Bob Fitzsimmons v Harry Greb

[Boilermaker]

Fitz was great, he would make my top 50. You're just comparing him to a definitive top 5 fighter

Both are definitive top 5 fighters (if there is such a thing). Fitz did things that no one else did. Making him, I believe as clear a choice of no 1 as is possible given the many, many great fighters we have seen. When Greb retired, as great as he was, i think it was pretty much still accepted by the majority who saw both and were around for both that Fitz ranked higher than Greb.

who beat more great fighters than Fitzsimmons had recorded fights.

Well this is just plainly wrong.

If you listed the top 10 wins between them, Greb would have at least 9 of them. The fight would be a virtual toss up, their resumes are not.

You are obviously a pretty big Greb fan. If you really believe the above, tell me about the 10 best guys Greb beat and I will find you 10 of Fitzsimmons victims that stand the equal or better of these guys. (not that Grebs competition wasnt great). In the interim, we can start with the two records of the two most famous. Corbett and Tunney.

Tunney was a great fighter and definitely a great win. But let us not forget that Tunney was a light heavywieight. And a Light heavyweight who eventually grew too big for Greb, when he approached Corbett's size. Corbett was bigger and equally as fast. Both liked to dance and box from the outside, I am not sure who hit the harder, but i would say that they were pretty similar in power, though Tunney probably seemed a little more eager to mix it up in close. Not that this is necessarilly a good thing. It seems to me that Tunney didnt quite have the power (when he met Greb early on) to keep Greb off him. It is likely that the bigger corbett would not have the same problem with Greb, one wouldnt think. I concede that Tunney had a more proven chin that Corbett, in susceptibility to KO power, but that is not going to be an issue with Greb as Greb didnt really have one punch KO power. The Tunney Corbett sparring session that is available doesnt really tell us much, even though Tunney supposedly came away impressed with what corbett showed him.

Still, it is worth remembering that overall, Greb didnt actually beat Tunney in their series. And never once stopped him. Fitzsimmons knocked Corbett out, so it really did leave nothing to chance as to who actually won the fight. If Corbett fights the light heavyweight version of Tunney, he has to start as favourite in a straight up to fight. Pound for Pound it is a much closer fight of course. But let us not forget that Corbett was often considered the greatest fighter of all time. The light heavyweight Tunney was not really given that accolade quite as often.

They were both greats, but Fitzys win over Corbett has to be a more impressive performance than Greb's Lost or (if you listen to some people) drawn series with Tunney, surely if only for the fact that one asserted dominance and one didnt.

Who is up to face the second best Fitzy opponent?

[Boilermaker]

Fitz was great, he would make my top 50. You're just comparing him to a definitive top 5 fighter who beat more great fighters than Fitzsimmons had recorded fights. If you listed the top 10 wins between them, Greb would have at least 9 of them. The fight would be a virtual toss up, their resumes are not.

I just stumbled across this little recording gem from Jack Dempsey.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4psHJGRG ... r_embedded

Obviously it doesnt mean all that much because it was a list done so quickly and off the cuff, and I am not even sure when. But i do think that it is very, very telling that in his list of great fighters, Harry Greb's name didnt really crop up. That would never happen to Bob Fitzsimmons back in those times and Fitzsimmons was the second fighter listed. Interestingly, (and perhaps tellingly) Dempsey appeared intitially at least to be creating a heavyweight list more than anything else at first, before turning to the likes of Joe Gans, Kentchell and Barbados Joe Walcott.

If one of these guys is inside the top 5 and the other inside the top 50, you will have got it back to front, realistically. Dempsey's comments actually raise quite an interesting question on the greatness of Greb (compared to the upper echelon). But it seems that Greb is better appreciated now than he was in his own time, that is for sure. I just wonder if this is just a tad of revisionism. I am interested to see some Greb fans defend his position.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I'd love to tell you i read any of that or clicked the link, but I can't.

[pound per pound]

Fitzsimmons would stop Greb, as he simply hit too hard. Fitzsimmons not only flatten heavyweights he was responsible to three fatalities in the ring, and one of those was a sparring session. Greb's fearless fly forward and throw punches style is the wrong way to fight Ruby Robert.

[The Great John L]

Fitz was great, he would make my top 50. You're just comparing him to a definitive top 5 fighter who beat more great fighters than Fitzsimmons had recorded fights. If you listed the top 10 wins between them, Greb would have at least 9 of them. The fight would be a virtual toss up, their resumes are not.

Fitz could easily be considered a top 5 P4P ATG as well. His resume is difficult to compare to Greb because, despite his MW frame, many of his most recognized wins were at HW.

