Greater Fighter: Harry Greb or Sugar Ray Robinson?

[GordonChen]

Who would you take for pfp?

[elmersalsa]

None of the two. To me, it will always be the great Henry Armstrong.

[Ambling Alp II]

Greb may very well be #1 or very close to it. I wish that some of his fights were available to watch. However, he certainly had more than enough big wins that we know he was great. but how great? What really sucks is the huge amount of No-decisions that he had. Wish they never had that. How much credit do we give him for a No-Decision win as compared to an official win?

[elmersalsa]

To me, Sugar Ray Robinson and Harry Greb are two of the most overrated boxers ever when it comes to pound per pound great ratings.

[Caractacus]

Should maybe rather be Sugar Ray Robinson or Willie Pep ?

[goose 5]

How can Robinson be overrated when fighters, trainers, matchmakers and boxing writers all spoke of him as being great and, in many instances, the best ever ? What are you seeing that great trainers like Eddie Futch, Ray Arcel and Freddie Brown missed ? What about fighters like Ali, Archie Moore, Charlie Burley and Sugar Ray Leonard- they are all on record stating how great Robinson was. Don Chargin and Teddy Brenner called him the best ever-Chargin did rank Burley on a par with Sugar Ray. W.C. Heinz and Art Rust Jr. also rated Robinson as the best ever, pound for pound.

[gilgamesh]

Greb may very well be #1 or very close to it. I wish that some of his fights were available to watch. However, he certainly had more than enough big wins that we know he was great. but how great? What really sucks is the huge amount of No-decisions that he had. Wish they never had that. How much credit do we give him for a No-Decision win as compared to an official win?

I think you look at those No Decision Wins the same way you'd look at Pernell Whitaker's "Draw" against Julio Cesar Chavez.

You know what it is. Think of it as what it is.

[gilgamesh]

It's impossible to compare Greb and Robinson, as far as their skills and ability is concerned because we really have nothing to go on with Greb except for what's written whereas we can watch Robinson fighting at or near his best, and we can see how excellent of a fighter he was.

On paper Greb takes a backseat to nobody. That's all I'll say as it concerns comparing him to Robinson.

[Caractacus]

yeah, if Ray Robinson had been born in the same year as Harry Greb had been,
he may have had developed a completely different style of fighting.

[elmersalsa]

You guys overrate or put those guys, Harry Greb and Sugar Ray Robinson, larger than what they really were.

Were there great boxers? Yes

Top ten? Absolutely

Were there better fighters than those two in terms of skills? Yes.

In terms of accomplishments? Not many. But those who are, they are not mentioned enough. Example: Sam Langford.

Was Robinson the most complete boxer ever? No way! I can name at least ten boxers in history that were better than he in terms of skills. The guy could not fight inside to save his life for crying out loud.

[Caractacus]

Lotta people forget that Jake LaMotta was winning the rounds in "St. Valentines Massacre"fight up until he hit "the Wall".

[Ambling Alp II]

Greb may very well be #1 or very close to it. I wish that some of his fights were available to watch. However, he certainly had more than enough big wins that we know he was great. but how great? What really sucks is the huge amount of No-decisions that he had. Wish they never had that. How much credit do we give him for a No-Decision win as compared to an official win?

I think you look at those No Decision Wins the same way you'd look at Pernell Whitaker's "Draw" against Julio Cesar Chavez.

You know what it is. Think of it as what it is.

So, you really think of it as a win?
My problem is that the two fighters knew going into the fight that there would not be a decision. Is possible that one does not go all out because of this?
Also, how reliable is it when it's called a "Newspaper Decision? Do we really know what every single reporter thought of the fight every time?

A No-decision fight is not an exhibition. But should a guy get full credit for it?
I guess I give the guy partial credit. So, if Fighter and fighter B fought once and fighter A won a newspaper decision, he won the "head to head series", so to speak. But if they fought one more time and Fighter B won an official decision, I would say that fighter B won their series.

I think Greb and Robinson are very close as to where they should be rated. I think we weigh the wins against the losses, taking into consideration of the fighter and his opponent's stage of his career. To a lesser extent, margin of victory or defeat should be counted.
To me it goes down to Robinson, Greb, Langford, Charles, and Ali. I think Armstrong is slightly behind these guys but have no problem with people ranking him ahead of any of them.

[elmersalsa]

Greb may very well be #1 or very close to it. I wish that some of his fights were available to watch. However, he certainly had more than enough big wins that we know he was great. but how great? What really sucks is the huge amount of No-decisions that he had. Wish they never had that. How much credit do we give him for a No-Decision win as compared to an official win?

I think you look at those No Decision Wins the same way you'd look at Pernell Whitaker's "Draw" against Julio Cesar Chavez.

You know what it is. Think of it as what it is.

So, you really think of it as a win?
My problem is that the two fighters knew going into the fight that there would not be a decision. Is possible that one does not go all out because of this?
Also, how reliable is it when it's called a "Newspaper Decision? Do we really know what every single reporter thought of the fight every time?

A No-decision fight is not an exhibition. But should a guy get full credit for it?
I guess I give the guy partial credit. So, if Fighter and fighter B fought once and fighter A won a newspaper decision, he won the "head to head series", so to speak. But if they fought one more time and Fighter B won an official decision, I would say that fighter B won their series.

I think Greb and Robinson are very close as to where they should be rated. I think we weigh the wins against the losses, taking into consideration of the fighter and his opponent's stage of his career. To a lesser extent, margin of victory or defeat should be counted.
To me it goes down to Robinson, Greb, Langford, Charles, and Ali. I think Armstrong is slightly behind these guys but have no problem with people ranking him ahead of any of them.

