Marvin Hagler v.s Harry Greb

Hagler TKO3

 

Sorry if I misled you. My statement is a conclusion of all his posts and not necessarily the last one. He has been mentioning the same thing I mentioned, which is 'how can somebody be so sure about a boxer he has never seen fighting?'

What he's doing at the end, in his last post, is being sarcarstic, he's basically showing that is not wise to pick a boxer you have never seen fighting. He's basically doing the same some posters are doing, with a little twist, he's picking Hagler, who is the one that he has seeing, but he has never seeing Greb.

That's why hes saying " Show me footage of Greb that proves otherwise". Do you see the sarcasm there?

 

Since virtualy everybody from welterweight to heavyweight tried and failed to put Greb away in his own time I doubt that anybody is doing it in three.

Punish yourself.

 

Don't bother listening to him mate. He thinks Dempsey's legacy is hurt by the fact he didn't face a 50 year old Johnson just like Tyson's legacy is jurt since he did not face a 50 year old Foreman

 

Hagler W 15 Greb

Harry Greb's legs were observed to be fading slightly in his successful defense against Mickey Walker, but he still reportedly handled Walker well for a conclusive win.

Most ringside observers believed that Greb also did enough to deserve a decision win in both controversial losses to southpaw Tiger Flowers. Still, I suspect the different stance of a MW the caliber of the Deacon had to compromise Greb's effectiveness to a certain extent, regardless of any decline on Harry's part.

At the very least, Hagler should certainly be allowed as the greatest southpaw MW champ to date. Even a peak Greb isn't going to threaten to take Marv out. This is going 15 rounds, with no KDs. Unlike most southpaws, Hagler's business end is really his right. Keep that jab after Greb continually, mixing in some left crosses downstairs. If Harry tries to get under that jab low, use the right to uppercut.

Hagler's closest opponent to Greb was probably Antuofermo. In his rematch with Vito, he demonstrated that he learned from his previous draw very well. Harry will try darting in and out. Have the jab ready to thwart Greb's advance when he closes. It's going the distance, so be sure to be the one punching cleanly, and with straighter blows. Stay disciplined.

For Greb, he needs to emulate Antuofermo as best he can. He probably didn't have Vito's physical strength, but he wasn't hampered by Antuofermo's susceptibility to cuts either. Running at Hagler, fists flying, head butting, gloves thumbing, laces raking, all too fast for the referee to pick up on, racing around Hagler when in close.

Ultimately bouts are won by punching, and I believe Hagler's delivery of his would be more clearly discernable, but the only outcome I'd place money on, is that the match goes the distance.

 

Well Ray Arcel didn't need any Greb film because he evaluated both as ringside observer and he chose Greb over Hagler BIG TIME!!
This was published information in Boxing Illustrated 1984. Also, if you found 1924 Gene Tunney impressive vs Carp as did Muhammad Ali calling Tunney "A White Ali" keep in mind over the hill half blind middleweight Harry Greb defeated prime 182 lb Gene in a ten round newspaper decision in that very same year in Cleveland according to the majority of ringside reports.

 

It must be a hard life being a Greb critic.

You can't try to pull his record apart and those of his key opponents, because you would be here till kingdom come.

The only way to do it is to drop a hydrogen bomb on the entire era by saying that everybody in that era sucked, so it dosn't matter what he achieved.

Of course this approach produces a huge fallout, and considerable colateral damage to adjacent eras.

 

Hagler is too skilled and rounded for Greb...... Greb is made-to-order for the likes of Hagler...........

Hagler always excelled on maulers / brawlers who forced the action...... Boxers (Duran & Leonard) who kept there distance and gave different angles troubled Hagler to a degree.......

Harry Greb was solid and great at 160, but he was no slickster with finess, etc......

Hagler gets to Greb late....... HAGLER!!

MR.BILL:deal

 

The only fair response. The short films do show a few structural problems with Greb that also show in photos of his bouts. His right elbow is way up in both films and photos which today would be seen as amatureish, leaving him open to left hooks to the body (something Tommy Loughran said was needed to beat Harry) and not able to put much into the punches, etc.

 

JUST about everybody. joe chip did i believe

 

You would be doing Greb a grave injustice if you said that he was just a brawler.

Greb seems to have switched styles at will between being a swarmer and a slick boxer. He could out box the slick boxers of the day and out maul the maulers.

He beat the number of top fighters that he beat for a reason.

He could always find a style that frustrated theirs.

 

You can say that every single fighter you've seen from that era looks like absolute dog**** in a world class sense. Gene Tunney looks ahead of his time but still is not that impressive. You guys just make such a big deal about him because he's the only guy that doesnt look cruder than crude.

On the other hand, Hagler looks like a master. So i'll go with the visual evidence.

 

Greb was 17 years old and weighed 142 pounds to Chips 156.

This fight might perhaps not be verry relevant?

 

Do you honestly think that Hagler would hang with Tunney based on the film evidence?

Be honest.

 

:tongdetails, details