Tiger Flowers - Most Underrated Fighter of All Time

sharkeysboy · Post by **sharkeysboy** » 28 Aug 2005, 10:56

I make no arguement for Flowers being the best middleweight of all time - he had no punch and a chin of the most delicate china. But he wiped the floor twice with Harry Greb. And most ring siders agree he beat Mickey Walker soundly although he was robbed of the victory by a scandalous decision. (Rumor has it Al Capone had something to do with it.) Tiger is definitely not a canditate for PFP greatness since every flirtation he made into the Light Heavy ranks was punished severely. He was knocked out early twice by Jack Delaney, once by Kid Norfolk and once by Sam Langford. But he was a very tough infighter with an unusually good defense for someone who liked to mix it up. And he was extremely atheletic in the ring, fast and agile. In a way, he was the mirror image of Greb (or Greb with a weak chin) which may be why he did so well against him. They were both notoriously dirty fighters. Greb was the better PFP fighter (witness his LHW record) but I think they were comparable at middleweight. They were about the same age so the "Harry was past his prime" arguement doesn't fly. And the idea that Harry beat him in their earlier match is a much debated subject. I guess this is what I'm saying: the 1920's produced four great middleweights, Panama Joe Gans, Mickey Walker, Harry Greb and Tiger Flowers. Gans doesn't get his due either but he was never champ. I think in many ways Flowers' accomplishment of becoming an African American champion between the Johnson era and the Louis era is one of the more impressive accomplishments in fight history. He is in the International Boxing Hall of Fame but no one talks of him much and this is my way of trying to correct that.

Sherlock · Post by **Sherlock** » 28 Aug 2005, 11:39

From what I have heard Tiger didn't "wipe the floor twice with Greb," but that they were both close decisions that could have gone either way. Walker fight is a different matter, Tiger won that. Is underrated and is a top ten middle of all time.

KOJOE90 · Post by **KOJOE90** » 28 Aug 2005, 11:54

sharkeysboy · Post by **sharkeysboy** » 28 Aug 2005, 12:18

Sherlock wrote:From what I have heard Tiger didn't "wipe the floor twice with Greb," but that they were both close decisions that could have gone either way. Walker fight is a different matter, Tiger won that. Is underrated and is a top ten middle of all time.

The two Greb-Flowers fights were clear cut victories for Flowers. Perhaps "wiped the floor with" was exaggeration on my part but there was no debate on who won the fights. As a matter of fact, in a era of suspect decisions the N.Y. Times reporter goes out of his way to describe the decision in the first fight as "popular" meaning knowledeable fight fans agreed with it. And that fight was pretty close to a floor wiping according to the Times report. Greb did a bit better in fight 2 but once again, there was no controversy as to the decision. You can access the New York Times accounts from ProQuest Archiver. The reports make great reading and give you an excellent idea of what the fights were like.

sharkeysboy · Post by **sharkeysboy** » 28 Aug 2005, 12:31

Very cool photo of Tiger, KOJOE. I haven't seen that one before.

Seamus · Post by **Seamus** » 28 Aug 2005, 14:44

Sharkeysboy

Do you have any additional info regarding the claim that Al Capone was involved in possibly fixing the Walker-Flowers fight ? It's not that surprising since Capone frequented the old Chicago Coliseum which was in walking distance of his Lexington Hotel, and Metropole headquarters. One small point of contention though, and this by no means would rule it out (much strangers things have occured) but Mickey Walker was actually a personal friend of Dean O'Banion the co-founder of the North Side Gang, Capone's bitter rivals.

