Where is Harry Greb in your All time Greats Top list?

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

i dont have roy in my top 10 not anywhere near

 

Come on now T, Carpentier at 4 and Greb at 18? Greb would have wiped the floor with Carpentier.

 

Archie Moore lost most of his big fights, thats why most rank monzon higher, even ring magazine ranks monzon higher than moore.

 

Carpentier was the only fighter to claim a national title in all classic eight divisions.

He was a European Champion at 135, 147, 160, 175 and Heavyweight.

He was the best Light Heavyweight in the world from 1910 all the way though to 22. He was Light Heavyweight Champion of the world (1913 to 1922). He also claimed a white World Championship at Heavyweight.

That resume is better than Greb's, thus Carpentier is my all time #4 and Greb #18.

Greb was brilliant but is slightly overrated by most because of SSS. ('Salvador Sanchez Syndrome' he died too early)

 

That's a pretty heady claim. I'm not sure I could so easily rank Carpentier thusly given the presence of Battling Levinsky, Tommy Gibbons, Jack Dillon, and Kid Norfolk during that period. Still, that's an interesting argument you make for including Carpentier in the top-5 all-time, even if I don't agree.

 

Well i dont agree with how low they rank carlos ortiz and how they overrate basilio and lamotta, but IMO Carlos Monzon simply ranks higher because he won every big fight he was in. You can make any excuse you want like this guy was blown up, or the other guy was out of his prime. The fact of thet matter is that you can look at archie moore's resume and you will notice that he lost to most elites that he fought.

 

One only has to look at grebs record to see he was frigging awesome,about number 2 or 3 for me,also he had a dodgy eye i believe for a part of his career,is that true?

 

European titles were very important in that era.

Ledoux, Sulivan, Lewis, Smith, Levinsky, Lewis and Gibbons were excellent names. And even in 1924 he was able to compete with a primed Tunney for 10 rounds, despite being as much as 10 years past his pomp.

Greb was in his fighting prime in 1926 and died, another symthom of SSS is an inabilty to recognize that a death can give you an emotional attachment to a fighter... you are after all human!

 

When i look at how good a resume, i usually mean the people that you beat. I could care less if someone fought 10 or 11 hall of famers, if you lose to most of them, it just makes you look bad. Harold Johnson is the only guy he beat that i would put on a top 100 of all times list, while monzon beat 3 guys that you can put on the list. He is better and detloff(ring magazine) agress with me.

 

Charley burley was a WW and moore lost to him. Last time i checked, bennie briscoe, rodrigo valdez and nino benvenuti were all legit middleweights and all 3 of them are usually in the top 50 middleweights of all time. Hell make a list of the top 75 middleweights ever and about 9 or 10 monzon victims will be on it. So, lets look at it this way monzon beat 2 ATG welterweights, one ended up being a middleweight champ and on top of that he beat every top middleweight of his era and 3 top 50 middleweights of all times.

Archie Moore only became light heavyweight champ after Ezzard charles left the division, he lost most of his big fights, whether you like it or not, you can come up with 101 excuses, it wont change reality.

 

Greb did twice as much as Carpentier did in half the time.

Look at Henry Armstrong for instance, who T obviously rates highly. How long did his period of dominance last? Not that long at all. But he cleaned out half the sport in that time, and nothing else needs to be said. It doesn't matter that he didn't have a 10 or 15 year prime.

Patrick Charpentier imo has DLH syndrome. Competent in a lot of weight classes, but never really that outstanding in any of them.

 

But Greb did not that is my point. Caprentier fought and won tiles in an era when titles mattered, Greb fought in that era as well, but his title count is nothing to Carpentier, and that is in part because he died young and could not fulfill his true potential.

When I rate my all time greats (which Greb was) I do not use potential as a criteria, thus Greb's early death means I can place him no higher than #18. IMO to place him any higher would be to punish fighters who had full careers.

 

How much could the heavyweight championship of Europe matter when all you had to do to earn it was defeat Bombardier Billy Wells?

 

Maybe that is where you going wrong, your listening rather than reading

Greb was in his pomp in 1926 when he died following an operation to remove a tooth if memory serves me right.