[Boilermaker]

Fitz was great, he would make my top 50. You're just comparing him to a definitive top 5 fighter who beat more great fighters than Fitzsimmons had recorded fights. If you listed the top 10 wins between them, Greb would have at least 9 of them. The fight would be a virtual toss up, their resumes are not.

Fitz could easily be considered a top 5 P4P ATG as well. His resume is difficult to compare to Greb because, despite his MW frame, many of his most recognized wins were at HW.

and unlike others who went up in weight to fight heavyweights, he was still a middleweight at the time he fought them. If you look solely at the Jim Corbett fight, I cannot think of any other middleweight who has beat a better fighter (as a middleweight). And obviously Corbett was not the only big heavyweight victory for Fitzsimmons. Corbett wasnt Just the best heavyweight of his time, he was actually an all time great heavyweight legend. That is a massive win on its own. And to win this fight weighing just 158lbs is astonishing. There is of course some contradictory reports as to fitz' exact weight but even if it were the 168 pounds that some places report, it is still a massive result.

The manner of victory and dominance of Fitz is also telling. Against other middleweights, he was lethal, and pretty much KOd them all within a few rounds. Obviously styles account for a lot, but in contrast, Greb, even at his best was only able to win his fights by decision. I cant see any way that he was anywhere near as dominant as Fitz. Actually on this point, one thing that worries me a little bit about rating Greb a top 5 fighter is his lack of KOs. There seems no doubt that Greb was astonishingly fast with an awesome in and out style and super high work rate. Although due to lack of film we can only sadly imagine his style. But, you have to ask, who are the other greats that reach such high levels without having pretty serious power and ability to really hurt an opponent with a punch and power. I cant really think of too many off hand. Does this lead to a question mark as to whether Greb, stylistically could possible be a chance of living up to the position (in a head to head sense i suppose) that his resume appears to demand.

[The Great John L]

Greb was certainly capable of hurting opponents and is in just about every relevant top 5 listing I've ever seen, and deservedly so.

[Boilermaker]

Greb was certainly capable of hurting opponents and is in just about every relevant top 5 listing I've ever seen, and deservedly so.

Yeah i do agree.

But i guess i was just noting really how poor his KO ratio is. And this is obviously not the be all and end all anyway. I am just wondering (particularly given that you would expect such a high work rate to overwhelm and stop fighters) what this really means. The most recent example and not a really good one i can think of where this could be used was a Sven Ottke, who despite winning every fight didnt really have short term power and nobody would have pushed him as a top fighter because of this (yes i know obviously Greb had a far better resume).

Or how about a Joey Maxim. A great fighter no doubt, but didnt really have the power to compete and dominate with the absolute elite in most people's opinions despite the fact that he did have some success against this type of fighter. Philadelphia Jack O Brien is another example. If Greb doesnt have this power, could he really be a top 5 fighter. Are there any other examples of fighers without top line power (or at least very good power) that are good enough to be top 10 or 20 all time fighters. Maybe i am missing some obvious candidates but I cant think of any off hand.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Fitz was great, he would make my top 50. You're just comparing him to a definitive top 5 fighter who beat more great fighters than Fitzsimmons had recorded fights. If you listed the top 10 wins between them, Greb would have at least 9 of them. The fight would be a virtual toss up, their resumes are not.

Fitz could easily be considered a top 5 P4P ATG as well. His resume is difficult to compare to Greb because, despite his MW frame, many of his most recognized wins were at HW.

I don't see any scenario where Fitz lands in the all time top 5. None that I would take seriously. Though this lists are just for fun anyway. He might not make my top 50 if I actually did it. I'd never rate him over a Hagler or Monzon just to name 2.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Greb was certainly capable of hurting opponents and is in just about every relevant top 5 listing I've ever seen, and deservedly so.

Are there any other examples of fighers without top line power (or at least very good power) that are good enough to be top 10 or 20 all time fighters. Maybe i am missing some obvious candidates but I cant think of any off hand.

Off the top of my head..Willie Pep, Tommy Loughran, Maxie Rosenbloom, Pernell Whitaker, Pancho Villa, Jimmy McClarnin, Barney Ross, Tony Canzoneri and Muhammad Ali. None of them had top line power and you can make a case for any of them in a top 20.

[Boilermaker]

Fitz was great, he would make my top 50. You're just comparing him to a definitive top 5 fighter who beat more great fighters than Fitzsimmons had recorded fights. If you listed the top 10 wins between them, Greb would have at least 9 of them. The fight would be a virtual toss up, their resumes are not.