klompton · Post by **klompton** » 28 Aug 2005, 14:46

So your basing your claim that Flowers wiped the floor with Greb twice on one newspaper report? New York had several newspapers at the time and thats only one opinion of how the fight went. Both fights were close with the second being the more competetive. Greb was past his prime regardless of what you want to believe. Flowers was younger and started his career several years later than Greb, he had about half as many fights as Greb, and wasnt blind in one eye. If you had read read more on this fight you would have noticed that it wasnt Flowers who put on a clinic but Greb who had noticeably faded from his previous ability. His fight with Walker was a somewhat controversial decision but it hinged on whether you liked clean hard punches or slaps, it was Walker landing the clean hard punches, Walker who came on down the stretch, and Walker who floored Flowers more than once. In fact Flower may have been floored more than any other middleweight champion in history. As per their deaths posted by you in another thread there was nothing controversial about their deaths. Medicine wasnt what it is today and these things happened. Flowers death wasnt given any added meaning by overimaginative writers until a bit later when Walk Miller (Flowers manager) was found dead in his apartment of an apparent suicide. Some have since said that his and Flowers death were foul play because they were trying to force a rematch with Mickey Walker. This is unlikely and there is no credible evidence to support it other than half baked theories from newspaper and magazine men written years after the fact and far away from the events.

sharkeysboy · Post by **sharkeysboy** » 28 Aug 2005, 17:21

Seamus wrote:Sharkeysboy

Do you have any additional info regarding the claim that Al Capone was involved in possibly fixing the Walker-Flowers fight ? It's not that surprising since Capone frequented the old Chicago Coliseum which was in walking distance of his Lexington Hotel, and Metropole headquarters. One small point of contention though, and this by no means would rule it out (much strangers things have occured) but Mickey Walker was actually a personal friend of Dean O'Banion the co-founder of the North Side Gang, Capone's bitter rivals.

Seamus, on pages 70-73 of Mickey Walker's autobiography The Toy Bulldog and His Times (a book of mine that was lost and now is found) Mickey goes into detail about his friendship with Al Capone. No mention is made of O'Banion, at least in that section, there is no index. Mickey says "Capone never took advantage of our friendship by asking me to throw a fight." Mick goes on to say he never fought a crooked fight in his life "knowingly" he adds. Re the Flowers fight he says on p. 141 "It was very close. There were a lot of people who thought I didn't win the fight." Of course, he then goes on to argue that the did. That the fight was fixed by Capone is just a rumor my uncle heard. My uncle was an elevator operator in the Manhatten building Owney Madden lived in and has (had, he died in 2002) plenty of mob rumors. Of course, anything crooked happening in Chicago in those days was probably laid at Capone's feet. The mayor of Chicago Big Bill Thompson said the fight was crooked. And Big Bill had some inside knowledge. Walker is most outspoken about his fight with Greb. He's sure he won.

sharkeysboy · Post by **sharkeysboy** » 28 Aug 2005, 17:45

klompton wrote:So your basing your claim that Flowers wiped the floor with Greb twice on one newspaper report? New York had several newspapers at the time and thats only one opinion of how the fight went. Both fights were close with the second being the more competetive. Greb was past his prime regardless of what you want to believe. Flowers was younger and started his career several years later than Greb, he had about half as many fights as Greb, and wasnt blind in one eye. If you had read read more on this fight you would have noticed that it wasnt Flowers who put on a clinic but Greb who had noticeably faded from his previous ability. His fight with Walker was a somewhat controversial decision but it hinged on whether you liked clean hard punches or slaps, it was Walker landing the clean hard punches, Walker who came on down the stretch, and Walker who floored Flowers more than once. In fact Flower may have been floored more than any other middleweight champion in history. As per their deaths posted by you in another thread there was nothing controversial about their deaths. Medicine wasnt what it is today and these things happened. Flowers death wasnt given any added meaning by overimaginative writers until a bit later when Walk Miller (Flowers manager) was found dead in his apartment of an apparent suicide. Some have since said that his and Flowers death were foul play because they were trying to force a rematch with Mickey Walker. This is unlikely and there is no credible evidence to support it other than half baked theories from newspaper and magazine men written years after the fact and far away from the events.

Well, one contemporary newspaper account is worth 100 later versions of the fight designed to perpetuate myths of the past. Feel free to direct me to contemporary accounts of the fight that contradict the account I directed you to. As far as Greb being past his prime, all fighters look slowed down when they're suddenly up against a fighter who is so much faster than he is. Greb simply met a better man and so he looked like he was over the hill. Gatti looked like a creaky old man when he fought Mayweather. Do you think a younger Gatti would have done much better? I don't. It's a funny thing. So many black fighters were denied shots at titles in the 20s. One got the shot (that would be Flowers), performed brilliantly, whipped a white legend twice, the racist white press in the 20s gave him his due at the time but today so many people don't want to face it. Tiger Flowers was as good or better than Harry Greb at middleweight. The great thing about boxing is that there's a bottom line. If you step between the ropes and the fight is on the level, the truth will prevail. Thanks for the info on Flower's death. I suspected something like that.

