Harry Greb Footage

AP article on Gene Tunney 7/26/28...
"Gentleman Gene Tunney has never been knocked out. The late Harry Greb, possibly the greatest artist to ever don the leather mittens, holds the only decision."

Jack Kofoed "Thrills in Sport" New York Evening Post 8/4/1932...
"We look back on the Pittsburgh Windmill as one of the greatest middleweights that ever lived... There aren't any middleweights nowadays to compare with Greb..."

"The Windmill really was one of the greatest middleweights of all time."

Jack Sharkey in News and Courier, 3/9/30
"Harry had everything. Did you ever think that during his career he licked men who held the championships in three divisions- Gene Tunny who became heavyweight champ; Tommy Loughran, light-heavyweight, and Mickey Walker, middleweight."

Gene Tunney, Los Angeles Examiner 5/26/27
"Harry Greb was one of the most amazing of all gladiators..."

The Evening Repository 10/23/26
"Harry Greb is eulogized as one of the greatest and gamest ringmen that ever lived. "

Mickey Walker, 8/24/36 The Denver Post
"Mickey says that the Pittsburgh Windmill was the greatest fighter he ever met... 'He could really pitch', says Mickey."

The Daily Jeffersonian 8/27/34
"Greb is considered by most people to be the greatest fighter the division ever had."

Hooks and Jabs by Pete Baird, The Times-Picayune 12/4/38
"We got Johnny Cox over a few the other night in a local join to find out who was the greatest of them all and Johnny comes up with Harry Greb...

The greatest fighter that ever lived, Harry Greb. Fighters may come and fighters may go, but never again in the history or never before has there ever been a superman like Harry Greb."

The Reading Eagle, 10/23/26, Gene Tunney
"He was one of the very greatest fighters who ever lived."

The Saginaw New Courier, 11/10/26, Billy Evans/Gene Tunney
"Greb was a great fighter," said Tunney "The greatest fighter I ever saw."

I could copy and paste these all day long...

 

You clearly have no idea who Bill Gallo is or heard his name before today. And you were also going on and on about Hank Kaplan, who was actually a member of the BWAA at the time they (the BWAA) voted on the fighters included in the video you're trashing.

Thanks for playing.

 

So, Gene Tunney said Greb was incredible at Greb's funeral. Got it.

Nothing like multiple papers quoting from the same eulogy.

I could also post quotes all day by different sources quoting the same interview with Larry Holmes after Ken Norton died saying Ken Norton was the best he ever fought.

That doesn't make Ken Norton the #1 pound-for-pound fighter of all time.

That's how stuff gets blown out of proportion.

 

& even this obscure video on MWs that you dragged out of nowhere has Mickey Walker in their list.. a partially blind past his best Greb decisively beat a PRIME Walker.. so even in these tenuous attempts to argue against Greb you've snookered yourself.. Don't you think it's kind of stupid having Mickey Walker on a list and not the guy that beat him in one of the most famous middleweight fights of all time? LMAO.. you've only proven that you dont know what you're talking about.

 

No, he didn't simply say he "was incredible" or "the best he ever fought," he argued that he was a candidate for best ever, something you denied being an argument that existed prior to the internet age, despite numerous quotes from an assortment of sources over a span of decades proving otherwise.

& you can add Nat Fleischer to the list of historians who rated Greb among the best ever - here's a quote from the initial edition of his book Illustrated History of Boxing that was released around 1959/60, in its section on LHWs:
"Some of the world's greatest ringmen have fought in the division, among them such stars as Kid McCoy, Harry Greb, ..."

 

Here's 3 more to peruse if he's struggling to find reading material on Greb..

Boxing: The Great Champions by Gilbert Odd (1974):

Biographical accounts of prominent boxers, with Greb featured for his remarkable career, including his middleweight and light heavyweight titles and victories over fighters like Gene Tunney and Tommy Gibbons.

The Boxing Register by James B. Roberts and Alex Skutt (1999):

This comprehensive record of boxing history includes a biographical piece on Greb, noting his titles, 45-0 record in 1919 & his fights against Hall of Famers like Mickey Walker and Battling Levinsky.

The Fireside Book of Boxing edited by W.C. Heinz (1961):

A compilation of essays, stories, and profiles of boxing’s greatest figures, including historical accounts of early 20th-century fighters. It includes contributions from notable writers like Jack London and covers Greb & the 1920s..

 

The illustrated history of boxing is outstanding. I read it many years ago.. along with kings of the ring by Gavin Evans & they could've been contenders by Jim McNeill.. some of the first books i ever read on the sport .. all 3 i highly recommend.. i only have the latter two still.. I'll have to order a new copy

 

That's just more facts.....why use those when we have a guy on the internet who has an opinion that Greb was garbage?

 

Having looked through hundreds of magazines last night, I learned what Compton did. Harry Greb isn't featured or his name isn't brought up much at all in any of them from the 1930s onward until really toward the end of the century.

