No, this is the fatal flaw in your argument. I'm arguing he wouldn't last in today's era due to his lack of range, poor defense, bad punching technique and constantly incorrectly positioning himself. All of this can be seen from his sparring footage, even though he clearly wasn't going 100%. Go to youtube and watch a great from this era and tell me how many you can find with similar flaws while sparring.
See, this is what I mean. You guys pretend what you know because you've imagined it hundreds of times. You;ve became delusional because you constantly make up excuses when you haven't even seen the guys fight. Yet I can't critique sparring footage and say guys from an older era wouldn't last today. All sports evolve, I can't think of any sports that were evolved to the point of today in the early 1900's. Oh and to respond to what you said about Langford only feeling out his opponent, fighter do that today as well and I never see them try and block all of the punches coming out them by cutting them off at the pass with their hands.
I've read all of your post picking about what I said about feints, go back and read what I said again. All of your ideas have been brought up by other guys already.
I've tested it a bit myself, though hardly exhaustively. But there are guys who have, and they also believe it works. Not to mention the fighters who were actually in that era who used it successfully. So I say again: test it for yourself. Square up against guys who DO practice that style today. They're available.
Ok Cross_Trainer, I'll let you pick the fighter of this era who meausres up to Greb in those areas. Don't say that no one does because many fighters have reached the peak in those areas in every single era. If you simply base picking Greb on the fact that he was tougher and would do what it would take to win, then take the time to look back at everyone who supported Arturo Gatti, (who BTW, is much better technically than Harry Greb) in his chances against Mayweather.
No need. Have you tested what I told you would make these techniques ineffective in today's game? Of these guys, why haven't any of them made it to the elite level?
:rofl You just don't have any shame. You're arguing that Greb is so tough he could make up for his massive technical flaws when other guys of Greb's ilk don't last a round. Was Greb superhuman and none of you even told me? **** I must look like a fool in front of everyone.
The closest equivalents would probably be in Thai boxing rather than modern boxing--they have inferior medical care, inferior equipment, very little money or food, and hundreds of fights; the same conditions Greb faced. But I don't think you're listening to what I'm saying: It doesn't matter how much tougher Greb is than Gatti...because Gatti is tough enough to take just about anything thrown at him and fight back.
Fantastic! I'm delighted that you agree. So why didn't a prime Gatti come close to beating the elites of his modern era?
:roll: Again, no. I didn't argue that Greb would win because he's tougher. I said he was tougher than Gatti, but that it's irrelevant because Gatti's more than tough enough. In other words, the opposite of what you accuse me of saying.
You're right. I read what you wrote incorrectly. So my post is directed at other posters who do argue that logic.
atsch Of course there's a need. You're trying to theorize your way out of testing it, and that doesn't work. If you want to prove to us that older techniques are hopelessly useless, you prove it through sparring. They don't compete at an elite level because they have a tiny talent pool and have just started a few years ago. Same reason that most MODERN boxing gyms don't compete at an elite level. But if you can't beat these guys easily, there's no way you'd beat Greb.