Seamus · Post by **Seamus** » 28 Aug 2005, 18:10

Sharkeysboy

Thanks ! I later did a search and found that Walker was a friend of Capone, and I also found a site mentioning the fix but without any real details.

The Chicago Coliseum was a real gem. It looked like a cross between a prison a castle and a brewery, and in addition to boxing, it was used for pro hockey and basketball, political conventions and finally even rock concerts (it was the site of the only 2 shows by the Doors in Chicago) The Coliseum which was constructed from bricks taken from Libby Prison in Richmond Virginia, was very popular with Chicago gangsters in the 20's-30's. In fact the Chicago Police made a few sweeps on gangsters leaving the Coliseum after boxing cards. Sadly the arena was torn down in 1982.

While on the subject of boxers and organized crime, Albert Weinshenker, one of the 7 men murdered in the St Valentine's Day Massacre was (according to his uncle) planning to attend the 2-27-29 Sharkey-Stribling fight in Miami Beach at the time of his murder.

sharkeysboy · Post by **sharkeysboy** » 28 Aug 2005, 18:23

Seamus, thanks for all that cool info. Chicago is the only big American city I haven't spent much time in. I get what you mean about being sad when they tore down the arena. I was inconsolable when they tore down the Polo Grounds. The Giants hadn't played there since '57 but the Mets played there in '62 and '63. I just assumed it was something people would keep around for decades. Then in '64 they tore in down. Horrifying. Do you know how many great fights were fought there? Too many to count.

klompton · Post by **klompton** » 28 Aug 2005, 20:04

So Greb at thirty-two with three hundred fights under his belt and blind in one eye, having been in the game several years longer than Flowers was NOT past his best? Let me get this straight: Your contention is that Tiger Flowers met the best version of Greb in 1926 and whipped him handily without any trouble? I would say start spending more time with your nose buried in microfilm before making ridiculous claims like that. You also claim that Flowers was as good or better than Greb at middleweight yet he lost to Jack Delaney by KO twice (three times if you include the fact that they actually let Flowers fight after being KOd in the second fight only to get stopped again), the same Jack Delaney who was only a middleweight at the time, outweighed by Flowers, and the same Jack Delaney that despite being Greb's top contender for a couple of years refused to face Greb for the title after Greb had signed his name to three seperate contracts... Tiger Flowers also won a gift decision from Lou Bogash (who Greb beat) after being bounced off the canvas like a yo-yo, he had his face torn to shreds by Allentown Joe Gans who couldnt win a round against Greb. He drew twice and lost to still middleweight Maxie Rosenbloom who had been so utterly dominated by Greb that the newspapers speculated Greb allowed Rosenbloom to stay the limit. He lost to the same Mickey Walker that Greb gave a beating to. He lost to McTigue (a bad decision) who was dominated twice by Greb and who would never give Greb a shot at the LHW title. You could go on and on but theres a reason why Greb is rated infinitely higher than Flowers at MW and P4P and it takes a lot more research than looking at ONE newspaper on Proquest before you can understand why.

A guy looks at one newspaper, the Times, which wasnt even close to the best boxing paper, and suddenly hes an expert. You dont think Greb was past his best? This is a guy who had already fought several champions before Flowers even laced up a glove...

klompton · Post by **klompton** » 28 Aug 2005, 20:38

Here is a little education for you from some of my files since you asked to be enlightened:

Sam Hall Universal News:

"Greb did not lose very far, but they took his title away and while they were so doing, he showed very plainly that he is through as a great fighter. Never did Greb fight so badly and it was far from a wonderful middleweight that defeated him...."

"...He was lucky enough to catch Greb when that once great fighter really had reached the end of the trail that his friends had seen in the offing for the past SIX years."

