It has come to my notice that Harry Greb was once knocked out by a body shot from a journeyman in 1915. Now Klompton always loved to try and taunt me that Les Darcy was SO WEAK that he once got knocked out by a body shot.... he lost the fight by DQ because he was recovered and ready to go when the towel was thrown in... anyway my point of this thread is that if Darcy was weak then Greb must have been weaker due to the far lower quality of opponent. Now bear this in mind, Greb was older than Darcy so no excuses here. Here is the newspaper link https://www.newspapers.com/image/34253884/?terms=les+darcy+fight+reports And here is the link to my fb page where I have done the screenshots of this article. https://www.facebook.com/aussielegendsofpugilism/?fref=ts I don't care if you know who blows his stack or not but I do not intend to blacken the name of the great Harry Greb, clearly this man was special.... so was Les Darcy... both men about as rugged and tough and brilliant as they come.... BUT when someone tries to throw MUD about they had better be prepared for some to come back...... Fact is all fighters no matter how great.... and how legendary are simply human beings and catch them on a bad day and they are all beatable... hell even Les Darcy was beatable... but only just. Another reason I made this thread is to PROVE just how wrong BOXREC can get things as the idiots have called this fight a ND bout as a newspaper win for Greb... well what does this article say ??? LOL it hilarious... this was a KO loss to Greb but obviously the place that night STANK OF CORRUPTION..... so go cry me a river Mr Many ALTS. Al Rogers gave Greb a bad day and a bellyache to boot.
a TEN MINUTE break... good grief .... now way Jose'..... chalk this up as another loss to Greb folks. Now how many more false wins does he get credited ?
I've no idea who is right, Box Rec has both the 1915 fights with Rogers as NWS wins for Greb, Cyber zone had them both as N D 6 rds. Can't access the link.
which one ? you may have to pay to get the whole newspaper but my fb page has screenshots so you can certainly read that, the link works.
By Richard Guy of Pittsburgh Gazette Times that the Cincinnati Enquirer refers to: "Superintendent of Police N. W. Mathews was appealed to, and he told Rogers he did not need to continue unless he wanted to, but he advised that Greb be permitted to recuperate in order to give the crowd a chance to see the fight, which bid fair to be a corker." Thus Rogers agreed to allow Greb to recuperate and has nobody else to blame for the fight being resumed, after 5 to 10 minute break. Rogers fouled twice more in the opinion of some reporters in the 4th round, and Greb didn't try to claim it on foul or request additional time to recover.
Well researched Senya but nothing changes the fact Greb was knocked out... we essentially have two fights here and two versions of who won the second. No doubt there was some extra money in it for Rogers and all credit to him. As for Greb, I said he was human and this proves it.
It depends whether you believe there was a foul or not. The fighters were in a neutral corner with Rogers' back toward the press row (and, likely, to the referee), so it was hard for them to see if it landed low or not. Reportedly, the referee even went to the reporters during the 1-minute break to ask them if they saw a foul or not, because he wasn't sure. Gazette Times, Press and Chronicle-Telegraph voted for Rogers, while Post, Sun and Dispatch voted for Greb, it's 3-3, a draw per local newspapers.
How is it a foul if the referee didnt see it or wasnt sure? At the very best this would make it a controversial KO loss, wouldnt it? I think that Greg might be correct on this one. There were technically two fights. A KO loss and a No Decision fight.
As I stated already, nobody forced Rogers to continue. He was given a choice to claim the bout on a foul, or to resume the fight. He chose the latter. So the result stands - a no decision bout, with local newspapers split 3-3, making it a newspaper draw.
Sorry Senya, but i am confused. How could Rogers claim the bout on a foul? If he knocked him out, he would either claim the bout by knock out or let the fighters fight on, wouldnt he? Controversy aside, this would be no different to if Tyson decided to give Michael Spinks time to recover and then went on to box a close no decision to please the fans who had paid plenty of money to see the fight. It wouldnt change the result of the first ko.