BoxRec

I really struggle with the Greb issue. I don't have to see footage of Napoleon or Alexander the Great or King Leonidas I or such like to know they were incredible human beings. There is enough written material to adequately demonstrate their achievements and cement their places in history. The same is true of Greb. He was undoubtedly an outstanding pugilist, an all time great. But, at the same time, ranking him in an all time P4P list is a headache that beats me every time. I simply can't fathom where to put him. Everyone else (i.e. the usual suspects) I can place with relative ease; Greb, who knows?

JLP wrote:I really struggle with the Greb issue. I don't have to see footage of Napoleon or Alexander the Great or King Leonidas I or such like to know they were incredible human beings. There is enough written material to adequately demonstrate their achievements and cement their places in history. The same is true of Greb. He was undoubtedly an outstanding pugilist, an all time great. But, at the same time, ranking him in an all time P4P list is a headache that beats me every time. I simply can't fathom where to put him. Everyone else (i.e. the usual suspects) I can place with relative ease; Greb, who knows?

that is the way i feel.
i have no doubt he was an amazing fighter,but without
seeing him fight.i can not put him in my list.not saying is not
one of if not the best.it is just impossible to be objective.

We have film on many of the great fighters Greb beat . . so what's the issue? I don't understand why one needs to see film . . .much of the film from 1898-1920s is sped-up and in not great quality anyway (I know there are exceptions).

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:It's incredibly subjective, but, as i've said on here before, I think there are pretty clearly defined tiers. Like Alp's post, I'd agree with almost every word except for marciano belonging in the top 10, I have a hard time imagining him in the top 50. To me that is beyond subjectivity.

I completely agree on Heavyweights, not so much that they're just one class than the fact that they are largely less skilled fighters and tend to fight in a division lacking in the depth you'll find in the lower classes. They've also always made more money and had the luxury of fighting less frequently and taking on less top opposition. I don't have an issue with Ali or Louis in the top 10, the top 5 is a bridge too far for either one of them. No other career Heavyweight deserves consideration for that positioning.

Spot on. One quick question though: Ali or Louis, who is rated higher in your opinion and why?

I have Louis by a hair. I mean like 1A & 1A99/100ths. The 25 defenses puts him over the top for me, and it came against underrated competition. Ali's top wins are better, but Joe matches him in depth and when it's something that close it's going to come down to a minuscule detail. I love Joe's punching technique and such a vast majority of fans hand the title to Ali like Louis didn't exist.

Ambling Alp II wrote:Can't say I can say who is # Pound for Pound. I always thought that the first 10 fighters elected into the Boxrec Hall of Fame is a pretty good list for the top 10

The rest of the list consists of:
Ali
Armstrong
Charles
Greb
Louis
Marciano
Monzon
Moore
Pep
Robinson

I would have Marciano in there and probably not Pep. Still not a bad list.

Believe it or not, Langford didn't make it. (Voters could vote for up to 25 fighters and less than 75% had Langford on their ballot!)
Interesting how his stock has gone up in the last few years. He certainly should be in the top 10.

I think you could these guys in almost any order. Of course there are always going to be guys just outside of the top 10 you could argue for.

Putting Marciano in that gang is pretty old school. But nice to see. is that decision based on the fact Rocky was a small guy in the division? Not saying it wrong, just asking because I thought you had Foreman higher... probably got that wrong too.

Gavilan could be up there...no arguments, Griffith too...

Canzoneri, McLarnin, Ross, Britton, Chocolate...are all very close.

Ray Leonard isn't far off, probably locked if not for the mid career layoff.

Ezzard wrote:

Ambling Alp II wrote:Can't say I can say who is # Pound for Pound. I always thought that the first 10 fighters elected into the Boxrec Hall of Fame is a pretty good list for the top 10

The rest of the list consists of:
Ali
Armstrong
Charles
Greb
Louis
Marciano
Monzon
Moore
Pep
Robinson

I would have Marciano in there and probably not Pep. Still not a bad list.

Believe it or not, Langford didn't make it. (Voters could vote for up to 25 fighters and less than 75% had Langford on their ballot!)
Interesting how his stock has gone up in the last few years. He certainly should be in the top 10.

I think you could these guys in almost any order. Of course there are always going to be guys just outside of the top 10 you could argue for.

Putting Marciano in that gang is pretty old school. But nice to see. is that decision based on the fact Rocky was a small guy in the division? Not saying it wrong, just asking because I thought you had Foreman higher... probably got that wrong too.

Sorry that was a typo. I don't think Marciano should be in there. I did go back and edited the post.

Ambling Alp II wrote:

Ezzard wrote:

Ambling Alp II wrote:Can't say I can say who is # Pound for Pound. I always thought that the first 10 fighters elected into the Boxrec Hall of Fame is a pretty good list for the top 10

The rest of the list consists of:
Ali
Armstrong
Charles
Greb
Louis
Marciano
Monzon
Moore
Pep
Robinson

I would have Marciano in there and probably not Pep. Still not a bad list.

Believe it or not, Langford didn't make it. (Voters could vote for up to 25 fighters and less than 75% had Langford on their ballot!)
Interesting how his stock has gone up in the last few years. He certainly should be in the top 10.

I think you could these guys in almost any order. Of course there are always going to be guys just outside of the top 10 you could argue for.

Putting Marciano in that gang is pretty old school. But nice to see. is that decision based on the fact Rocky was a small guy in the division? Not saying it wrong, just asking because I thought you had Foreman higher... probably got that wrong too.

Sorry that was a typo. I don't think Marciano should be in there. I did go back and edited the post.

Not in there, yet interestingly, Marciano knocked out 3 fighters in the list (despite weighing the same or less than them).

