Greb Knocked Out By Body Shot

at the end of the day we don't know what sort of shot it was. if it was legal and seen maybe rogers gets a straight 10 count, maybe greb can't recover and gets taken out in the second, maybe he survives and the papers vote for him or maybe he does and they vote against him. if it was illegal and seen maybe greb should win by dq or maybe what happened happens.

anyone projecting a single result from that large selection of possibilities is grasping at straws without any real basis for their opinion.

if it was some sort of corruption the referee pretends he's seen it and dq's rogers, if it was some sort of corruption and what happened happened they would be ****ed at the ref for not doing that, my conclusion, no corruption from the ref.

 

he never counted so it's not a ko either.

 

The facts are as stated by the seven different Pitts newspaper, many alts posted.
1- Greb was down at the bell
2-He didn't come out for the 2nd rd until he got a 10min rest
3-The ref didn't see a low blow and didn't call it
4-Few in the audience saw a low blow

So answer this why if no official saw a low blow, and call it and was Greb allowed to stay in the corner? And you say there was no corruption, I don't know if greb could've gotten away with staying in the corner for 10 min when the rules state a 1 min rest between rds, there was no justification for him doing that. That Rogers was an outer towner, and the ref was cowed by the chief of police or superintendent and the crowd. Even then the ref refused to call it a foul, that and only that would have justified Greb's long rest between rds. Rogers and corner had to be completely stupid not to realize that based on Greb staying in the corner, without a ruling, made them the winners.

 

so why did the corrupt ref not dq rogers? was he as **** at corrupt refereeing as you seem to think rogers and his team were at understanding the rules of boxing? maybe a theory that needs this level of incompetence from two parties to make sense is not a good theory?

 

Are we talking Leo Tolstoy here? Or perhaps Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn? You see I labour under the perhaps misguided assumption that an author is as follows.

I don't see the comparison between collating previously written information and copying it , and originality.

The first example is what billions of kids and students do at schools and colleges. The 2nd example is where the above mentioned authors come in.

Perhaps if you were to write an album of say 12 songs that sold 20 million copies worldwide I might be impressed.

 

did you buy/read his book foxy?

 

No, and if it is anything like his posts I would rather have root c**** treatment without anaesthetic than do so. That said I did have a lot of time for the works of the late Harry Mullins.

 

Everything beyond the facts is pure conjecture, was the punch low? Nobody really seems to know. I don't think I said the ref was corrupt, and really the word corrupt is too strong in this case more like homecooking, all the homies stuck together that is apparent. The ref had more cause to DQ Greb. As far as understanding the rules of boxing, I would think a first time amateur understands the one minute between rds rule. Rogers was no beginner he had 48 pro fights coming in, so I would think they knew the rule as anybody. I believe there was more going on then was reported, maybe the Rogers people thought if they kept up their protest they might not get paid, but again it's pure conjecture. I wonder if this happened in NY would Greb been DQ'd, more conjecture.

 

it's not actually(i was surprised too).

how well can you really review an author whose work you have not read?

 

homecooking is corruption for the home fighter. the fact it's such a common form of corruption that it has it's own name doesn't make it different.

rogers knew the rule yet chose to not win?

you believe stuff? based on what?

lots of conjecture just got into the supposedly obvious fact that greb should have lost a ko.

 

Hey, save money and go on these free newspaper archive sites and type in the fighter of your choice and there will be a book load of articles. I just done that on the Wills - Dempsey non fight, I am up to 177pgs, on Dempsey and Wills. What's good about it is the freedom to make up your mind and not be led by the nose by someone's agenda.

 

exactly, rogers knew the rule yet chose to not win? But the question is why???

 

i understand historiography and newspaper archives fine thanks. i also read books before i cast judgment on them.

the reports on greb rogers are unclear on whether the blow was legal, if you think that means a clear ko loss for greb whatever, but don't pretend you don't have an agenda.

is greb rogers 1 a questionable fight/result? yes, anything beyond that is not a fact.

 

Oh please whatever, everybody that comes on here has an agenda, nobody has to pretend, what's your agenda???

 

yeah, doesn't make any sense, unless klompton is right and it was not unusual for fights to be restarted in this situation, then it would make perfect sense.