Greb Knocked Out By Body Shot

If you think youve suddenly rediscovered the wheel then like I said go and publish your own ****ing record book. Otherwise the official result stands. If you cant figure out what the official result was then I suggest you go take a hard look at every record ever published on the subject.

If you can read and dont need me to hold your hand through all of this then scroll down and tell me what this newspaper, that voted against Greb in the Rogers bout, published the result as:

[url]http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z335/klompton/Pittsburgh_Post_Gazette_Tue__Jul_31__1917__zpswtjqtviz.jpg[/url]

But you know more about all of this than the people who were there and someone like myself who has spent 15 years studying the subject because you read an article online.:happy

 

Many alts, Maybe you should take your own advice since you posted all those articles which said he got a nice long rest before he came for the 2nd rd, since the ref didn't see a foul or called it, just why he got that rest since nobody called it?:think
And please don't come back with the police chief ruled it, why don't you mention why he was brought in to make the ruling in the first place, the hometown crowd, the ref being intimidated why did he get the rest?
It seems you buried yourself in articles for 15yrs and you still DKSAB. Did you ever answer my question about the laughable Dempsey contract, or the Kearns killing the Pitts, fight by stalling

 

Ah many alts 'er please tell me what this: [url]http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/...pswtjqtviz.jpg[/url]
What has this to do with what happened in the 1st and 2nd rd, of a fight that was fought two yrs earlier hmmmm!?
The spinner spinning but not answering, we are talking about the first two rds not who won the the fight after getting a nice rest when nobody called a foul. By rights the fight should have been called right then and there when Greb didn't come out for the 2nd.

 

You have serious problems of comprehension.
I haven't once here disputed the official result. It's a 6-round ND.
So what are you waffling on about ?

You're in such a state of denial it's not even funny. Well, actually it is funny.
Now it's clearer than ever - everything that you accuse others of being when "glossing over" some of the 'funny business' that may have benefitted such fighters as Carpentier, Tunney and Dempsey is 100% a projection of your own pathetic nature.
For you to produce such a childlike post ("But the official result stands!" ) as your answer to what people are saying on this thread is hilarious.

You could research for 150 years, it would make no difference. You'd still be bitter, biased, pompous and fake. Call yourself a historian if you want. You're the worst type of historian. But you can probably fool most of the people most of the time. So good luck with that.

 

Many alts is a pysstorian not a historian cos everything that goes against his agenda he p yss's on

 

Many alts I will refer to your posts to address the thread, while Greg jumped the gun and said "Greb Knocked Out By Body Shot", while it wasn't an official ko/tko, it seems Greb was stopped cos he didn't come out for the 2nd rd. The didn't see the foul, didn't call a foul, he should have DQ'd, counted him out while sitting in the corner or the fight called and ruled a tko or stopped. That would have been the call if the ref had stood up.

Not relevant, didn't factor in the fight, unidentified person

He didn't lay down. He just didn't come out for the 2nd rd, and since the ref had not called it. Not relevant, didn't factor in the fight, unidentified person

Of course anybody disagreeing with many alts has to be lying

Many alts nobody is arguing about who won the decision, this thread is about Greb being ko'd. While technically he wasn't stopped, he did stay in the corner and got a rest, the ref hadn't ruled it a foul, so there seemed to be some homecooking there.

And of course you took what they said as gospel, as you are well aware people always tell the truth lol

As I said Greg jumped the gun, but he did bring to light this episode of Grebs career where maybe a stronger ref would have called the fight when Greb didn't come out for the 2nd rd.

And here you are being just plain silly, the ref rules on what he see's and he stated he didn't see the foul, so end of story.

In both cases the foul was acknowledged, and in the Rogers fight it wasn't. I know it's a minor detail, but one worthie of consideration don't ya think?

 

I see no point to continue this argument, but honestly, Pittsburgh Press' report by Jim Jab was pure garbage. It's not about disagreeing with his opinion or not, it's just that it was a bulls hit write-up that shouldn't be considered seriously.