Why make it complicated? A win, a loss or a draw. That's all it matters. The 45 wins in one year is overrated. Things like these why I see Harry Greb as overrated. Those 45 wins were not wins. But non decided.

[Ambling Alp II]

So you don't count no-decisions at all? I do remember once where referred to them as "exhibitions. "
I think they have to count for something.

Not sure how Greb is overrated. Even if you throw out all the no-decisions, he had a lot of quality wins.
He beat Tunney, Loughran, and Walker.

[gilgamesh]

So you don't count no-decisions at all? I do remember once where referred to them as "exhibitions. "
I think they have to count for something.

Not sure how Greb is overrated. Even if you throw out all the no-decisions, he had a lot of quality wins.
He beat Tunney, Loughran, and Walker.

If I'm not mistaken he's the only guy that ever beat Tunney right?

[elmersalsa]

So you don't count no-decisions at all? I do remember once where referred to them as "exhibitions. "
I think they have to count for something.

Not sure how Greb is overrated. Even if you throw out all the no-decisions, he had a lot of quality wins.
He beat Tunney, Loughran, and Walker.

If I'm not mistaken he's the only guy that ever beat Tunney right?

And once he fought a real great black fighter in Tiger Flowers, the Georgia Deacon gave him a licking twice.

[bwu]

Two points of order: I don't think you meant it like this, but one could almost read your post as an implication that Greb wasn't fighting Black fighters. In an era when others drew the color line, Greb did not.

Further, Greb and Flowers fought three times and I don't think either gave the other "a licking." Most accounts give Greb the win in their first fight. Reasonable observers were all over the place in saying who won the respective title fights.

For my part, I've ping-ponged back and forth between which was greater. In recent years, I've been in the Greb camp and there I remain.

[Expug]

You guys overrate or put those guys, Harry Greb and Sugar Ray Robinson, larger than what they really were.

Were there great boxers? Yes

Top ten? Absolutely

Were there better fighters than those two in terms of skills? Yes.

In terms of accomplishments? Not many. But those who are, they are not mentioned enough. Example: Sam Langford.

Was Robinson the most complete boxer ever? No way! I can name at least ten boxers in history that were better than he in terms of skills. The guy could not fight inside to save his life for crying out loud.

I’d be interested in hearing the ten who were more complete boxers than Ray. Him, I’ve seen film of and he was tremendous. And he could fight on the inside as well. I’d bet even Lamotta would agree he could

[Expug]

You also say above that he was top ten in history and that you can name ten guys that were better in terms of skills. Confusing.

[elmersalsa]

You also say above that he was top ten in history and that you can name ten guys that were better in terms of skills. Confusing.

Having better skills doesn't mean he had better accomplishments. I could name 10 fighters or more that were much more complete than Sugar Ray Robinson. He looked terrific at THAT TIME. In an era that nobody saw someone else like that with that speed and power.

Robinson couldn't fight inside. His punches? He threw them up too wide. Muhammad Ali, that wasn't a great inside fighter, was better inside fighter than Robinson.

Let me give you the ten names, plus more:
Eusebio Pedroza
Salvador Sanchez
Roberto Duran
Mike McCallum
Sugar Ray Leonard
James Toney
Eder Jofre
Marvelous Marvin Hagler
Wilfredo Gomez
Miguel "Happy" Lora
Floyd Mayweather, Jr.
Ezzard Charles
Charley Burley

These fighters had complete games. They could box, slug it out, fight inside, had speed of hands and feet, counter punching abilities, ring generalship, poise, punching power and did it better than the Sugar Man.

Now, when we talk about accomplishments, Robinson did better than all of the guys in this list. Even though, he didn't fight the best black fighters of his era. And there were plenty of them: Cocoa Kid, Holman Williams, Charley Burley, Archie Moore, Ezzard Charles, Eddie Booker, Ike Williams, Beau Jack, Bob Montgomery and others that I can name.

He looked the other way, especially against Burley and Charles. He ignored them completely. Robinson feasted fighting clumsy, rugged and limited white boxers.

Sure, he went some 90 wins plus without a defeat. His record would have had much more losses if he fought these terrific black boxers. That is why I see him as overrated in my view.

[Expug]

None of those fighters you listed were more complete than Ray. He could box, fight on the inside or outside, great chin, one punch ko power , moved terrific , he could do it all.

[elmersalsa]

The other overrated boxer, although great in my view, is Harry Greb.

I don't see the overall wanting or clamour of him being the best ever. Was he an incredible boxers? Yes. He had 300 fights. He beat some great boxers. He didn't beat a great black fighter. And when he did, Tiger Flowers, one of the most ducked and ignored fighters of his era, gave him two lickings. Flowers kicked his ass. Plain and simple.

Then, some called "experts" get impressed by the 45 fights he had in a year without a loss. All of those fights were non decisions.

What does non decisions mean? It means that it didn't mattered. Either you win, lose or draw. Let's not make it complicated folks.

The great Harry Greb....Top ten? Yes. Top 5? No way!

[Expug]

And, you have guys listed there who were in weight divisions that Ray never fought in. I don’t think he ducked Ezzard Charles or Beau Jack, Archie Moore etc. How many divisions does he need to fight in?

[elmersalsa]

None of those fighters you listed were more complete than Ray. He could box, fight on the inside or outside, great chin, one punch ko power , moved terrific , he could do it all.

You better watch Sugar Ray Robinson fights again. Do not lie to yourself, please! Stop it. There are plenty of film of his. The guy could not fight inside to save his life.

Did he had a good jab? Yes
Punching power? Yes
Great chin? Yes
Great footwork? Yes
Hand and foot speed? Yes

Fight inside? Not much to be desired. Those guys that I have mentioned would give Robinson a boxing clinic when it comes to inside fighting.

[Expug]

So the guys you have listed above are all better in your view than Robinson and Greb ?