BoxRec

I'm shocked nobody has mentioned Holman Williams, he is in my top 10 and certainly belongs in the top 25.

I dont think I would put Mike McTigue in the top 100 on any list. Had he not won a criminal gift decision over Siki (who wasnt exactly great himself) he would be nothing more than a footnote in boxing history on greater fighters records.

BoxBuzz wrote:One of the tosses against him was that he fouled a lot. That's why I threw in that blurb. If that's the case, that's cause for criticism or at least caution aimed at those who chant that they want him at the top of the list. I'm not as well read on him as I should be, but what I have read brings into question his observance of the rules.

Tunney sort of brought our attention to the importance of the rules. A man who won't follow the rules, and will not be "held to account" within a fight can often get the better of his opponent if the ref allows it. This may need to be taken into account as we ponder Grebs place within the best of the best.

Think of the others on the list. How many of them were flagrant in fouling?

I'm trying to encourage objectivity here....please don't over react. Once again, Greb's record is spectacular to say the least.

Id like you to elaborate on this comment.

klompton wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:One of the tosses against him was that he fouled a lot. That's why I threw in that blurb. If that's the case, that's cause for criticism or at least caution aimed at those who chant that they want him at the top of the list. I'm not as well read on him as I should be, but what I have read brings into question his observance of the rules.

Tunney sort of brought our attention to the importance of the rules. A man who won't follow the rules, and will not be "held to account" within a fight can often get the better of his opponent if the ref allows it. This may need to be taken into account as we ponder Grebs place within the best of the best.

Think of the others on the list. How many of them were flagrant in fouling?

I'm trying to encourage objectivity here....please don't over react. Once again, Greb's record is spectacular to say the least.

Id like you to elaborate on this comment.

Maybe I should turn this around since you have done much in the way of research as I recall.

Was Greb a chronic fouler? My world of information on Greb is based on my Grandfather and Father's boxing arguments. Elder saying he wasn't and his son saying he was lol So very small universe of information...all anecdotal including what I have read here. If it's a documented fact that he was, it should be factored in any assessment of his "best of the best" assessment. If not then "never mind". His record is stupefyng for anyone reviewing it.

Also, the "rules" were not quite as enforced back then pre Tunney....another myth? If so it's one I have come to embrace. So it becomes an apples and oranges debate if so.

Is that the specific elaboration you were looking for? I'm just stirring the pot and asking questions. I have pursued no serious reading on Greb.

Rosenbloom fight was considered a snoozer to those at ringside, because of Greb's come forward style, and Maxie's defensive posture. You have to wonder if under today's greater appreciation of fighters like Whitaker, if the judges would have seen that fight differently.....not so much for excitement, but for scoring.

No I dont believe he was a chronic fouler. Certainly not in his prime. There was an increase in the complaints about his tactics in the latter part of his career which coincided with him losing the sight in one eye. The chief complaint against him was that he held and hit. Something that A. Was not frowned upon when he began fighting, and B. Was likely necessitated by his lack of depth perception. By all accounts, in his prime (which is when we should be basing his greatness on) he was a very clean, fair, sportsmanlike, and well behaved fighter. When he was justly criticised for some of the tactics he used later in his career it should be remembered that he asked no quarter when giving none himself (something that I hate about Hopkins who is one of my fav fighters today, he fouls but whines if someone pays him back) and in those fights where he was criticised, or DQd (Tunney, Norfolk, etc) The other fighter was doing just as much fouling as he was. In the case of Norfolk (the only time he was ever DQd in a fight, the reports clearly state that Norfolk could have been DQd as well. In the second Tunney fight (which was a robbery against Greb regardless of the tactics) numerous outlets made it well clear that not only was Tunney fouling as well, but he was also complaining of non existent fouls, and doing things like resting his chin on Greb's head and then popping up to make it look like he was being butted only to complain to the ref. This is very clear from a number of reports.

I should also make it clear that I dont think fouls were paid less attention to in Greb's day, I think Greb's career bridged essentially two generations of boxing where the sport changed subtly making it a lot more "civilized." By this I mean that when Greb started fighting infighting was a very well respected art form in the sport, one expounded upon by his townsmen Frank Klaus. In Pittsburgh, a very working class city, brutal tough man contests were far more appreciated than fancy dan boxing by the miners and steelworkers. The accounts of American fighters going to places like Australia and Europe and defeating those fighters with infighting only to be frowned upon by the locals are legion. This was the era that Greb cut his teeth. In addition to that punches like the backhand punch and Kidney punch were both made illegal about midway through Greb's career (although I dont think Ive ever seen him accused of either of these infractions). This all serves as an example of how Greb was kind of caught in the middle of a changing sport after having learned how to fight in basically a different era. He even remarked once "they want to teach me something new but Im too old start changing now" or something very similar. So in short I dont think Greb was overtly dirty, even when he was using "foul tactics" and I think this explains why he only lost one decision via DQ. He was rough and tumble. A lot rougher than a lot of guys wanted to fight, but he didnt complain when you got rough with him and that went a long way with officials and fans who also understand that the sport was rapidly changing. Keep in mind as well that while Tunney bitched and moaned he wasnt exactly a popular fighter or fan favorite. He was well liked in New York where he had powerful friends and backers but he wasnt getting flooded daily with offers to appear all over the country on a regular basis as Greb was for a good ten years.

