Harry Greb vs Bob Satterfield with modern gloves

I'm not getting this, are you saying those ATG's who fought in the 1920s would not be ATG's today since they all wore the same gloves ?
As for Greb coming along at the right time , he fought,over 13 years:
Gans
Todd
Rosenbloom
Walker
Rojas
Wilson
Tunney
Ratner
Slattery
Flowers
Moody
Loughran
Mantell
Dillon
Chip
M Gibbons
T Gibbons
Renault
Bogash
Smith
Smith [Gunboat]
Miske
Brennan
Houck
McGoorty
McCoy
Delaney
Shade
McTigue
Madden
Downey
Seems a pretty quality era to me, how does it compare to say Golovkins opposition?

 

Respectfully, Oh how wrong you are...Are you also barking that a Gene Tunney, a Mickey Walker, a Tommy gibbons, a Maxie Rosenbloom, a Tommy Loughran, a Kid Norfolk, and dozens and dozens of great fighters who the immortal Harry Greb licked, were
inferior to today's fighters ? Were all the multitudes of fighters, trainers, boxing writers who saw Harry Greb fight along with his
adversaries above, were somehow less informed than you are ?
Do you think that the fighters I saw fight many years ago such as Ray Robinson, Kid Gavilan, Willie Pep, Ike Williams, Beau Jack, Jimmy Bivins, Sandy Saddler etc, were somehow inferior to todays fighters
because they fought in a time that you were not present ? Do you think that men like my dad walked and talked different from you ?
Be thankful there were men like a Harry Greb who lived in a hell of a lot tougher age than we do today, even if you were not present...

 

Your conclusion makes no sense. Greb wasn't a puncher and never set himself to punch. He was a points scorer. So somehow you think because we have bigger, better padded gloves today that this would, for some reason, force Greb to sit down on his punches more? Why?

The only difference in Greb's career and greatness today would be that he would fight much less, have less injuries to deal with in the ring, and given the long interval between weighing in and fight time he would like fight at a lower weight than 160. Otherwise things like speed, stamina, activity, volume punching, and durability are still mountains that most fighters today struggle against.

Given that most top fighters don't fight each other anymore, at least not until years after their prime, I would say someone as fearless as Harry Greb would have a hard time getting fights and when he did hed be a tough man to beat.

Another thing is that you make a point about him being disqualified due to his eye troubles but neglect to note that medical science has advanced considerably in the last 90 years. It is completely within reason to assume that Harry Greb's eye trouble could have been corrected by modern methods just like Sugar Ray Leonard's was and as such there wouldn't have been an issue. Its also reasonable to assume that given the larger THUMBLESS gloves (that you love to mention) used today Greb would have been less likely to suffer the injury that lead to his blindness to begin with.

See how that works? When you pluck a guy from the 1910s and place him in the 2010s you have to take into consideration ALL of the differences in todays world, not just the ones that suit your agenda.

 

Satterfield is too big for Greb and wins by early KO because nothing Greb can do even slightly stings this big fella

 

"less opinion based on whether Brennan or anyone else Greb fought hit harder than Satterfield"

That is why I asked for the best man that Brennan actually knocked out. Knocking out quality opponents is one, and I think probably the best, measurement of punching ability.

"Who did Satterfield beat that comes anywhere near Greb in terms of greatness"

In the first place I was talking about Brennan who didn't come close to beating Greb anyway.

But the answer is Harold Johnson.

 

"Bill Brennan didn't get the moniker "KO" for nothing."

Neither did Satterfield get the moniker "Bombardier Bob" for nothing.

But fancy nicknames in sports proves nothing much except you have a good press agent. Did "Home Run" Baker hit the most home runs? Was "Six-Yard" Sitko more likely to gain six yards than Jimmy Brown or a score of other running backs on any given run?

One factor here is that Satterfield's biggest flaw, a weak chin, might not be something Greb could exploit.

As for Brennan as a puncher, my question stands. Who was the best man he knocked out?

 

LOL! Harold Johnson was nearly a decade away from winning the title and lost a hairline split decision in Satterfields hometown which he twice avenged, once by knockout and once by wide decision. Thanks but no thanks.

 

Its funny, Im called an alt but mysteriously Dempsey and Greg both share the same inability to use the quote function on this website.

Dempsey, you keep asking me about Brennan. I asked you who was the best man Satterfield knocked out? Neither guy knocked out a legitimately great heavyweight so what we are left with is nothing more than opinion. The exact opinion you asked for. I gave it and you cant deal with the fact that I disagree with you. Get over it.

Whether Greb could exploit Satterfields notoriously horrible chin is neither here nor there because Greb winning was never predicated on his getting a knockout. Not ever. As was shown numerous times in his career you didn't have to be a granite chinned legend with bottomless stamina to outpoint Satterfield, Satterfields problem is that he would be facing someone with those qualifications. Johnson wasn't in Greb's class and Satterfield sure wasn't. With all of that being said I wouldn't put it past Greb to be able to hurt, drop, or stop Satterfield. Satterfields chin was that bad. Charlie Weinert who stood the same height as Satterfield, weighed the same, and won more, lost less, and was more durable found that out the hard way. So did Bartley Madden whose durability as his chief asset. Both guys got dropped hard and had all of the fight taken out of them by Greb and neither guy was known as being anywhere near as chinny as Satterfield and better yet both had much better stamina. Greb beats Satterfield easy.