Fitz could easily be considered a top 5 P4P ATG as well. His resume is difficult to compare to Greb because, despite his MW frame, many of his most recognized wins were at HW.

I don't see any scenario where Fitz lands in the all time top 5. None that I would take seriously. Though this lists are just for fun anyway. He might not make my top 50 if I actually did it. I'd never rate him over a Hagler or Monzon just to name 2.

How about if you rate longevity as the greatest asset a fighter can show? Fitz was the best light heavyweight in the world from about 1890 when he beat the second best light heavyweight Joe Choynski to about 1905 when he lost to Philadelphia jack O Brien. That is a period of 15 years. Neither Monzon or Hagler can come near this longevity, even allowing for the fact that as middleweights, neither was able to climb above this weight and win titles. Fitz is still the only Middleweight ever (or light heavyweight for that matter) to be considered the undisputed best fighter in the world, at any one point in time. Surely that counts for just a little bit?

[Boilermaker]

Greb was certainly capable of hurting opponents and is in just about every relevant top 5 listing I've ever seen, and deservedly so.

Are there any other examples of fighers without top line power (or at least very good power) that are good enough to be top 10 or 20 all time fighters. Maybe i am missing some obvious candidates but I cant think of any off hand.

Off the top of my head..Willie Pep, Tommy Loughran, Maxie Rosenbloom, Pernell Whitaker, Pancho Villa, Jimmy McClarnin, Barney Ross, Tony Canzoneri and Muhammad Ali. None of them had top line power and you can make a case for any of them in a top 20.

Some pretty good picks (and obvious ones) let me have a good think about that when i get time. Off the cuff though, there is no way that Muhammed Ali should be on the list. He wasnt a knock em down Tyson or Joe louis style power fighter, but he still had plenty of power and could turn a fight with one punch.

The guys you picked are defensively great fighters though. It is hard to tell without film, and seemed to really be technically good, and liked to box and move in a tradional way. But i didnt really get the impression that Greb fits this mould as he seemed more offensive minded than defensive minded. Although to be fair, many fighters did say that he was hard to hit, it is just that they seemed to focus more on him hitting them from all directions than him ducking and fighting defensively. What is the consensus on Greb's defence?

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I didn't pick anyone, I answered your question. Since there was eight "obvious" names, how come you couldn't come up with one of them?

[Goodnight, Irene]

Saad is saying Ali didnt have top-line power. You really think thats unfair, BM?

[Boilermaker]

Saad is saying Ali didnt have top-line power. You really think thats unfair, BM?

I do think it is unfair. At least in the context of what i was saying.

Ali's power was really respected. He was able to turn fights with his power, and he was considered a big puncher. Obviously there are guys like Shavers foreman etc who had more power, and i agree with this, but ali's power worried people. I mean he did stop George foreman with power shots and noone has ever done that. He also stopped Sonny liston and, particularly pre layoff had a very good KO record.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Saad is saying Ali didnt have top-line power. You really think thats unfair, BM?

I do think it is unfair. At least in the context of what i was saying.

Ali's power was really respected. He was able to turn fights with his power, and he was considered a big puncher. Obviously there are guys like Shavers foreman etc who had more power, and i agree with this, but ali's power worried people. I mean he did stop George foreman with power shots and noone has ever done that. He also stopped Sonny liston and, particularly pre layoff had a very good KO record.

Top-line power should mean guys at the top...Foreman, Louis, Liston, Tyson, etc.

Unless youre putting Ali in that category, I dont see what your beef with Saad is.

Id say Ali would struggle to be on par with even someone like Holyfield...no way he hits like a Bowe, Frazier or Walcott, and those three guys arent in any way in the elite category themselves (all three were hard punchers but dont belong with the gents I mentioned).

[Boilermaker]

But, you have to ask, who are the other greats that reach such high levels without having pretty serious power and ability to really hurt an opponent with a punch and power.

how about pep?

Definitely an excellent example but as i stated before, he was such a defensive whizz. Look especially at the winning a round without a punch myth to see just how good he was considered defensively. Young Griffo might be another to fit this category.

I am reading a fair bit about Pep at the moment, and i am leaning towards agreeing with this call. While he was great defensively and from a orthodox techinical perspective a lot better than Greb, it does seem as if he might be the all time great who can succeed without a great KO record, or even stand out power. For those interested here is a good little article from the early days comparing Peps greatness to Abe Attells. Note in particular that he was said to be able to change his game quite a bit, and overwhelm his opponent offensively with his speed. I guess in a way Saad may also be right in that Ali's speed overwhelmed Liston and others and while i stand by the comment that he had underated power, i am leaning towards giving Greb the benefit of any doubt on this point.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=X2 ... +pep&hl=en

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Saad is saying Ali didnt have top-line power. You really think thats unfair, BM?