 

[url]http://s58.photobucket.com/user/Senya13/media/boxing/19150824ThePittsburgPress_p17.jpg.html[/url]

 

Which parts of it were specifically untrue ?
(ie. "bullsh!t")
I'm about as sceptical about newspaper reports as anyone here on this site, but how do we know which details are true or not?

 

The whole piece is lacking objectiveness, and full of allegories and metaphors rather than details of what was going on in the ring.

P.S. I know I said I liked metaphors in boxing writing before, but I think there's a whole lot of difference between methaphorical writing of Jim Jab above and say Bill McGeehan - [url]http://www.boxingforum24.com/showpost.php?p=17386338&postcount=9[/url]

 

There are details of what was going on in the ring.
The report claims Greb was hit in the solar plexus at the end of the first round, for instance.
That he doubled over like a jack-knife and possibly made a meal of it.
(Excuse me any methaphors or allegories there.)

The lack of objectiveness is justified by the fact that Jim Jab is ranting about another crooked fight. If you honestly think something stinks, that's what you write I guess. But we can ignore all that bluster and style and take out the few details of what was going on in the ring. It's not an awful lot different to what some of the other reports are saying.

 

I see clear bias in that write-up, and emotional, rather than factual description of the bout. You can't even figure whom he scored which rounds for, Greb or Rogers. Perhaps the last round for Greb, is the only one I can figure, but even then he might have not given it to him because of supposed low blow? The author shows no attempt of seeking anything positive about Greb's performance or qualities. Plus, as has already been mentioned, we know that Jim Jab had had long history of degrading anything connected with Harry Greb. It's not a reliable source for this particular bout, from a historian's point of view.

 

Fair enough. Throw it out if you want. The few relevant details don't seem to deviate much from the "reliable sources" though.

What do you think happened ?
I think Greb probably tried to win on a foul. The referee didn't see a foul. Most eyewitnesses didn't claim to see a foul.
I think Greb probably refused to come out for the second round. I think the fight was probably delayed several minutes.
I think the rules always have been that a fighter who refuses to come out for a fight loses by a TKO.
I think the crowd were dissatisfied. I think the referee was uncomfortable with calling the fight over and declaring a winner.
I think the police superintendant intervened.
I think the fight resumed when Harry Greb deemed himself ready to continue.

All of this, for argument's sake, probably did happen. Based on the few reports of the fight.

It's not even a big deal. These things happen.
I'm not one to say "oh, it's all okay" though. It's another tainted/crooked fight. Just because corruption ( & bad referreeing, local police advice etc.) happened often in boxing to the point of seeming customary, doesn't actually make it any less crooked.
It was partly for incidents like this that boxing existed in an illegal/semi-legal status at the time anyway, and why it continues to come under attack from time to time to this day.

 

I have just three reports of the bout, so I can only base my opinion on them.

Richard Guy of Gazette Times didn't make any claim of being certain whether the punch was fair or foul. The same newspaper reported that the referee had gone to the press row to inqury them if anybody had seen a foul, so we can conclude the referee wasn't certain about that either.

Leslie C. MacPherson, Jr., of the Post showed no certainty either, although probably leaning toward it being foul, not because he had seen a low blow with his eyes, but coming to logical conclusion that it probably was low.

Jim Jab of the Press shows no hesitancy in claiming all three times, when Greb *might* have been fouled (not 100%, but a possibility), being absolutely fair punches, and the one time in the last round when Greb might have landed low, he claims it was certainly low.
Neither of two other reporters mention any fouls in the last round. There was a LOT of hard body punching in every round, based on reports.

 

We don't know whether the blow was fair or foul. We can't know.
That's not really the point.

What is actually relevant is that Greb said it was foul, and whether he refused to fight on at the beginning of 2nd round and got himself several extra minutes by refusing to fight on until he deemed himself fit. That either happened or it didn't too. Do we think that happened ?
At least one report tells it like that.
And also mentions the police chief getting involved in the proceedings.
If it happened it certainly taints the integrity of the match, under ANY standards.
This is all I've been saying and I'm surprised anyone would even dispute the basic sense of that.