Greatest Middleweights Ever?

[keithmoonhangover]

Ketchel

[Goodnight, Irene]

I said his Light Heavyweight wins are irrelevant to his Middleweight placement. You guys are just making shit up as you go. Based on Klompton logic, Charles is the greatest Middleweight of all time, his Heavyweight foray is much more impressive than Greb's. It's really impossible for someone not to be able grasp this so it's on me for bothering with trolls.

There is a major distinction between Greb and Charles. Charles accomplished his heavyweight exploits while a heavyweight; Greb defeated heavyweights while campaigning as a middleweight or small light-heavyweight.

Bingo!

Sorry Saad but the point is that trying to pull the grammer police out of your pocket on an internet forum is really the last bastion of hope for someone floating a flimsy argument.

What does this guy...



...have to do with the discussion?

[Tomasino]

Saad, I respect your boxing knowledge and am on here for fun and education so dont want to get into slinging insults or silly grammer debates but you are coming over childish on this thread here.

The argument for Greb being the best 160lb fighter ever is simple; not only was he able to beat all of the middleweights of his time, he was able to defeat the best light heavys and heavyweights too, whilst weighing in the ring what a middle weight champ of today would weigh.


I'm not saying the opinion you have of Marvin Hagler is wrong, my dad thinks the same as you but arguing that Hagler beating Spinks while weighing close to 160lbs wouldnt have raised Marvins stature as an all time middleweight is nuts.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I said his Light Heavyweight wins are irrelevant to his Middleweight placement. You guys are just making shit up as you go. Based on Klompton logic, Charles is the greatest Middleweight of all time, his Heavyweight foray is much more impressive than Greb's. It's really impossible for someone not to be able grasp this so it's on me for bothering with trolls.

There is a major distinction between Greb and Charles. Charles accomplished his heavyweight exploits while a heavyweight; Greb defeated heavyweights while campaigning as a middleweight or small light-heavyweight.

Bingo!

Sorry Saad but the point is that trying to pull the grammer police out of your pocket on an internet forum is really the last bastion of hope for someone floating a flimsy argument.

I'm not floating anything, just tossing facts at an imbecile. And you'll notice I was able to correctly spell my attack at your meager intellect.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Saad, I respect your boxing knowledge and am on here for fun and education so dont want to get into slinging insults or silly grammer debates but you are coming over childish on this thread here.

The argument for Greb being the best 160lb fighter ever is simple; not only was he able to beat all of the middleweights of his time, he was able to defeat the best light heavys and heavyweights too, whilst weighing in the ring what a middle weight champ of today would weigh.


I'm not saying the opinion you have of Marvin Hagler is wrong, my dad thinks the same as you but arguing that Hagler beating Spinks while weighing close to 160lbs wouldnt have raised Marvins stature as an all time middleweight is nuts.

I don't have an issue with Greb being ranked the greatest Middleweight ever. Hagler beating Larry Holmes wouldn't strengthen his claim. You, like Moe & Curly, are reciting excellent reasons why Harry could well be the greatest fighter who has ever lived. But Middleweight is Middleweight, not Light Heavyweight. While my insults can be childish, that is as rudimentary as anything can be. If you don't get that, you're not fit to rate fighters.

[Tomasino]

[dempseyfire]

If Hagler beating Holmes wouldn't raise Marvin's stature in comparison to other middleweights, than you're the imbecile. Fighters don't exist in this mythical categorized vaccums of existence for your convenience . . .just like Foster being unable to defeat any quality HWs hurts his ranking vs a Loughran or Conn at 175, one can certainly argue that Greb gets a bump vs guys who just stayed at middle in that he beat not only great middles but even great men who were bigger while still a natural middleweight.

[klompton]

There is a major distinction between Greb and Charles. Charles accomplished his heavyweight exploits while a heavyweight; Greb defeated heavyweights while campaigning as a middleweight or small light-heavyweight.

Bingo!

Sorry Saad but the point is that trying to pull the grammer police out of your pocket on an internet forum is really the last bastion of hope for someone floating a flimsy argument.

I'm not floating anything, just tossing facts at an imbecile. And you'll notice I was able to correctly spell my attack at your meager intellect.

If not pretending that there is some imaginary, invisible, and purely arbitrary dividing line that exists which shoehorns fighters victories into nice tidy little categories makes me an imbecile and you something greater then so be it. I accept.

[raylawpc]

Saad, I respect your boxing knowledge and am on here for fun and education so dont want to get into slinging insults or silly grammer debates but you are coming over childish on this thread here.

The argument for Greb being the best 160lb fighter ever is simple; not only was he able to beat all of the middleweights of his time, he was able to defeat the best light heavys and heavyweights too, whilst weighing in the ring what a middle weight champ of today would weigh.