"There were many present, including some of the critics who though the fight was too close to take away a mans crown and with it the knowledge that Greb, who could have chased Flowers back to Georgia when in his prime, failed miserably and dropped his honors to a man who was just a bit better. Flowers was better only by a round or so but that was sufficient with the officials."

Jack Lawrence New York Herald-Tribune

"In the opinion of this writer Harry Greb had a sufficient lead at the finish to warrant his being given the decision. It was certainly too close a thing on which to relieve a man of a worlds title. On the Herald-Tribune sheet Greb was given eight rounds against six for the challenger, one was recorded even."

Hype Igoe

" My own tally of rounds held Greb out in front by a margin of two rounds, showing five for Flowers, seven for Greb, and the others even."

New York Daily News:

Round by Round had it Greb six rounds, to five rounds for Flowers with the rest even. Harry Newman of the NY Daily News commented that Greb had the fight won going into the 13th round but failed to close the show, he felt the final three rounds were even and the while Flowers won under the strictest interpretation of New Yorks rules it was too close to take a mans title.

The New York Sun had the fight Seven rounds for Flowers, Five for Greb, with the rest even, admitting that it was close and that Greb was no longer the same fighter he once was.

I should also point out that the New York Times, which is the basis for you uneducated argument was emphatic more than once in the fact that Greb was simply far past his prime and no longer an elite fighter stating:

"... There is no accounting for the reversal of form by Greb other than that he is passed his crest. Greb fought like a man burned out. He had not the sustained speed and stamina and endurence which have carried him to so many victories in the past."

In fact its no wonder you came away with the flawed opinion you post here because the Times, which is the only article you looked at, is by FAR the most pro-Flowers article of all the New York articles Ive read.

sharkeysboy · Post by **sharkeysboy** » 28 Aug 2005, 20:39

klompton wrote:So Greb at thirty-two with three hundred fights under his belt and blind in one eye, having been in the game several years longer than Flowers was NOT past his best? Let me get this straight: Your contention is that Tiger Flowers met the best version of Greb in 1926 and whipped him handily without any trouble? I would say start spending more time with your nose buried in microfilm before making ridiculous claims like that. You also claim that Flowers was as good or better than Greb at middleweight yet he lost to Jack Delaney by KO twice (three times if you include the fact that they actually let Flowers fight after being KOd in the second fight only to get stopped again), the same Jack Delaney who was only a middleweight at the time, outweighed by Flowers, and the same Jack Delaney that despite being Greb's top contender for a couple of years refused to face Greb for the title after Greb had signed his name to three seperate contracts... Tiger Flowers also won a gift decision from Lou Bogash (who Greb beat) after being bounced off the canvas like a yo-yo, he had his face torn to shreds by Allentown Joe Gans who couldnt win a round against Greb. He drew twice and lost to still middleweight Maxie Rosenbloom who had been so utterly dominated by Greb that the newspapers speculated Greb allowed Rosenbloom to stay the limit. He lost to the same Mickey Walker that Greb gave a beating to. He lost to McTigue (a bad decision) who was dominated twice by Greb and who would never give Greb a shot at the LHW title. You could go on and on but theres a reason why Greb is rated infinitely higher than Flowers at MW and P4P and it takes a lot more research than looking at ONE newspaper on Proquest before you can understand why.

A guy looks at one newspaper, the Times, which wasnt even close to the best boxing paper, and suddenly hes an expert. You dont think Greb was past his best? This is a guy who had already fought several champions before Flowers even laced up a glove...

We spend so much time on this site talking about imaginary match ups. Greb vs LaMotta, Robinson vs Monzon etc. Here's a matchup we don't have to imagine. Greb vs Flowers. It actually happened twice. Both times Flowers won. Harry Greb beat the crap out of Maxie Rosenbloom a few months before the first Flowers fight. Nobody at ringside at that fight thought he had slowed down. Greb was 31 when he fought Flowers the first time. Flowers was 30. The way you talk you'd think Greb was an old man or that the age difference was huge. By the time of the second fight Greb had turned 32 and Flowers 31. Shall I list the great fighters who continued to be great after they turned 30? They are legion. I can start the list with Tiger Flowers. And I'm still waiting for you to refer me to another contemporary source of these fights that contradicts the opionion that they were clear cut victories for Flowers. Sorry guy. Reality rules. When it counted, Flowers was the better man.

klompton · Post by **klompton** » 28 Aug 2005, 20:45

Luckily your opinion is in the uneducated minority and laughable since its based on one article that you read. When you have nearly 30 500 page 3-ring binders on material covering the careers of Flowers and Greb ALONE, then come back and talk to me, until then you can review some of the quotes I reprinted for you so people dont think your a fool for basing such an opinion on the writing of one man.