I do think it is unfair. At least in the context of what i was saying.

Ali's power was really respected. He was able to turn fights with his power, and he was considered a big puncher. Obviously there are guys like Shavers foreman etc who had more power, and i agree with this, but ali's power worried people. I mean he did stop George foreman with power shots and noone has ever done that. He also stopped Sonny liston and, particularly pre layoff had a very good KO record.

Top-line power should mean guys at the top...Foreman, Louis, Liston, Tyson, etc.

Unless your putting Ali in that category, I dont see what your beef with Saad is.

Id say Ali would struggle to be on par with even someone like Holyfield...no way he hits like a Bowe, Frazier or Walcott, and those three guys arent in any way in the elite category themselves (all three were hard punchers but dont belong with the gents I mentioned).

He definitely didn't, Boilermaker seems confused by himself. But that's fine, drop Ali out. I still spit out 8 other guys in a couple seconds. So the premise that a top 20 fighter needs big power has been blown completely out of the water. I didn't even mention Gavilan or Griffith.

[Goodnight, Irene]

I certainly agree that power isnt a pre-requisite to greatness. I could name guys to the contrary all day.

As for just the top-20 men of all-time though, Im not sure off-hand.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I certainly agree that power isnt a pre-requisite to greatness. I could name guys to the contrary all day.

As for just the top-20 men of all-time though, Im not sure off-hand.

I wouldn't argue with anyone who had Ali, Canzoneri, Gavilan, Pep, Griffith, Loughran, Rosenbloom, Whitaker, Ross, McClarnin or Villa in their top 20's. Many of them are in mine.

I hate to even say it, but I think rating Pep as highly as I always have goes a bit against my strictness on resume being the deciding factor at the absolute highest level. If you look at the guys he beat compared to the guys Griffith beat and lost closely too it's a slippery slope.

[Boilermaker]

Saad is saying Ali didnt have top-line power. You really think thats unfair, BM?

I do think it is unfair. At least in the context of what i was saying.

Ali's power was really respected. He was able to turn fights with his power, and he was considered a big puncher. Obviously there are guys like Shavers foreman etc who had more power, and i agree with this, but ali's power worried people. I mean he did stop George foreman with power shots and noone has ever done that. He also stopped Sonny liston and, particularly pre layoff had a very good KO record.

Top-line power should mean guys at the top...Foreman, Louis, Liston, Tyson, etc.

yes, but i said top line (or at least very good) power. I think David Haye probably had very good power. I wouldnt put him in the category of fighters you mentioned. Vitali (i am sure i will get some abuse on this one) has very good clubbing power, but again i wouldnt put in the same bracket as the guys you mentioned. Greb I would have thought was less than this.

If we listed all the fighters pound for pound in order of punching ability, Tyson, McGovern etc would be up near the 10. Ali and Co probably around the 7 about on par with say a Monzon or a Ray leonard.

I would have thought that on this scale Rosenbloom and Greb would have been below 5. is this a fair rating, or do you think it would change and greb might be higher? By very good power, i was probably thinking of guys with less than 5 in the purely power category. I am open to being convinced by Greb's fans of many things, but this would seem to be the position as it stands.

Unless youre putting Ali in that category, I dont see what your beef with Saad is.

No real beef at all, just throwing a few different items up for discussion as i patiently bide my time to see if Klompton or any others can raise a good argument as to why Greb should rank over Fitzy.

Id say Ali would struggle to be on par with even someone like Holyfield...no way he hits like a Bowe, Frazier or Walcott, and those three guys arent in any way in the elite category themselves (all three were hard punchers but dont belong with the gents I mentioned).

i think that Ali definitely hits harder than Holyfield. I think i would lean slightly towards Ali in a punching competition with Walcott, although i admit it is close. Even Frazier, i think is definitely a lot closer than people think although i would probably give it to Frazier. I think i agree that Bowe probably hits a bit harder.

[Goodnight, Irene]

An exception to every rule though, right Saad?

Well, make that two exceptions. We cant forget the walking, talking greatness that was Ricardo Lopez

[SaadOffTheDeck]

[Goodnight, Irene]

I do think it is unfair. At least in the context of what i was saying.