I'm not saying the opinion you have of Marvin Hagler is wrong, my dad thinks the same as you but arguing that Hagler beating Spinks while weighing close to 160lbs wouldnt have raised Marvins stature as an all time middleweight is nuts.

I don't have an issue with Greb being ranked the greatest Middleweight ever. Hagler beating Larry Holmes wouldn't strengthen his claim. You, like Moe & Curly, are reciting excellent reasons why Harry could well be the greatest fighter who has ever lived. But Middleweight is Middleweight, not Light Heavyweight. While my insults can be childish, that is as rudimentary as anything can be. If you don't get that, you're not fit to rate fighters.

Just out of interest what would you rate Pacman as then? After all you've got 9 choices, his 8 " titles " and his Catchweight crown.

Like Saad, you are missing the point. Pac did these things as he moved up in weights. Greb beat the big boys while still a middleweight. I would say if Pac beat welterweights like Cotto and Margarito while still a flyweight one could say he was the greatest flyweight of all time.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Saad, I respect your boxing knowledge and am on here for fun and education so dont want to get into slinging insults or silly grammer debates but you are coming over childish on this thread here.

The argument for Greb being the best 160lb fighter ever is simple; not only was he able to beat all of the middleweights of his time, he was able to defeat the best light heavys and heavyweights too, whilst weighing in the ring what a middle weight champ of today would weigh.


I'm not saying the opinion you have of Marvin Hagler is wrong, my dad thinks the same as you but arguing that Hagler beating Spinks while weighing close to 160lbs wouldnt have raised Marvins stature as an all time middleweight is nuts.

I don't have an issue with Greb being ranked the greatest Middleweight ever. Hagler beating Larry Holmes wouldn't strengthen his claim. You, like Moe & Curly, are reciting excellent reasons why Harry could well be the greatest fighter who has ever lived. But Middleweight is Middleweight, not Light Heavyweight. While my insults can be childish, that is as rudimentary as anything can be. If you don't get that, you're not fit to rate fighters.

Just out of interest what would you rate Pacman as then? After all you've got 9 choices, his 8 " titles " and his Catchweight crown.

Depends on the discussion.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Bingo!

Sorry Saad but the point is that trying to pull the grammer police out of your pocket on an internet forum is really the last bastion of hope for someone floating a flimsy argument.

I'm not floating anything, just tossing facts at an imbecile. And you'll notice I was able to correctly spell my attack at your meager intellect.

If not pretending that there is some imaginary, invisible, and purely arbitrary dividing line that exists which shoehorns fighters victories into nice tidy little categories makes me an imbecile and you something greater then so be it. I accept.

Being greater than someone that can't grasp the context of a discussion isn't really worth praise.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I don't have an issue with Greb being ranked the greatest Middleweight ever. Hagler beating Larry Holmes wouldn't strengthen his claim. You, like Moe & Curly, are reciting excellent reasons why Harry could well be the greatest fighter who has ever lived. But Middleweight is Middleweight, not Light Heavyweight. While my insults can be childish, that is as rudimentary as anything can be. If you don't get that, you're not fit to rate fighters.

Just out of interest what would you rate Pacman as then? After all you've got 9 choices, his 8 " titles " and his Catchweight crown.

Like Saad, you are missing the point. Pac did these things as he moved up in weights. Greb beat the big boys while still a middleweight. I would say if Pac beat welterweights like Cotto and Margarito while still a flyweight one could say he was the greatest flyweight of all time.

Armstrong defended his Welterweight crown as a Lightweight on several occasions. Nobody rates him higher as a Lightweight than they do at Welter. Because they were Welterweight fights. I'm waiting for the Candid Camera to pop out of my computer. You guys can't all be this dense.

[raylawpc]

Just out of interest what would you rate Pacman as then? After all you've got 9 choices, his 8 " titles " and his Catchweight crown.

Like Saad, you are missing the point. Pac did these things as he moved up in weights. Greb beat the big boys while still a middleweight. I would say if Pac beat welterweights like Cotto and Margarito while still a flyweight one could say he was the greatest flyweight of all time.

Armstrong defended his Welterweight crown as a Lightweight on several occasions. Nobody rates him higher as a Lightweight than they do at Welter. Because they were Welterweight fights. I'm waiting for the Candid Camera to pop out of my computer. You guys can't all be this dense.

I always know that someone is winning an argument with you when you start name calling. I'll know for sure when you post your photo of Stone Cold Steve Austin giving the finger.

I can't speak for Klompton or Beau, but I happen to think Hammering Henry Armstrong was an all-time great lightweight, so that argument doesn't fly for me.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

This is an argument? You're actually serious?