They fough three times by the way, not twice.

And Im sure a lot of people from then to now wonder how a match between a prime Greb and a prime Flowers (the one who fought Greb) would have turned out. We dont wonder how a prime Greb would have done against the LaMotta who lost to Nardico do we? Thats nonsense, and ignorant.

sharkeysboy · Post by **sharkeysboy** » 28 Aug 2005, 20:55

I didn't see your list of Greb apologia before I made that last post. Why not take a look at African American newspapers of the time. They definitely did not see it as a close fight. They saw it as a decisive Flowers victory. Andrew M. Kaye in his brilliant book the Pussycat of Prizefighting, Tiger Flowers and the Politics of Black Celebrity documents how difficult it was for Tiger or any of his black contemporaries to get a fair deal from either judges, refs or the press. For a black fighter to get the decision over a white icon like Greb twice is clearly a case of a dominating performance that could not be overlooked. For all time the record will read Title Fights: Flowers 2, Greb 0.

sharkeysboy · Post by **sharkeysboy** » 28 Aug 2005, 21:17

As far as me belonging to "an undeducated minority" I would take offense but I'm considering the source. I am a proud member of a minority. And so was Tiger. By the way, that's the reason he's underrated which is where this thread began, a statement that he is underrated. Because the white majority for decades has demeaned his accomplishment and you have binders documenting that does not impress me. Oh, and for the record I mentioned the first of the three fights in my original post.

klompton · Post by **klompton** » 28 Aug 2005, 22:57

Andrew Kayes book is complete garbage, poorly researched, and completely biased. I was in contact with him long before the book was published, sending him information for research and when his book came out I gave him my honest assessment, which was that it was rushed, and again, poorly researched, he replied by calling me a boxing nerd, which is sad considering his book is a supposed to be a factual bio of Flowers, a boxer.

One of the major points of his book is that Flowers was ducked by Greb. Nothing could be further from the truth. Flowers was unknown until Greb AGREED to fight him in Ohio, a fight which Greb did not have to take. Within the context of the day Greb never had to fight a single black man but he did.

Greb was the saddest person in the audience the night Flowers was knocked out by Delaney because he was trying to get a large outdoor venue to accept a fight with he and Flowers for the title in the summer months for a huge purse.

Kayes book is basically a republication of Flowers equally bad first biography which was written by a minister at the behest of the Flowers family. A sidelight of Kayes book is about the fame of African americans during that era. He makes a point of saying that a Flowers biopic was never made because of some white conspiracy when in fact the Flowers film was made, it was a widely released across the country and did well at the box office. Archie Moore even cited it as his motivation for getting into the sport. An omition such as this is either ignorance, or flat out deception on the part of the writer. Either is unforgivable when making such claims.

As for black papers of the era, yes I have those sources as well but what you fail to mention is that papers are more biased, and are pushing an agenda far more blatently than any "racist white press" you can quote. The only time the black papers mentioned a white fighter was to denegrate him, this is the case with the major papers such as the Pitts. Courier, New York Amsterdam News, and Chicago Defender, as well as the smaller papers from around the country which could be found in places like Cleveland, Cincinnati, Philadelphia, Boston and elsewhere. Your going to have to do better than that.

Ive been researching this subject full time for nearly four years, Im didnt just crack a ring magazine and read the New York Times to form my opinion.