I have yet to hear a single argument for leaving Bob Fitzsimmons out of such a list other than the asterisk that has him not considered so i can only presume he isnt being considered for these lists.

Nobody take that bait or this thread is toast.

Of that group, I'd go with Sugar Ray Robinson. Overall, pick though may well be Harry Greb.

Does anyone else think, that if not for the plane crash, Willie Pep might have ended up number 1 ? Remember, this is not a hypothetical about a guy who was 20-0, but rather 134-1-1, who had just stopped 9 of his last 10 opponents, and who's only loss came against a HOF'er in a very close fight.

MEISINGER wrote:

scallum wrote:Greb has a fair claim as being #1 in my humble opinion

without seeing any film of greb i can not rate him

. We dont need film we can read of The Great accomplishments of Greb and whom he defeated. Greb has to be included in the conversation and he would probably get my vote as #1. There are plenty of historical figures we have no film on yet they are still considered great . It would be a terrible injustice to not include Greb

Seamus wrote:Of that group, I'd go with Sugar Ray Robinson. Overall, pick though may well be Harry Greb.

Does anyone else think, that if not for the plane crash, Willie Pep might have ended up number 1 ? Remember, this is not a hypothetical about a guy who was 20-0, but rather 134-1-1, who had just stopped 9 of his last 10 opponents, and who's only loss came against a HOF'er in a very close fight.

I don't think the competition was there for Willie to outdo those guys.

Records don't lie, Harry Greb was probably the greatest fighter of all time, because he fought at the highest level of competition over the longest period of time. Not even Robinson was as consistant as Greb was. The only man who comes close is Sam Langford. Those two: Greb and Langford, were the two greatest fighters in history. Am surprised nobody thought to include Jimmy Wilde on this list either.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Nobody take that bait or this thread is toast.

Yeah i would hate to see any picks backed up by facts, that would make the thread toast.

Obviously an ATG, but not quite enough to argue for the top 10 in my opinion. He certainly had some great moments, however you have to look at the negatives as well. He did have some losses as a middleweight against fighters sthat weren't legends.
He also had a total of one successful title defense in this three title reigns. That hurts his cause. I hate to say this, but he was not a fighting champion.
When you are rating the cream of the crop, you do have to nitpick.

The great Roberto Duran should be in anybody's top 10 or top 5

My top 5 greatest fighters:
Henry Armstrong
Sugar Ray Robinson
Sam Langford
Roberto Duran
Willie Pep
Harry Greb

Now these were INCREDIBLE FIGHTERS!

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Nobody take that bait or this thread is toast.

Saad, I think he's probably right. Not a definite top 10 but he should be in the argument.

elmersalsa wrote:The great Roberto Duran should be in anybody's top 10 or top 5

My top 5 greatest fighters:
Henry Armstrong
Sugar Ray Robinson
Sam Langford
Roberto Duran
Willie Pep
Harry Greb

Now these were INCREDIBLE FIGHTERS!

Top 6 ?

Ezzard wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Nobody take that bait or this thread is toast.

Saad, I think he's probably right. Not a definite top 10 but he should be in the argument.

I don't see any reason for him to hit the top 50, but it's the poster over the sentiment. Fitzsimmons vs Langford is like Duran vs Malignaggi. I have no time for anything Boiler has to say.

robinson
armstrong
greb
langford

these are the unquestionable 4 that have to be in any top 10 p4p in my view

everyone else is arguable

maxie rosenbloom? all i have to say about that is.....have a merry xmas, buzz

My top 5 consists of Robinson,Armstrong,Ali,Greb and Langford. Robinson is my #1, but the rest are very close and I can see why others would pick one of the instead.

However, what I really wanted to discuss is Ezzard Charles. Most people (including myself )have in their top 10 is Ezzard Charles. Obviously he beat some very good good competition.
The big question for me that is seldom is discussed is his heavyweight record after 4th Walcott fight. I think you can give him a free pass for the losses after the 2nd Marciano fight.
However, he lost to Rex Layne and Nino Valdes. For a fighter considered to be one of the very best, those are embarrassing losses. True, he did beat Layne 2 out of three, but still. He also lost to Harold Johnson but that is much more forgivable.
Of course the wins over Burley,Marshall,Maxim, Moore, Bivins, Walcott etc. are very impressive. If it wasn't for a couple of upset losses, I think you could make a serious case for him being#1.

The poll is shit.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:It's incredibly subjective, but, as i've said on here before, I think there are pretty clearly defined tiers. Like Alp's post, I'd agree with almost every word except for marciano belonging in the top 10, I have a hard time imagining him in the top 50. To me that is beyond subjectivity.

I completely agree on Heavyweights, not so much that they're just one class than the fact that they are largely less skilled fighters and tend to fight in a division lacking in the depth you'll find in the lower classes. They've also always made more money and had the luxury of fighting less frequently and taking on less top opposition. I don't have an issue with Ali or Louis in the top 10, the top 5 is a bridge too far for either one of them. No other career Heavyweight deserves consideration for that positioning.

I think Marciano's '0' really impacts on how many rate & remember him I firmly believe.

I firmly believe that if he'd dropped a close/split decision in one of his early bouts against an opponent that no-one had ever heard of, but he still went on to become HW champion eventually, with his career panning out in exactly the same fashion, but with a final resume of 48-1, I'm willing to bet he'd hardly be rated at all.

I remember taking a lot of flak once for saying that I don't even think Marciano would have beaten Tyson.

He was a good & courageous fighter with heart & stamina to die for, but he doesn't belong in a p4p top 10 IMHO.

A few people thought Marciano may have dropped a decision to LaStarza the first time around. Not saying he did, but I think if he were 48-1 instead, he'd maybe drop 50 places on alot of alltime lists.