If SRR beat Burley or Holman Williams...

He arguably already is. These two wins would definitely solidify it. A Robinson win over Burley would be in the similar ballpark to Greb-Tunney. Burley was superior to Tunney but Tunney held a greater size advantage over Greb. At the same time, Robinson's depth, consistency, and peak streak would be too much to rank Greb above him IMHO.

 

This scathing indictment of Robby makes that very clear. Mr. Toledo (AKA Stonehands89) obviously expresses tremendous disdain for SRR in this derisive literary hatchet job. (By the way, welcome to the boards Kiddo!):

http://www.thesweetscience.com/article-archive/2010/7719-the-second-god-of-war-sugar-ray-robinson

 

I already have him ahead of Greb... so adding these names would just make the gap bigger.

 

I didn't see you mention the issue of politics, I don't really read enough boxing wise to be honest and have been meaning to read up on your stuff

If I was a WW, the fighter's I wouldn't want to try and set traps for would be Robinson, Leonard and Hearns. They're so quick they can make you pay for laying those traps and get out of harms way. Especially Robinson as he could get off such quality punches at speed at any range.

Another point I'd disagree with you on is Robinson being punished for his aggression. Robinson in my view is a better puncher and offensive force than Burley. I love Burley but in essence and despite his power he is a technician and counter puncher. This is one of the reason's people used for not fighting him. I don't see the sugar force going into a shell against him, however I do see him making Robinson fighting a technical fight, I see a Galivanesque fight or maybea Turpin like fight here

Did you enjoy Dawson-Hopkins this w/e stoney? Personally, sick fan of chess matches that I am, I did, Hopkins was setting brilliant traps and Dawson either wasn't falling for them or was getting off first. It's the same thing here imo, Robinson is throwing fast quality punches the moment there is an opening

If Burley is to be successful, he needs to keep the ring centre like Turpin did. Turpin managed to time Robinson with his jab and right first time and he was a bull of a man. Robinson did show his quality in the rematch. Pity there wasn't a rubber match really

1 telling issue in this match up in my view is height and reach, which allows Robinson to win at range, sticking and moving even if he has to be cautious after catching counters coming in.

We have had boxers on here claiming boxing 1 eyed hadn't affected them that much for what it's worth 1 way or another

 

there is no "right answer" to greatest of all time. imo, there's at least 4 guys with a strong case for it. 5 if you have more boxing knowledge than me and include fitz

 

I see Burley as stronger than all three of those great welterweights, with a chin that probably exceeded Robinson's and definitely exceeds Hearns' and Leonard's. And he could hit very hard himself. Burley's traps are part of his style -remember he's fighting off the back foot so traps are worked into his stance.

Why did Turpin beat Robinson and give him a hard time in the rematch? Sure, part of it was Robinson's being a bit underprepared the first time, but I see it as a matter of two things -Turpin's strength and unorthodoxy.

Damn right I did. I didn't care how ugly it got, I just wanted to see how Hopkins would overcome the fact that he was completely outdone in every athletic category. As it was, though, I thought Hopkins should have made it much, much uglier than he did. He was just off the perimeter inviting Dawson to lead and then countering and grabbing. That stopped working soon enough and Hopkins didn't adjust. I thought he should have done alot more mauling. Get in close where the speed and activity won't be factors and use old school tricks to drive him nuts -THEN he woulda made mistakes! Chad is self-conscious and when he acts out, he gets sloppier than he already is. Hopkins could have done more to exploit that by getting close... Not to mention the fact that Chad is gangly and fights gangly -those guys should get short-punched all day. And if you're slow why not get to where you can dig? Referee Cotton was like my grandmother in there though -he didn't allow 33 1/3% of boxing to even happen (that is he wouldn't let them do much at all inside).

Anyway....

Nice -even if I don't see it that way. Burley's openings weren't even openings half the time and his timing was better than Hopkins. The styles aren't really similar. Nor are their assets, though your point is a good one.

Can't fault this too much. Possible.

They're punch-drunk. Alot of boxing is about judging distance and peripheral vision. One eye ain't a whole helluva lot better than one arm. You box -wear a patch over your right eye next time. I wouldn't even try it.

 

Hey guys, I have a question for StoneHands. What exactly happened recently for Greb to overtake Robinson's number one spot? I have read a little on Greb, I know he was tough as nails, and never stopped throwing punches. Hence the nickname "Pittsburgh Windmill," but what has recently come too light that put Harry Greb over the top?

I just finished reading "Sweet Thunder: The Life & Times of Walker Smith Jr. (AKA Sugar Ray Robinson)" but before that book I read Burt Randolph Sugar's "100 Greatest Boxers Of All Time: and Burt's list (last updated in 2005) had Robinson @ #1, Hank Armstrong @ #2, Willie Pep @ #3, Joe Louis @ #4 & Harry Greb @ #5. Given that I have seen very little footage on Greb, of what I know of him, he was a bigger version of Armstrong.

Oh and one more question for you, @Power Puncher mentioned he had been meaning to read up on your stuff. I was just wondering exactly what stuff is he referring to (a blog, your posts, or published books etc) and if he's not referring to your posts, how can I find your other material?

 

This.

