Was Greb a dirty fighter, or just a rule bender?

old fighters generally commited a wider range of fouls, but in terms of the effect fouls can have on fights i don't think there is much difference across the decades.

edit, because of equipment- laces and free thumbs as much as refereeing standards. Also i'm only talking about the fighters who fouled, there were clean fighters in every era too

 

here is a short letter from Billy Shade, who claims that Greb would have been disqualified if his fight had taken place in NY. I am not necessarilly sure of the truth of his claims, but it is strange (but not impossible) that he would lie in a letter to Bill Corbett, who was half the world away.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/a...rm=harry wills life story boxer&searchLimits=

 

Thats funny. The ringside reports of the Greb-Shade bout only mention Greb holding and hitting but they also make note that Shade only landed an average of one punch per round, consider that statistic for a second. He was knocked down, dominated, and the audience thought Greb carried him and could have finished him if he had chosen. I guess everybody has their own story.

 

Greb has his mythology, that he was a hedonistic womaniser, who would foul the bottom of your foot if you lifted it of the canvas.

The truth on all of these points is a lot more complex.

Those close to him said that he was professional in preparation for fights.

His sexual escapades started after the loss of his wife.

He often fought cleanly.

The mythology is only half true.

 

It would be interesting to look at the write up of the Shade Lohman fight to see how the press might manipulate a story to help sell a fighter who is being promoted for a purpose (assuming shade is on the level with his assessment).

I am not saying that Shade is definitely write, just pointing out, as you say, that everybody has their own sgtory. The difference is though, i think sometimes we are a little too quick to completely write off things 100 years later, just because news reports say things. They are the best indicators we have, but they are not infallible.

Also note, that Shade doesnt say he should have been given a points decision against Greb, so the fact that he only landed one punch per round and was dominated is of little consequence. He says that Greb would have been DQd. Also note that presumably the thumbing, headbutting etc was suttle and not easily detectable so it isnt impossible that the media didnt comment on it, particularly if Greb won comfortably.

I am not saying that Greb was dirty. Certainly no more than any other fighter. And you have virtually convinced me of this. Still, i thought this was was an interesting article that i stumbled across and does tend to suggest that he bent the rules a littler. No different to any other great fighter i m sure.

 

The news reports mention Greb fouling in several fights anyway.

But I don't know why people now are trying to say Greb wasn't a dirty fighter. I can't think of any fighter in history who got a reputation for being a dirty fighter without being a dirty fighter. But in the absence of footage, some are claiming that Greb falls into this new category.

Certainly there were dirty fighters who never really got a reputation for being so - perhaps because they were so good at disguising their fouls - but I can't think of anyone who got the reputation for being dirty without do a little something to earn it.

 

I wouldn't expect newspaper men ringside to notice all the dirty little tricks fighters do anyway.
Per fight you might only see a few fouls. But that's what makes these fighters professionals.