And I always know you're losing an "argument" when you start making up things that were never said. I said Hank rates higher at Welter, not that he doesn't rate at Lightweight. But go ahead and spin whatever you need to try and claim a phantom victory if it helps you sleep at night.

[BoxBuzz]

Ah, the wonderful discussions that the sweet science can generate.

Ok, for me personally, I was both entertained and impressed with Roy Jones Jr and the way he handled John Ruiz.

Now that has a lot to do with the fact that I simply like to see Ruiz whupped upon. Very much liked Tua's surgical strike on that score...but Tua was a HW so, I am aware that's irrelevant to this discussion. And yet, I said it anyway, because I can.

Now, many took away a lot from Roy when he came back down in weight, and proceeded to implode. So should we take into consideration only the best work, and not the less tidy stuff that takes place as fighters begin to inevitably wane?

My mind has been bottled and boggled over the course of this give and take.

Could Monzon, Hagler and Greb handled the likes of Ruiz?

I know for certain that Monzon would not want to be hugged, Hagler would take offense regarding John's malodorous constitution, and I would imagine Greb would do what we saw him do to Philly Jack in the one piece of film we have on him.

How would Philly Jack do with the sort of a hugfest that Ruiz would dish out?

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I think O'Brien would beat Ruiz and that would be a nice victory for his Super Middleweight resume.

[raylawpc]

This is an argument? You're actually serious?

And I always know you're losing an "argument" when you start making up things that were never said. I said Hank rates higher at Welter, not that he doesn't rate at Lightweight. But go ahead and spin whatever you need to try and claim a phantom victory if it helps you sleep at night.

Well, at least you didn't call me a name. My point was that one doesn't necessarily have to rank Henry higher at welterweight than lightweight. He's an all-time great in both divisions, in my opinion.

[beaujack]

Ah, the wonderful discussions that the sweet science can generate.

Ok, for me personally, I was both entertained and impressed with Roy Jones Jr and the way he handled John Ruiz.

Now that has a lot to do with the fact that I simply like to see Ruiz whupped upon. Very much liked Tua's surgical strike on that score...but Tua was a HW so, I am aware that's irrelevant to this discussion. And yet, I said it anyway, because I can.

Now, many took away a lot from Roy when he came back down in weight, and proceeded to implode. So should we take into consideration only the best work, and not the less tidy stuff that takes place as fighters begin to inevitably wane?

My mind has been bottled and boggled over the course of this give and take.

Could Monzon, Hagler and Greb handled the likes of Ruiz?

I know for certain that Monzon would not want to be hugged, Hagler would take offense regarding John's malodorous constitution, and I would imagine Greb would do what we saw him do to Philly Jack in the one piece of film we have on him.

How would Philly Jack do with the sort of a hugfest that Ruiz would dish out?

Let me inform you that Harry Greb beat Big Bill Brennan FOUR times, losing nary a round...Brennan outweighed Greb by 35 or so pounds...And John Ruiz was no Bill Brennan...Brennan could hit...But Greb kicked the tar out of Bill Brennan in their 4 bouts...

[BoxBuzz]

Ah, the wonderful discussions that the sweet science can generate.

Ok, for me personally, I was both entertained and impressed with Roy Jones Jr and the way he handled John Ruiz.

Now that has a lot to do with the fact that I simply like to see Ruiz whupped upon. Very much liked Tua's surgical strike on that score...but Tua was a HW so, I am aware that's irrelevant to this discussion. And yet, I said it anyway, because I can.

Now, many took away a lot from Roy when he came back down in weight, and proceeded to implode. So should we take into consideration only the best work, and not the less tidy stuff that takes place as fighters begin to inevitably wane?

My mind has been bottled and boggled over the course of this give and take.

Could Monzon, Hagler and Greb handled the likes of Ruiz?

I know for certain that Monzon would not want to be hugged, Hagler would take offense regarding John's malodorous constitution, and I would imagine Greb would do what we saw him do to Philly Jack in the one piece of film we have on him.

How would Philly Jack do with the sort of a hugfest that Ruiz would dish out?

Let me inform you that Harry Greb beat Big Bill Brennan FOUR times, losing nary a round...Brennan outweighed Greb by 35 or so pounds...And John Ruiz was no Bill Brennan...Brennan could hit...But Greb kicked the tar out of Bill Brennan in their 4 bouts...

I don't know enough about Brennan, but will take your word. You seem to be the sort who takes his studying seriously. I'm not overly skeptical about Greb at all, just pine for seeing motion pictures of the guy practicing the art that he seems to have set the gold standard for. But what would Greb do in the clutches of "The Octopus" uh I mean "The Quiet Man". lol.

[beaujack]

Ah, the wonderful discussions that the sweet science can generate.

