Greb vs Louis. What type of chance does Greb have?

Old Fogey and klompton offer a debate for the ages (though I see no reason whatsoever for any ad hominem attacks).

Two cents... Louis would be favored, though 1922 Greb is the ultimate X factor.

1. Louis did not like to be crowded. Greb would do precisely that. Louis liked to get set and then zero in. If we know anything about Greb's style, we know that he wouldn't be there for that. He would spin around the larger man like a whirling dervish. There's a problem right there, stylistically.

Before anyone thinks I'm romanticizing the record of a great smaller fighter, let me assert loudly that the Mickey Walker who effectively defeated Sharkey wouldn't last 5 rounds against Louis.

2. Speaking of styles, remember Gibbons. Gibbons was a stand-up boxer-puncher like Louis. He couldn't handle Greb when it mattered most at MSG in March of Greb's peak year. Sure, Louis is bigger and stronger, but the record is adamant about how that really didn't mean much when facing this fighter. Greb handled Dempsey and Tunney and lesser HWs and the fact that the Dempsey sparring match was "only sparring" means nothing when we have an eyewitness swearing that it was "an honest-to-goodness fight" and Greb handled him. And Dempsey was in his prime.

3. Greb is Greb -and as much as Louis is deservedly highly touted, Greb is in a different league in terms of greatness. He had the style, the experience, and the chin to pull off a monster upset.

....Though I hope Greb's former conquest Jack Blackburn ain't in Louis's corner if that happens -Ole' Jack might shoot him. "I'll do the time!" he's say to press row as he's led away in cuffs.

 

"Tex Rickard and Lord Lonsdale"

These men are fighters?

Ring Magazine fighter of the year--I really don't know what imput Fleischer had in this--This have taken it back to 1922 and Greb is the Ring fighter of the year for 1922 and 1924.

Anyway, this is a from the May, 1952 issue of The Ring:

"Only a middleweight, Greb, whose greatness is accentuated with the passing years, beat just about all the best heavies and lightheavies of his time. Greb's endurance was apparently limitless. For years he averaged close to one fight a week, campaigning from Coast to Coast against opponents of all sizes, styles, and descriptions.

"A few nights after boxing classy middleweight Mike Gibbons, he'd be in there with heavyweight contender Bill Brennan. Probably a week or so later, lightheavyweight Battling Levinsky would be in the opposite corner facing the Pittsburgh windmill.

"He handed Gene Tunney his only defeat, and a one-sided one to boot. So successful was Greb against bigger men that his challenge to Dempsey was taken seriously by many. It has long been claimed that the then heavyweight champion and Manager Jack Kearns, while brushing aside his defi, had much respect for Greb, as a result of a training session he had had with the Manassa Mauler.

"At the time when the 'color line' was a live issue in the fight business, it meant nothing to Greb. He edged Kid Norfolk in a wild scramble in Pittsburgh. He had his troubles with Tiger Flowers, to whom he finally lost his middleweight title. The Tiger was helpless against a puncher, but Harry was not a hitter. Flowers' style was greatly similar to Greb's and the Tiger's southpaw stance made it particularly baffling.

"When the Dempsey-Wills controversy was at its height, Greb, at 165 pounds, challenged the 210-pound Wills, and meant it. "Let the winner get Dempsey," dared Greb, and no one doubted that Harry would have battle the then dreaded Brown Panther."

Ted Carroll

This was printed in Fleischer's Ring. It seems pro-Greb to me.

 

Greb proved his greatness. But could he beat Joe Louis? No way guys...Louis would have stopped Greb in four to six rounds.

 

Gibson was not all that clean. And were the guys who handled Louis? Are you saying that this proves this or that fight was fixed? Is it your position that this fight must be fixed because Gibson was (or at might have been) connected with Arnold Rothstein?

There is no doubt the writers of the time were paid off, but it is generally asserted they were paid off by Tex Rickard. This brings up an issue--you put your faith in the press as being more accurate than the referee and the judges. But there is no doubt the press was corrupt. Doesn't this make them an odd group to rely on?

 

Did The Ring have anything worthwhile on Harry during the entire 1940s?
I mean worthwhile!
Im sure no mention whatsoever was made in re Give Him To The Angels in 1946

 

Why exactly should they? He had been dead for years. A better question is do you have an article in which they trashed him. Rating Greb #3 at middle was pretty good, especially because Fleischer was so biased in favor of the "real oldtimers" from the turn of the century era. From featherweight on up, only Benny Leonard, at #2 at lightweight, was rated higher in his division than Greb among the 1920's champions.

 

I rely on the non core writers from brooklyn-staten island-jersey city-newark all of whom were adamant on greb winning the rematch.
i think dum dan morgan new a winner when he saw one. He was quoted the in Boxing Blade

"It was the most boldfaced robbery i ever saw, if i was Tunneys mgr i wouldn't let him accept the title"

Haladay in the Staten Island Advance,
"Gene dident win the title Billy Gibson had it handed to him on a silver platter"

 

There is no doubt the writers of the time were paid off, but it is generally asserted they were paid off by Tex Rickard.

Read both of genes books please

 

Thanks for the advice.

 

He wont read it Slakka. When you quote Tunney's own words verbatim stating that he had to admit Greb had a legit claim to calling the fight a robbery and he STILL ignores it, that tells you something about the guy you are arguing with. Gene Tunney, the fighter who benefitted from that decision, a master spin doctor, and one of the most ego centric fighters in history comes out and says there might have been something to Greb's outcry of a robbery then you can DAMN WELL GUARANTEE there was a robbery. Period. Tunney went with Gibson for one reason and one reason alone. Influence. Gibson had a lot of influence with New York officials as well as the financial backing and muscle to back it up. But hey, lets not waste our time arguing with someone who wouldnt believe it if it isnt printed in the Times. By last count we can come up with 32 newspaper who were ringside and published an opinion on the fight. Of those 32 papers 26 felt the decision was wrong and vast majority of those 26 felt Greb should have won. But lets ignore the weight of all of that, and all of the other expert opinions we have posted, and just believe those six that agree with us... Sounds pretty asinine doesnt it? Lets continue to quote Nat Fleischer (because he was so reliable) who himself wouldnt even render his opinion of the fight (which ought to tell you something, seeing as how Nat was never one to keep his opinions to himself). Instead lets quote wire reports and proven liars or magazine articles written 40 years later. Anything as long as they agree with my minority stance...

 

Gene said the core ny boxing writers were paid by his team, why do you need to put it on Tex?

He also said "realizing there was justification in Grebs claim of a bad decision I granted him a third fight".

 

old fogey
Whats your respones to Genes own cornerman George Engel saying Greb won???

 

That sounds fair. Hardly an admission he lost or thought he lost.

I am a little confused why they paid off writers when they already had paid off the referee and judges? And why just pay off a few rather than the majority?

You have to give Tunney credit for giving Greb a return match after being beaten twice so badly, as you maintain.

 

That sounds pretty damaging, actually. Was he still working for Gene or did they have a falling out?

 

I have to say that my memory is that Greb was very highly thought of in the late forties and fifties. After all, he had beaten Tunney, Walker, Loughran, Gibbons, etc. I don't remember Nat Fleischer or anyone else trashing him.

The only fly in the ointment is that most did think and write that Tunney won their series.