Harry Greb vesus Barbados Joe Walcott in a fight to the finish

I think tat as long as there is a theoretical termination point Greb should take it but without one it is a whole diferent game.

In a finish fight it turns on whether Greb can bleed Walcott into submision before he runs out of steam. This is certainly a possibility sine many of his oponents who lasted the distance only had the fact that they were acustomed to being on their feet holding them up.

Walcott is more proven over 20+ rounds although Greb did somtimes go 20.

The stylistic dynamic would be interesting because both these guys were verry hard to hit clean even when they werer coming forward. I am asuming that Greb was faster but Walcotts 5' 1''- crouch height combined with his olwn movemnt could give Greb something he had not seen before.

 

Walcott is more proven over long distances and the more powerful but Greb was meant to have an amazing cardio and could break you down and cut you plus he would be a fair amount bigger. Even though Walcott has more power considering Greb all time great chin and he was able to take shots from much larger men like Tunney or Norfolk make me believe Greb would probably win. Although you can never count out Walcott, but still Greb should be favoured.

 

Joe Walcott would win this, Greb has all the skills and experience, but as mentioned, the distance plays into Walcott's favor, and so would that enormous strength of his.

 

I like how a guy most everyone argues is a top 3 all time pound for pound fighter gets beat by someone not in most top 20's, and a division or two below. That's very special.

 

It's the same with Johnson in many heavyweight ranks including mine. I rate Johnson so highly because of his achievements rather than his resume number of defenses or H2H ability

 

If Walcott is not in your top 20 welterweights then something is wrong!

 

My esteemed nemesis, please to read closer... Pound for pound not divisional ranking.

 

Greb has every advantage here with the lone exception being power. Being that he fought bigger and more powerful guys than Walcott I think it's safe to assume that Harry will be able to handle Joe's strength and take his punch. Mysterious Billy Smith got right in there with Walcott, tested his power and banged with him well all the same. The bigger, stronger, faster and more mobile Greb would do no less.

Almost all accounts on Greb attest to his amazing stamina. He seemed to get stronger the longer a fight went, so distance favors him too. The longer the fight goes the worse of a battering Walcott takes.

Peak for peak I see Harry taking him every time.

 

I don't understand the premise of "a fight to the finish ". Every foot race must have a finish line. Does it mean who says "Uncle" first ? ...The history of modern boxing is based on a given amount of rounds...Based on a normal fight roundwise, I can't see a twenty pound lighter Walcott beating a rough, tough,faster Greb who was strong enough to tangle with Light Heavies and Heavyweights...In his prime it is said he fought harder in the last round than in the first round...Greb , I had read had a very low pulse rate
as did Henry Armstrong...

 

This and That...

 

It suggests that these p4p ATG ratings lists are often a load of crap, more than anything else.

 

I pick Greb and with a little confidence. Walcott was great ,and has some big names on his resume , he also has quite a few stoppage losses. Greb was more durable . I pick Greb to beat any middle weight ,so I must pick him to beat Barbados Joe.

 

Without footage it's hard to make a safe bet. But if I were to make one, i'd go with the natural super middleweight as opposed to the natural welterweight.

 

I think that even pound for pound, Walcott has a prety strong case.