Ok, for me personally, I was both entertained and impressed with Roy Jones Jr and the way he handled John Ruiz.

Now that has a lot to do with the fact that I simply like to see Ruiz whupped upon. Very much liked Tua's surgical strike on that score...but Tua was a HW so, I am aware that's irrelevant to this discussion. And yet, I said it anyway, because I can.

Now, many took away a lot from Roy when he came back down in weight, and proceeded to implode. So should we take into consideration only the best work, and not the less tidy stuff that takes place as fighters begin to inevitably wane?

My mind has been bottled and boggled over the course of this give and take.

Could Monzon, Hagler and Greb handled the likes of Ruiz?

I know for certain that Monzon would not want to be hugged, Hagler would take offense regarding John's malodorous constitution, and I would imagine Greb would do what we saw him do to Philly Jack in the one piece of film we have on him.

How would Philly Jack do with the sort of a hugfest that Ruiz would dish out?

Let me inform you that Harry Greb beat Big Bill Brennan FOUR times, losing nary a round...Brennan outweighed Greb by 35 or so pounds...And John Ruiz was no Bill Brennan...Brennan could hit...But Greb kicked the tar out of Bill Brennan in their 4 bouts...

I don't know enough about Brennan, but will take your word. You seem to be the sort who takes his studying seriously. I'm not overly skeptical about Greb at all, just pine for seeing motion pictures of the guy practicing the art that he seems to have set the gold standard for. But what would Greb do in the clutches of "The Octopus" uh I mean "The Quiet Man". lol.

No films exist of Harry Greb fighting. There is one training film that I have ,which was found in a
University Archives a couple of years ago.. It shows a past peak Greb sparring with a 50ish Phil Jack O'Brien in 1925, preparing for Greb's fight with Mickey Walker...Greb had about 290 bouts by this time
yet gave Walker a drubbing...In one year after, Harry Greb died after an operation in 1926..
Though no film of his fights exist, his accomplishments in beating great heavier hall of fame LHs and up, stamps Greb as the best P4P fighter ever...And oh, one more thing. This 160 pound wonder fought the last YEARS of his career with the use of ONE EYE....

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I rate Langford higher than Greb, but it's arguable.

[beaujack]

I rate Langford higher than Greb, but it's arguable.

Sam Langford rates with anyone...I rate Greb over Sam because Greb was a true MW at 160. He fought the great Mickey Walker weighing 158 pounds one year before his death...Langford matured into a 170-80 pound fighter, much heavier than Greb...
What made Greb so difficult to beat was he was always on the offense. "He never gave you the ball".
Enormous stamina, with an iron chin...And his great set of wheels constantly in motion ,made it
"impossible to time him solidly" as Gene Tunney proclaimed...You couldn't knock him out, and you couldn't out barrage him...
P.S. In an old Ring Mag, Nat Fleischer who saw both Tham and Harry, said that Langford couldn't catch up to Greb to ko him...His considered opinion...

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Beating all-time greats at Lightweight, Welterweight, Middleweight, Light Heavyweight & Heavyweight is a distinction that Sam has all to himself.

[Boilermaker]

Beating all-time greats at Lightweight, Welterweight, Middleweight, Light Heavyweight & Heavyweight is a distinction that Sam has all to himself.

This is true.

Although, i would like to know by Langford fans, which was his best weight and which period of time.

What Sam did makes him definitely one of the elite. But it is hard to find a division that he was the real stand out dominant fighter. I dont think he was ever a better heavyweight than Jack Johnson. He didnt really standout over Holly and Blackburn. He was probably better as a middleweight or light heavyweight, but never really got a chance to fight the best of these divisions much. (and if i understand the argument made by Saad on a different thread), his wins against non middleweights or light heavys shouldnt be considered in ranking these divisions.

[dempseyfire]

Beating all-time greats at Lightweight, Welterweight, Middleweight, Light Heavyweight & Heavyweight is a distinction that Sam has all to himself.

This is true.

Although, i would like to know by Langford fans, which was his best weight and which period of time.

What Sam did makes him definitely one of the elite. But it is hard to find a division that he was the real stand out dominant fighter. I dont think he was ever a better heavyweight than Jack Johnson. He didnt really standout over Holly and Blackburn. He was probably better as a middleweight or light heavyweight, but never really got a chance to fight the best of these divisions much. (and if i understand the argument made by Saad on a different thread), his wins against non middleweights or light heavys shouldnt be considered in ranking these divisions.

How was Langord not a standout at light heavyweight? He beat all the top fighters from 175 through heavyweight for about 10 years. He KO'd O'Brian. Dillon as great as he was drew the color line so Sam never got a chance but he's about the lone guy not a victim on his resume.