Harry Greb v Jim Corbett?

Greb. Too fast, too active... and he actually beat decent heavyweights.

 

Corbett. Harry who? Make believe guy.

 

It's worth repeating that Greb actually has a much better heavyweight resume than Jim.

 

Once more moron. Your opinion only.you are NOT the end all of opinion. And, for fighters pre 1940 yr opinion is meaningless due to yr admitted predilections. Everyone sees it. You are a hater and size queen.

 

Argue the point, Mr. Intellect. Give me your argument that Corbett has a better heavyweight resume than Greb. I will wait for the hamsters to get up to speed and spark that gray matter.

A) Damn sure I am more schooled in pre 1940's fighters than you, at least by the evidence of your posts on this board which are quite frankly embarrassing.

B) Everyone? Are you now speaking for everyone. Must be nice to feel entitled by the masses.

C) Do you find it laughably ignorant that you claim me to be a size queen whilst I am picking the smaller fighter? I sure as f*ck do.

 

This content is protected

 

Interesting, I think that Harry would decision him to be honest. Corbett was awkward and unique fighter, but Greb was the master of that.

Jim's clinching tactics could help him a lot in this fight though and he could fight well on inside. In a 2 fights series, both would win one for me.

 

Corbett was in the ring with Sullivan, Jackson, McCoy, Jeffries, Sharkey and many others. No Greb did not come close to matching this quality.

I'd favor Corbett.

 

Greb thrashers Corbett, busts him up and stops him in latter round s.

 

One thing to remember - Corbett is much bigger than Greb. I'd like to see how well he would be able to clinch Greb inside.

 

Yes, but few of Corbett size were also as good as Corbett. Tunney was a bit smaller then than Corbett and he certainly troubled Greb, even if all decisions are not legit in their series.

 

I favor Greb