I completely disagree about the Rosenbloom fight. It wasnt really considered a snoozer. Just completely one sided. And Greb didnt even really box coming forward in that fight. Its one of the fights where he showed his rarely discussed excellent fundamentals. Like a lot of Greb fights he dominated Rosenbloom, dropped him, and appeared on the verge of stopping him before letting off the gas and letting Rosenbloom stay the limit. By the end of the fight Greb's victory was such a foregone conclusion that people were leaving (this is something you read very often in the details of Greb's fights). That all being said the fans marvelled at Greb's skill and speed. So I wouldnt call it snoozer by any stretch.

Interesting take, thanks for the response. I've read from two sources that Rosenbloom had won the early rounds, and Greb had to play catch up, and though that sounds like the recipe for an interesting fight, I thought the fans saw Greb as the winner of nearly all the rounds because of the backing up of Rosenbloom and aggression of Greb. Something that would make it seem boring to the old fight fans who wanted to see ....well a fight......Something that wasn't Rosenbloom's strength. Since he probably had more in common with Whitaker, and Greb more like Chavez.....

Can you believe that there is no fight footage of either of these guys? Unbelievable that Maxie...who never saw a camera he didn't like, somehow managed to get through his career with no taped evidence of his work. Same for Greb....No film exists of any of his fights right?

BoxBuzz wrote:Interesting take, thanks for the response. I've read from two sources that Rosenbloom had won the early rounds, and Greb had to play catch up, and though that sounds like the recipe for an interesting fight, I thought the fans saw Greb as the winner of nearly all the rounds because of the backing up of Rosenbloom and aggression of Greb. Something that would make it seem boring to the old fight fans who wanted to see ....well a fight......Something that wasn't Rosenbloom's strength. Since he probably had more in common with Whitaker, and Greb more like Chavez.....

Can you believe that there is no fight footage of either of these guys? Unbelievable that Maxie...who never saw a camera he didn't like, somehow managed to get through his career with no taped evidence of his work. Same for Greb....No film exists of any of his fights right?

Three of the most prolific fighters who ever lived Harry Greb, 300 fights, Jack Britton 344 fights and Maxie Rosenbloom, 219 bouts, have not ONE film of them fighting in existence today ! Though
many of their opponents films are still available today...Bizarre ....

What are the two sources that state Maxie won the early rounds and Greb had to play catch up? Joe Williams of the Cleveland Press stated that Greb could have stopped Rosenbloom in any round and that it took "real art, but Greb let Maxie stay." The Cleveland Plain Dealer stated that it was obvious Greb could have finished the bout at any time. The Pittsburgh Post, which sent Regis Welsh to Cleveland is misquoted and partially misinterpreted by whoever made their notation here on Boxrec. Nowhere in the article does it say Greb was behind after six rounds. In fact it says he (Greb) won the fight almost as he pleased and had Cleveland fans asking how long Rosenbloom would last. The person who made the notation in Boxrec states that Greb was behind after five rounds because the article says that Greb didnt open up until the sixth round and really start to show his speed and full bag of tricks. Thats a big difference from being behind in a fight. Im not sure how this person could have misquoted this when the headline of that article plainly says that Greb was an easy winner. Thats beside the fact that being behind after five rounds would leave you in a considerable hole to dig yourself out of in a 10 rd fight and as you say would make for a more interesting, and competetive contests than what really happened, which was Greb dominating and putting on a clinic.

beaujack wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:Interesting take, thanks for the response. I've read from two sources that Rosenbloom had won the early rounds, and Greb had to play catch up, and though that sounds like the recipe for an interesting fight, I thought the fans saw Greb as the winner of nearly all the rounds because of the backing up of Rosenbloom and aggression of Greb. Something that would make it seem boring to the old fight fans who wanted to see ....well a fight......Something that wasn't Rosenbloom's strength. Since he probably had more in common with Whitaker, and Greb more like Chavez.....

