done any schooling but you did school the woman beater there.

 

Sorry dude but anyone saying little Harry beats Dempsey is NOT plausible... and as for the short fight idea... that's for pussies not for champions.... 15 rounds should be the minimum back then and should still be today.... I am sick of seeing runner-dancers win on points and hardly doing anything to do so. At all times Greb is one punch away from oblivion and it WILL come, you guys all think Dempsey was a bum.... I feel sorry for anyone that thick.

And Bob Fitzsimmons should have fought Terry McGovern and Hagler should have fought Jeff Fenech ... LOL.... I agree Greb thought he could fight Jack but thats his ego talking and he was delusional like so many fighters before and since.... pity he didn't get the fight so Jack could have sat him on his backside and shut his gob.

 

When did Fenech beat Hearns, Duran, Roldan and Hamsho?

 

Good articles Klompton

 

Here is the problem with Greg harping on about short fights: It wasnt Greb asking for one. In fact if you read those articles and all of the others you will see that in 1918 philadelphia promoters were the ones pushing forth a short fight. You know, the same distance Dempsey had no problem signing for that yr against Miske and Levinsky, two names you might recognize as Greb victims. Later in 1922 it was again philly promoters who were pursuing an 8 rd Greb-Dempsey fight (because we all know fighters arent promoters right dempsey and perry? Lol) but Greb was in favor of the 10 round bout in Pittsburgh.

Point 2 is that dempsey1234 wants to move the goal post again. Instead of this being a thread trying to insinuate one of his ever changing anti greb-dempsey points: greb didnt deserve a shot, greb had no support, there wasnt enough money behind the idea, there were no promoters to stage it, etc now he wants to argue that in 1918 it would have been a step backwards to fight greb despite saying there was no call to fight Greb in 1918 or that instead of all of the above articles i posted obliterating all of his points he wants to just argue that dempsey would have beaten greb, which isnt even germaine to tje discussion at hand, OR that ive posted only argents that support my point, which doesnt really matter because hes been arguing all along that all of the above had no support, so by posting a plethora of sources supporting my points ive proven him wrong. Sorry morons class dismissed.

I wont even respond to the ridiculous accusation that im a woman beater. If you think i was then submit some proof right here. Otherwise ill take your personal slanderous comments as proof that you just got your asses handed to you and cant defend your arguments so thats the only recourse you have. Lol. Classic!

 

Just to clarify, Klompton (and sorry to derail the thread from the personal insults ) the "Philly promoters" that you talk of - were they Dempsey's people or just independent guys? I've been of the opinion that a shorter bout would favour Greb, but I guess that's blown out of the water if Greb wanted a longer fight and Dempsey a shorter one.

 

The promoter in 1922 angling for an 8 round greb-dempsey bout in 1922 was non other than jimmy dougherty, dempseys close friend and the guy he constantly used or tried to use as his personal referee. Id have to see who was running the club in 1918 that was trying for a six rd bout. The bottom line is greb didnt care how long the fight was, his point always was that if dempsey couldnt catch him he wins and the odds of dempsey catching him late in a long fight are a lot smaller than him not having to worry about travelling 10 or 15 as such being able to fight full speed for six or 8 rounds.

 

Anytime loonis

 

You have to admire Greb's confidence then. Dempsey is overrated around here but he was still a fast champion with vicious power and skills. Certainly nobody's pushover. I'd have wanted every advantage possible against him ...

 

Well, i believe a longer fight is to Greb's advantage. Bill Brennan was as big as Dempsey, heavier, just as strong, fast, and hit hard and none of that tired Greb out over 10 or 15 rounds. In fact it was Brennan that tired in their fights, swinging at air will do that, and Brennan had travelled the distance more than Dempsey. Its funny to me that Dempsey fighting Levinsky in a six round bout is acceptable but fighting the guy who beat Levinsky three months earlier for a chance to fight Dempsey is considered a step backwards by the apologists. If GGG went out of his way to fight all the guys May beat but avoided May wed be calling him out as a fraud, why is it diff for Dempsey.

 

I have to say that it did make sense for Dempsey to stay out of Greb's way from a legacy point of view. If he won, well, he was the heavyweight champ and expected to. If he lost - to a MW - the shame would have been awful. He really did have a lot to lose and little to gain. One can sort of understand it, if not condone it.