I acknowledge Greb has the greatest resume in the history of the sport (along with Langford) and I give him a top three position accordihgly, but unfortunately there is no film whatsoever available for public viewing. Yes, there is of his opponents and we know the level they fought at. Even still, there is a fairly good amount on SRR himself even if the full fights are primarily middleweight footage -- and he's mesmerizing. With the resume, longevity and dominance to go along with it. Then again, I am an absolute sucker for fighters that have dynamite loaded in both fists. :deal

 

It wouldnt change anything for me. I have Robinson # 1 by a good margin.

 

I think it's the fact that we now have the answer to all those mysterious (and pesky) ND fights that always appeared on Greb's record. We really had no way of knowing who won unless we looked through hundreds of pieces of microfilm from libraries all across the country(a near impossible task). But with the advent of internet newspaper archives we can now simply type it up and get the results we seek.

The startling discovery that guys like Greb and Benny Leonard won almost every damn one of those ND fights (with room to spare in many cases) left historians scrambling to reassess their place in boxing history.

Greb leaves just about everybody in the dust.

 

Probably yes.

It would have been fun if some ATG fought today in the internet era:

Ali would have been called "glass jawed", Langford "fat and lazy", Robinson "cherry picker" and Monzon "robotic and overrated".

I don't like Charles-Burley fight as a measuring stick in here.

Quite frankly I don't see Robinson as a smaller version of Charles.

Ezz is a much bigger man naturally. But was he even faster than Burley?

Actually Charles always reminded me a bit of Holyfield - the way he moves, the way he counter attacks.

Maybe it's just me.

Leonard-Benitez is probaby better comparison as Jones was much, much faster than Toney.

That's the most probable scenario of their fight to me too - a technical chess match where no one has siginificant edge with Robinson doing flashier work/throwing more punches and Burley scoring harder punches. Maybe Burley even drops Robinson with one of his counters?

Robinson being more popular gets the nod via SD - fans argue endlessly about who really won the fight.

Spoiling tactis of the highest technical calibur.
I almost cheered for Hopkins - such dirty craftiness!

 

R,may I inject a couple of points to your post ?
1- You ask what has occured to put Harry Greb over Ray Robinson as #1 ?
He has been #1 by knowledgeable historians all these years , based on his almost surreal record in the ring, almost mythical to ponder. Greb at 160 pounds fought 300 times in his career almost bi weekly if not more...
In one year he fought FORTY FIVE times, WINNING every fight....
Greb tackled every fighter who would fight him, regardless of color, styles
or WEIGHT...He ducked no one of his times...No one. Now look at these BIG BOYS, Harry Greb licked...Gene Tunney, Tommy Gibbons, Tommy Loughran, Battling Levinsky, Jack Dillon, Gunboat Smith,Maxie Rosenbloom, Billy Miske, Fat Willie Meehan [gave Dempsey fits], Big Bill Brennan
[4 times, nary losing a round] , Kid Norfolk etc... All these guys outweighed Greb by 12 to 35 pounds....Simply Amazing... And REMEMBER ,for the last few years Harry Greb fought with ONLY ONE EYE...ONE EYE... Think of the courage it required to enter the ring knowing that one blow to the REMAINING EYE could render you BLIND and helpless to your opponent,
and to your audience !!!. And yet with this astounding handicap the
great Harry Greb tackled great Light heavyweights and heavyweights for many years...Can you picture a Ray Robinson [best fighter I saw ringside]
tackling bigger boys as Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Lloyd Marshall, Harold Johnson, time and again and beating them ? No, the great Sugar Ray KNEW his limitations, whilst Harry Greb, handicapped with only one eye, had NO limitations...My dad as I have posted saw Greb slaughter Gene tunney in MSG 1922...My dad and I as a youngster saw the great Ray Robinson in his WW prime, and he always insisted that Harry Greb would have been too rugged, too unorthodox, too strong for Ray Robinson, were they to have met...As do I and others, who have the Pittsburgh Windmill
# 1...Jack Johnson when retired, sparred with Harry Greb in NY, and declared Greb the fastest fighter he had seen.. Jack Dempsey in several sparring sessions, was roughed up by the 160 pound Greb ,stated that
"heck Greb is even faster than Benny leonard ",after the sessions..
2- Henry Armstrong only in the stamina department was like Harry Greb in style. Armstrong was in your face all the time and had nowhere's the ability to avoid punches that Greb had. Greb had a great pair of wheels, scooting about the ring between volleys and flurries..Greb as Gene Tunney stated was "never in the same position for more than a second, and impossible to time ". And Greb never gave you the ball it was said as all his opponents were on the defensive... Harry Greb was one of a kind, whose likes we will never see again...Cheers.

 

I tried to give approach the assertion that Greb is the greatest, twice.

You'll excuse the bum presentations. These things looked good with graphics, italics, and all before the site was revamped some months ago.

"Where Have You Gone, Harry Greb?"
http://www.thesweetscience.com/article-archive/2009/6785-where-have-you-gone-harry-greb

"The God of War"
http://www.thesweetscience.com/article-archive/2010/7752-the-god-of-war

--Just a side note. I was adamant that SRR was the best ever for years. But the more you look at Greb the less sense it makes to put anyone over him, at least since 1920.

 

Greb is in my goat category. Along with robinson and fitz.

Had robinson beaten burley and williams it'd be difficult arguing other resume's above his.

Had he beaten maxim and defended against moore I think he'd be my goat in all 3 categories.

I don't see any man being a favourite over him from 147-160. The guy's just too talented.

 

Langford-hater!!!