Its sad that you think there was some conspiracy by whites to defraud Flowers of his opportunity and his legacy. Nothing could be further from the truth. When he fought Mike McTigue it was to establish a contender for Greb. Flowers lost a decision that was widely considered to have been a terrible decision. Not because of racism but because as a novelty the promoters had the owners of major New York retailers judge the fight as a promotional tie in with Christmas which was two days later. The inexperienced judges voted for McTigue. Because of this poor decision, Flowers, the loser, and not Mike McTigue, the winner, was ordered by the New York Commission to be Greb's challenger. Greb didnt have to accept Flowers anymore as his challenger any more than Dempsey had to accept Wills as his. Greb could have continued to fight throughout the country making money and more than likely would not have suffered in the opinion of most. Flowers wasnt considered that great a threat to beat Greb (Greb was a 5 to 1 favorite in their second fight) and so he could have just argued that based on Flowers spotty record he didnt deserve his ranking. Greb had been at odds with New York several times in the past so this wouldnt have been that out of character. Instead Greb accepted the fight, rushed home from a trip out west and signed, to his credit. Its a shame you think otherwise but its obvious from your last couple of posts you have an agenda, an axe to grind, and a lack of knowledge on the subject.

P.S. When I said you were a member of an uneducated minority I meant that you where a member of a minority of people who think Flowers was better than Greb based on a lack of knowledge of the subject. The fact that you took it to mean something else tells me all I need to know about your agenda.

sharkeysboy · Post by **sharkeysboy** » 28 Aug 2005, 23:40

Klompton, I went and read a lot of your previous posts to this site and I realize Kaye was wrong about one thing. You're not a boxing nerd, you're a Harry Greb zealot. Do you have a statue of Harry glued to your dash board? You've horribly misrepresented Kaye's book but I'm not surprised. I doubt if you've even read it. It would challenge too many of your prejudices and that is always traumatic for a zealot. And your suggestion that it was the black press that was trying to keep the white fighter down back in the 20s is so sad I'm beginning to feel compassion for you. I realize now you're the one who's writing the book on Harry Greb. What a shame. The Windmill deserves better. The irony is I have a photo of Harry Greb hanging over my night stand. My list of all time great fighter usually runs Langford, Robinson, Armstrong, Greb. Maybe I'll write a book on Harry Greb. Now that I know what the competition is, it's not such an intimidating challenge.

klompton · Post by **klompton** » 29 Aug 2005, 00:54

So Im zealot because I think hes one of the top two greatest fighters that ever lived and the greatest MW that ever lived? Im entitled to my opinion.

I wont get into why Kaye's book is so bad (building Flowers legacy he says Flowers KOd the great Sam Langford, a simple check of the record shows a nearly blind Langford knocked Flowers dead as soon as he landed, but we wouldnt want facts to get in the way) but below is the review I wrote for it for Amazon.com and it basically spells out everything I would say:

"The writer doesnt understand boxing, the history of boxing, or the era in which he is writing about. In the very beginning of the book he states that writers had used Tiger Flowers image as a means of furthering their own agendas be they racist or not, while warping the truth and ignoring the historical facts. Yet, he falls into the same category from the introduction. There are so many holes in his narrative that Im left to wonder how long he spent on his work.
Ive been criticised by some for spending too much time on my book but I feel I owe it to the Greb and his contemporaries to get the story as close to the truth as possible. If a guy beat Greb I want people to know about it so that guy gets the credit he deserves, if Greb beat someone that he is reputed to have lost to then i want him to get some recognition for it. In order to do this in the No Decision era one has to be extremely diligent in tracking down as many eye witness sources as possible. This man didnt even come close. His bibliography lists only 24 newspapers of varying usefulness. Not to toot my own horn but in simple comparison because we are writing about the same era my bibliography lists 198 newspapers and thats for a book that isnt even completed and bibliography that hasnt been updated in quite some time.

His book is about Tiger Flowers and the "politics of black celebrity" and yet in his book he asserts that a movie Flowers starred in about his own life was never released. I find that a shoddy piece of research considering the movie was indeed released, its on file with AFI and the Library of Congress, it opened in black theatres to excellent reviews across the country, and when it premiered in Pittsburgh the Pittsburgh Courrier (possibly the best black newspaper of the day) had a quarter page ad for the film. Pretty hard to miss that if your trying to find it.

He ascerts that prior to 1924 Greb and the the light heavyweight champs were running from Flowers. This is absolutely ridiculous. Greb had never even seen Flowers fight until a few weeks before their first bout. Flowers was largely an unknown quantity until AFTER he fought against Greb in 1924 and made a good showing. The writer goes on to say Flowers beat Greb in 1924 which he may have yet he only quotes one source for this fight when several media outlets across the midwest were present at the fight and opinions varied greatly.