Ali's power was really respected. He was able to turn fights with his power, and he was considered a big puncher. Obviously there are guys like Shavers foreman etc who had more power, and i agree with this, but ali's power worried people. I mean he did stop George foreman with power shots and noone has ever done that. He also stopped Sonny liston and, particularly pre layoff had a very good KO record.

Top-line power should mean guys at the top...Foreman, Louis, Liston, Tyson, etc.

yes, but i said top line (or at least very good) power. I think David Haye probably had very good power. I wouldnt put him in the category of fighters you mentioned. Vitali (i am sure i will get some abuse on this one) has very good clubbing power, but again i wouldnt put in the same bracket as the guys you mentioned. Greb I would have thought was less than this.

If we listed all the fighters pound for pound in order of punching ability, Tyson, McGovern etc would be up near the 10. Ali and Co probably around the 7 about on par with say a Monzon or a Ray leonard.

I would have thought that on this scale Rosenbloom and Greb would have been below 5. is this a fair rating, or do you think it would change and greb might be higher? By very good power, i was probably thinking of guys with less than 5 in the purely power category. I am open to being convinced by Greb's fans of many things, but this would seem to be the position as it stands.

Unless youre putting Ali in that category, I dont see what your beef with Saad is.

No real beef at all, just throwing a few different items up for discussion as i patiently bide my time to see if Klompton or any others can raise a good argument as to why Greb should rank over Fitzy.

Id say Ali would struggle to be on par with even someone like Holyfield...no way he hits like a Bowe, Frazier or Walcott, and those three guys arent in any way in the elite category themselves (all three were hard punchers but dont belong with the gents I mentioned).

i think that Ali definitely hits harder than Holyfield. I think i would lean slightly towards Ali in a punching competition with Walcott, although i admit it is close. Even Frazier, i think is definitely a lot closer than people think although i would probably give it to Frazier. I think i agree that Bowe probably hits a bit harder.

No WAY does Ali hit harder than Walcott! None! And you would say Frazier, "probably," hits harder than Ali? And what is this about Vitali having anything resembling good power? Did you watch him belt a 3,000-year-old Shannon Briggs (seriously, an ancient Briggs!) all around the ring without so much as a knockdown? It was pitiful. Vitali got all the punch resistance in his gene pool, but Wlad got every last drop of power (which he now neglects totally).

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Top-line power should mean guys at the top...Foreman, Louis, Liston, Tyson, etc.

yes, but i said top line (or at least very good) power. I think David Haye probably had very good power. I wouldnt put him in the category of fighters you mentioned. Vitali (i am sure i will get some abuse on this one) has very good clubbing power, but again i wouldnt put in the same bracket as the guys you mentioned. Greb I would have thought was less than this.

If we listed all the fighters pound for pound in order of punching ability, Tyson, McGovern etc would be up near the 10. Ali and Co probably around the 7 about on par with say a Monzon or a Ray leonard.

I would have thought that on this scale Rosenbloom and Greb would have been below 5. is this a fair rating, or do you think it would change and greb might be higher? By very good power, i was probably thinking of guys with less than 5 in the purely power category. I am open to being convinced by Greb's fans of many things, but this would seem to be the position as it stands.

Unless youre putting Ali in that category, I dont see what your beef with Saad is.

No real beef at all, just throwing a few different items up for discussion as i patiently bide my time to see if Klompton or any others can raise a good argument as to why Greb should rank over Fitzy.

Id say Ali would struggle to be on par with even someone like Holyfield...no way he hits like a Bowe, Frazier or Walcott, and those three guys arent in any way in the elite category themselves (all three were hard punchers but dont belong with the gents I mentioned).

i think that Ali definitely hits harder than Holyfield. I think i would lean slightly towards Ali in a punching competition with Walcott, although i admit it is close. Even Frazier, i think is definitely a lot closer than people think although i would probably give it to Frazier. I think i agree that Bowe probably hits a bit harder.

No WAY does Ali hit harder than Walcott! None! And you would say Frazier, "probably," hits harder than Ali? And what is this about Vitali having anything resembling good power? Did you watch him belt a 3,000-year-old Shannon Briggs (seriously, an ancient Briggs!) all around the ring without so much as a knockdown? It was pitiful. Vitali got all the punch resistance in his gene pool, but Wlad got every last drop of power (which he now neglects totally).

It's a typical poster that makes statements and then back tracks on them when he should just become enlightened by the answers and say Thank You. Holyfield and Walcott both hit harder than Ali and Frazier hit harder than all of them.

I mean this is a man asking for one good reason how harry greb rates over Bob Fitzsimmons. Resume doesn't count, quality of opposition doesn't count. It's high grade trolling.