But Ring Magazine, in particular, really loved Stanley Ketchel, especially in magazines from the 1930s. Ketchel is mentioned in nearly all of them. There is feature after feature on him. He was clearly Nat Fleischer's favorite.

I also found that all-time lists are hard to find until relatively recently. When boxing was dominated by hundreds of fights in clubs and around the world, and guys were fighting world wars, people didn't have much time for "navel gazing" and pondering things like pound-for-pound.

But I found some. One in particular is a Pound-for-Pound list later (in 1980). They brought together a packed panel of "experts" - including, Eddie Futch, Gil Clancy, Don Dunphy, Freddie Brown, Cus D'Amato, Jim Jacobs, Harry Gibbs, the editors of everything, and on and on.

Greb made the top 15 (at #15). https://ibb.co/mCnqCqqL & https://ibb.co/JjxMYZKV

This 1979 issue of Big Book of Boxing included the top five all-time in each weight class (like the video I posted yesterday from the Boxing Writers.

Greb didn't get mentioned.

https://ibb.co/p6b8GxMG https://ibb.co/8LXqZbM1

In older issues of Ring, like the 1930s and 1940s, Greb was rarely mentioned in passing (He wasn't. I looked. For hours.). They had a lot of feature stories on fighters. Not so many lists.

But, if old guys back then brought up the great middleweights, or made best-of lists, they brought up REALLY old middleweights, who were better (to them) than the guys who came after. Because guys who train INDOORS in gyms and who don't fight in a makeshift ring and then run from cops afterward weren't real fighters. (That's really old school.)

https://ibb.co/39MLw6HD https://ibb.co/9k8HzHv2 https://ibb.co/qMbz0sGt https://ibb.co/V0vn8vPz

https://ibb.co/Vpz9B116 https://ibb.co/gMVXmRXQ https://ibb.co/twPHxcdS

Anyway. It is what it is. I'm going outside. I'm tired of boxing magazines.

 

On the topic of Greb being seen as the GOAT, here’s a pretty good quote I found from Steve Compton in an old thread about the topic:

If you ask me, I’d say Greb’s lack of relevancy in all time rankings in particular magazines would be due to him being not that popular compared to the other greats out there like Ketchel.

 

Right. Or a lack of "entertainment value," which is why I hopped on to begin with.

HBO signed Pernell Whitaker because he was considered at the time to be one of the greatest technicians ever. Nobody thought he was a bad fighter. But HBO practically had to beg people to tune in and watch. They would even joke about forcing people to do it. (And he wasn't as nearly as boring as a lot of "names" are.)

It doesn't matter if boring fights happened all last weekend, or 100 years ago.

Entertaining fighters tend to win over fans and bring more of them to the sport and get involved in fights people want to rewatch. Boring or frustrating fights and fighters don't.

Which goes back to the whole ... why didn't anyone preserve any Harry Greb fights?

 

W.N. Cox "Breaks of the Game" carried in the Norfolk Virginian Pilot in 1/29/1950... responding to a poll that picked Dempsey as the greatest fighter of the first 50 years of the century...

"In passing, it might be added that Jack has grown in stature over the years, that he is without doubt and deservedly so probably the most popular figure, retired or active in American sports. Meanwhile it is my guess that there is room on the list of facts for disputing the honor voted Jack as the greatest fighter of the past 50 years... I wish to state that Harry Greb, overlooked by the writers, was the greatest fighting man in many respects I ever saw... That takes in Dempsey, too."

I am quoting this because 1) this is almost 24 years after Greb died and 2) because Cox cuts to the essence of the issue. These polls of so-called experts (or parasites) are popularity contests. And Greb, because of his style and his promotion (the level of which again might have reflected his style), was not as popular as fighters who were no where near his level. So many self-anointed experts are either liars or charlatans, sometimes both. What doesn't lie is Greb's record. Name me one better. Name me one that's even in the same zip code.

 

Boring is boring. Frustrating to watch ... is frustrating to watch.

We got plenty of that last weekend.

Nobody wants to preserve things that bored the pants off them.

 

Can you show me the first hand accounts of those thought he was boring, didn't throw enough punches, was too static?

 

It's interesting how, as debates evolve, the discussion can veer away from the most pertinent issue(s). For whatever it's worth, my take on the 2 x core issues that have primarily been discussed in this thread, are as follows:

1) Were Greb's fights entertaining? - I can honestly say I don't recall having ever given this a moments thought before this thread, and even having read this thread, I can't say I particularly care one way or the other. That said, if I were asked my opinion, then in the absence of footage, basing my guess on the reports of those who did watch him fight, rather than extrapolating an opinion based on that lack of footage, would make the most sense to me. Typically reports of Greb's fights read as if they were action packed, whilst lacking the drama of a fighter who possessed concussive, 1-punch, fight changing power.