He also further illustrates his lack of knowledge of the sport when he criticises Greb for making the contract of the first Flowers fight an overweight match (thus a non title bout) and bringing in Eddie Kennedy of Pittsburgh as referee. This was common in those days, it was the rule, not the exception. When Greb fought Al McCoy (then middleweight champ) he was forced to agree to McCoys referee, Ad Wolgast TRAVELED with his referee from fight to fight. Kennedy for his part was an excellent referee, former fighter, and well known across western Pennsylvania for his quality.

He contends that Flowers was forced to come in at an unnaturally high weight to fight Greb when in fact Flowers had been fighting most of his career as a small light heavyweight (much like Greb). When he faced Greb in 1924 he was coming in at what was probably his natural weight.

Of course Greb was protecting his title by forcing an over the weight match this way he wouldnt get robbed in a foreign state by a foreign commission (which could happen and nearly did when he fought Fay Kaiser in Baltimore for the title only a few months before facing Tiger) against a fighter he knew very little about. Had Flowers shown well, which he did, he could garner a shot at the title for more money in the near future in New York City or some other large venue. Greb certainly wasnt going to put his title on the line against an unknown fighter fighting his first time in Fremont, Ohio for peanuts.

When Flowers showed well he was matched with Grebs other outstanding challenger in an elimination bout, Jack Delaney. Delaney knocked Flowers out. the author again shows his ignorance of the circumstances when he says Delaney was a light heavyweight. Delaney in fact had been fighting as a middleweight and weighed less than Flowers when he knocked him out. In an immediate rematch Delaney knocked Flowers out again. Thus temporarily removing Flowers from top contention. Delaney challenged Greb and three times Greb signed his name to a contract, every time Greb signed Delaney mysteriously came down with an injury and thus the bout never came off. Its either ignorance or an agenda that prevents the writer from including the details, neither is forgivable in my opinion.

It took Flowers nearly a year to rebuild his reputation with both the white AND black press before he was finally signed to fight Greb for the title. The writer goes on and on like this painting his story with a broad brush and leaving large factual and narrative gaps that rapidly chip away at any credibility.

Even the photos are a joke, about 80 percent of the photos were actually taken right out of the very rare biography of Flowers published in the late twenties which was commissioned by his widow. Some of these were simply direct copies of entire photo pages without any effort to hide the fact. The rest of the photos are the same ones that have been circulating in ring magazine for the last 80 years.

The book reads like a sorry attempt at filling a publishing quota at the university this author lectures at. I hope he prepares his lectures better than he does his books."

I never suggested that the black press was trying to keep white fighters down, merely that they, much more than the mainstream press, had an agenda and that it was more than reflected in their writings. The so-called white press wrote and wrote favorably about black fighters, did the black press? Answer me that? So if we agree that the black press not favored black fighters to a fault then why would I rely solely on those articles (which you dont even quote, but I can if need be) and one article from the Times. Ive quoted more contemporary sources than you by far and you call it Greb apologia (AFTER having asked for me to quote them). You choose not to believe that the fight was close and the decision debatable when nearly all observers say it was. You choose not to believe that Greb was past his best (based on what evidence you wont say) when nearly all observers, MEN WHO KNEW HIM, say otherwise. Im quoting from first hand accounts here and all you can do is huff about conspiracies and quote a single newspaper account that you didnt even need to leave your computer to read. Yeah youve done your homework buddy, no wonder you like Kaye's hack job. Two lazy peas in a pod. If you want to write a book on Greb go ahead. Maybe you can beat kaye's record and finish it in 2 weeks instead of 3.

klompton · Post by **klompton** » 29 Aug 2005, 01:11

And for the record I checked my reports from the Amsterdam News, The Courier, and the Defender, the three largest and most influential black papers of the day and all had it a close fight with Flowers no more than two rounds ahead making it a one round swing for a draw. So goes your theory...