Can you believe that there is no fight footage of either of these guys? Unbelievable that Maxie...who never saw a camera he didn't like, somehow managed to get through his career with no taped evidence of his work. Same for Greb....No film exists of any of his fights right?

Three of the most prolific fighters who ever lived Harry Greb, 300 fights, Jack Britton 344 fights and Maxie Rosenbloom, 219 bouts, have not ONE film of them fighting in existence today ! Though
many of their opponents films are still available today...Bizarre ....

Correction : Maxie Rosenbloom had 299 recorded bouts, not 219...

Ezzard wrote: 22. Jack Dempsey

Ezzard,
I am quite interested to hear how the Non pareil ranks at 23, ahead of Bob Fitzsimmons.

Boilermaker wrote:

Ezzard wrote: 22. Jack Dempsey

Ezzard,
I am quite interested to hear how the Non pareil ranks at 23, ahead of Bob Fitzsimmons.

Obviously this was 5 years ago when I was just a babe…

I maybe held Bob off the list because he was a middleweight fighting heavies. Bob’s MW record is good, very good, but great??? Not sure. Which means I have to go more by skills, which I haven’t seen enough of. But it’s an oversight of epic proportions…

Williams is a bigger oversight, his Middleweight resume dwarfs Fitzsimmons.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Williams is a bigger oversight, his Middleweight resume dwarfs Fitzsimmons.

Williams is also a major absentee. If I get time I'll try and fix things up.

Seriously, I had not rights going past the top 15. After that I just don’t know enough to be sure.

Frankly I think that LaMotta is being undersold here. He would be in my Middleweight top 10.

Crease wrote:Frankly I think that LaMotta is being undersold here. He would be in my Middleweight top 10.

he's at 12 so not really undersold.

Ezzard wrote:

Boilermaker wrote:

Ezzard wrote: 22. Jack Dempsey

Ezzard,
I am quite interested to hear how the Non pareil ranks at 23, ahead of Bob Fitzsimmons.

Obviously this was 5 years ago when I was just a babe…

I maybe held Bob off the list because he was a middleweight fighting heavies. Bob’s MW record is good, very good, but great??? Not sure. Which means I have to go more by skills, which I haven’t seen enough of. But it’s an oversight of epic proportions…

5 years? I wouldnt say Obviously

Although Fitz was fighting heavys (or light heavys since there was no super middle or middle limit), he was weighing as a middleweight for most of this time, or at least he was weighing at roughly the same weight as harry greb anyway. That is competition which has to be as good as any other middleweight. But his actually middleweight record was spectacular. From the defeat of all time great Jack Dempsey, the KO domination of Jim Hall, to the win over Corbett, he KOd a dozen or so fighters, in less than 4 rounds, when he was a middleweight. Not all were middleweights (eg world coloured champion Joe Godfrey - there is some doubt about this, but it seems pretty clear to me) These guys were mostly obviously not the worlds greatest fighters, but they were probably the equivalant of many of todays alphabet/multi weight challengers. That is as impressive a streak as anyone has ever put together.

Ezz-I know this list was done 5 years ago, so you may have changed your mind on some of this. Gene Fullmer has to be in the Top 25. I have him in my top 10.
"Mick" McTigue at #25? Are you referring to Mike McTigue? He was a light heavyweight.

Gene fullmer shouldnt be anywhere near the top 25 with all the home cooking he benefitted from. Mctigue spent most of his career as a mw. Even as lhw champ he could make 160. But he wasnt anywherr near the top 25. Maybe not even the top 100.

Name me 25 MWs better than Cyclone Fullmer. You cant.

Harry greb
Bob fitz
Sam langford
Srr
giardello
Dick tiger
Jose torres
mickey walker
Bhop
Hagler
Monzon
Rodrigo valdez
Jeff smith
Papke
Ketchel
Clabby
Mcgoorty
Darcy
M. Gibbons
T. Gibbons
j. Dillon
h. Williams
C. Burley
f. Steele
f. Apostoli
J. Lamotta
J. Dempsey
t. Ryan


I could keep going snd even name some of the guys that fullmer managed to win gifts over but like i said its pretty easy to list guys better than fullmer.

It is when you start naming guys with no case.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:It is when you start naming guys with no case.

And in addition-
Billy Conn
Marcel Thil
Ken Overlin
Dave Sands
Jack Dillon
Dave Shade etc. I have over the tough Fullmer H2H...

Frank Klaus
Mike O'Dowd

Someone needs to slap me for neglecting to mention those two...

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Name me 25 MWs better than Cyclone Fullmer. You cant.

No doubt, Gene was a beast. Highly underrated and definitely in my all time top 100.