2) Where should Greb rank all time - There have been instances cited on this thread of Greb being ranked both highly and not so highly, and even not at all, by individuals and on published all time lists, pre the 1990's. If you rank based on the eye test, then I understand why you'd place significance on how those who saw Greb fight, rated him on an all time basis. If you rank based on resume & achievement, I don't think where Greb was ranked in the 1980's should carry any more weight than where he ranks now. On the contrary, I think there's a clear correlation between the depth of knowledge and understanding of boxing history a person or group possesses, and how highly they rate Greb all time. Greb fought an awful long time ago, wasn't a HW & isn't a "cross-over" fighter, in terms of his profile amongst casual & non-boxing fans. This survey in the Classic section 5-years ago voted Greb at 3# p4p all time & Langford at #4 - Top 35 All Time reveal - Boxing Survey Series | Boxing News 24 Fan Forum. If we ran a similar survey in the General forum today, I'd be surprised to see either in the top 10 and astonished to see either in the top 5. Obviously there'd be a bias towards more modern fighters, relative to the Classic Forum survey, but even allowing for that, I'd still expect to see far less accomplished, but far higher profile (amongst casual & non-boxing fans), fighters like Jack Jackson, Jack Dempsey, Jake LaMotta, etc. appear higher in a survey in the General forum. Even those posters that frequent the General forum who would have heard of Greb & Langford, won't have an in-depth knowledge of their careers, let alone the careers of all their key opponents.
Pre the 1990's, a truly in-depth knowledge, and understanding, of Greb's career, the careers of his key opponents and their key opponents, would have been the sole domain of an incredibly small number of hardcore boxing historians (which magazine article & list writers don't typically qualify as). In more recent times, someone with a keen interest in boxing history who is prepared to dedicate on average a few hours of internet research each week, can consume similar content within a year or 2, that it would have taken a lifetime of dedicated research, physically at libraries and such, searching for, and through, old newspapers and magazines, etc, pre the 1990's. It's only a guess, but I suspect that both hardcore boxing historians and casual fans alike, rank Greb similarly today as pre the 1990's, but I wouldn't be surprised if fans with a keen interest in boxing history and who have spent significant time researching the same, but not to the extent of a hardcore full time boxing historian, typically rank Greb higher today their pre-1990 counterparts did, because the easier access to his record, the records of his key opponents and the records of their key opponents, means they're better informed. i.e. I have a keen interest in boxing history and have spent hundreds of hours researching it, but I'm no hardcore boxing historian, it's never been the primary focus in my life & I've never made a living from it. Yet, having added hundreds of hours of internet research, to multiple books I've read about Greb and some of his key opponents, I not only know Greb got the better of the following opponents, I know they were all world class fighters in their own time and have a sound understanding of the historical standing of many of them:

Arguably top 20 p4p ATG & bigger, Gene Tunney (probably x 2 on fair scorecards), top 10 ATG LHW Tommy Loughran x 4, arguably top 10 p4p ATG Mickey Walker, arguably top 40 ATG Tommy Gibbons x 2, arguably top 60 p4p ATG Jack Dillon, arguably top 60 p4p ATG Mike Gibbons x 2, ATG LHW Maxie Rosenbloom, ATG & 17.5lbs heavier Kid Norfolk, ATG MW Tiger Flowers, borderline ATG LHW Jimmy Delaney x 3, borderline ATG Jeff Smith x 6 (including when giving up 9lbs), 19lbs heavier HW contender Billy Miske, 33lbs heavier HW contender Willie Meehan x 2, LHW world champion Battling Levinsky x 6 (including when Levinsky had up to a 15lbs weight advantage), LHW world champion Mike McTigue x 2, Willie KO Brennan x 3, Jimmy Slattery, 24lbs heavier HW contender Charley Weinert, Buck Crouse, Gus Christie x 3, Eddie McGoorty, Jack Blackburn, Bob Moha x 6, Clay Turner x 7, Leo Houck x 3, Bill Brennan x 4 (including when outweighed by 26lbs), George Chip x 2, Soldier Bartfield x 3, 8lbs heavier Gunboat Smith, Jonny Wilson x 2, Ted Moore x 2, Lou Bogash & Bryan Downey.

That's 76 fights where Greb got the better of world class opposition, many bigger than him & many of them ATGs. He got the better of other opponents who were either world class or fringe world class, that I haven't listed. I defy anyone to nominate a fighter in the entire history of boxing who got the better of world class opposition in as many fights. Greb has the deepest resume in all of boxing's history. That we can come to that conclusion more easily and quickly now than we could have pre wide spread availability of the internet, doesn't diminish the legitimacy of how Greb is ranked today relative to, for example, the 1980's, imo.

If you rank based on the eye test, clearly you must exclude Greb from your rankings.

If you disregard newspaper decisions, then your rankings aren't really all time, they're (roughly) post 1930, which of course is completely fine.

However, if your rankings are truly all time, and therefore you respect the opinions of men who were paid to attend boxing matches and then give their opinion on who won in the event the contest went the scheduled distance, the height & depth of quality of win resumes is key amongst your evaluation criteria and you're well educated on boxing history, you'll have Greb as a lock for your top 5 p4p ATGs.