sharkeysboy · Post by **sharkeysboy** » 29 Aug 2005, 01:30

Yeah, you're proving you're not a zealot. Right. By the way, what alternative existence do you live in that you think the white press of the 20s didn't have an agenda and the black press did? Even someone with your level of delusion must concede they both had agendas. And you point out a good thing done by white folks like the New York commission insisting Greb fight Flowers as if that proves that it wasn't a racist world back then. Are you nuts? Keep in mind the context of Flowers winning the middleweight title. It wasn't simply the only time a black man won a title between Johnson and Louis. It was the only time a black man was ALLOWED TO COMPETE for a title. I'm going to bed and dream about Roy Jones pummeling Harry Greb into unconciousness.

klompton · Post by **klompton** » 29 Aug 2005, 02:08

So let me get this straight, when they support your argument they are right, when they refute it they have a racist agenda. So I guess we can only believe those sources that support your own whacked out theory? Thats convenient for you...

Dream... Exactly. Roy Jones would have found a million excuses NOT to fight Harry Greb, Kensboy.

By the way, as per your review on Amazon.com of the boxing register: You say Greb didnt beat Norfolk or Flowers in either of their first two meetings. Base that on some evidence. Quote a source. Id love to see it. Both fights had as many people voting that Greb won (in fact the first Norfolk fight a slim majority felt Greb won) as the other fighter. So again, are the sources only correct when they support your argument? You said the same thing about Ketchel-Langford, which was a similar situation. I think Langford was the greatest fighter that ever lived and Im not particularly impressed with Ketchel other than his raw power, however sources are divided as to the outcome of that bout. You dont have the luxury of simply picking and choosing which sources you can look at based on a pre-disposition to one fighter. Thats called piss poor research which is why Kaye's book is garbage.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 29 Aug 2005, 03:55

I rate Greb as the 3rd greatest middleweight of all time.

and off the top of my head, klompton, didnt harry greb fight tiger flowers two years earlier in 1924 and win a newspaper decision???

harry greb was not in his prime when he lost to tiger flowers. greb was practically blind going into both fights. if greb had been in his prime, he would have beat the hell out of tiger flowers over 15 rounds.

and dont get me wrong, flowers is an underated fighter and a top 10 or top 15 middlewight. hes just not in the same class as harry greb. and he did not beat a prime harry greb. harry greb was at the tail end of his prime against mickey walker which took place 2 years before flowers. and greb beat the hell out of walker after the 6th round when greb was horribly weight drained.

klompton · Post by **klompton** » 29 Aug 2005, 04:32

Correct, Greb fought Flowers in 1924 BUT it depends on which sources you look at as to who won. There are a ton of media outlets which reported on that fight and they split right down the middle as to who won, similar to the first Greb Norfolk fight.

Thats why I have such a problem with a guy like Sharkey coming in and making a blanket statement based on ONE source. Its ridiculous. You dont just throw out everyone who disagrees with you.

Did Greb lose to Flowers twice later on in two of his last fights? Yes, I have no problem with that and its no disgrace to Greb. But to try to rewrite history by saying he was clearly beaten is a joke.

I would also argue that Greb was past his prime against Mickey Walker. In fact many people felt that he was slipping by the time he met Gibbons in 1922. I would argue that the real slide started in early 1923 and escalated after the death of his wife. Greb was a different person after that and his life really turned. Its remarkable he was able to accomplish what he did afterwards.

1923 was a hellacious year for Greb and it really took its toll on him. Its from about that point on when many of the things occured that later writers attributed to Greb throughout his life such as partying, women, wild behavior etc. Up until 1923 these things were almost non-existent and his life was basically boxing. After 1923 he gradually seemed to let himself slide in terms of his diligence to the sport.

Anyone who wants to argue that a 31 (nearly 32) year old man, blind in one eye with vision fading in the other, and 13 years/300 fights of ring wear, was in his prime doesnt know his ass from his elbow. Tiger Flowers was a year younger, had less than half as many fights as Greb, and started fighting more than four years after Greb, like I said before: after Greb had already met and defeated numerous past, present, and future champs. Advantage: Flowers.

At his best Flowers scraped by a narrow decision against a faded, half blind Greb. So Im supposed to buy the theory that he would have beaten a prime Greb?