BoxRec

What are people's thoughts?

I know very little about this period. So, I tried to put together a list based off The Ring rankings, but they only really covered half the decade. You also had great fighters of the time who were limited by the color line. So I tried to also look at the records of those who were considered top guys pre-1924. Finally, I ranked based on consistency of results and ranking across the decade, not 'who wins H2H':

• Jack Dempsey
  Harry Wills
  Gene Tunney
  Jack Sharkey
  Tommy Gibbons
  Billy Miske
  George Godfrey
  Jack Renault
  Paolino Uzcudun
  Young Stribling

Also, what are people's thoughts on the possible placement of Harry Greb? He had a number of wins over +175lbs opponents in the early 1920s, with 2 wins over Jack Renault in 1921.

He ran into a wall against +175 Gene Tunney, but so did many others.

It would be a big help to hear people's thoughts.

So, what do you have?

The decade started with a long reign of Dempsey, although with a part of inactivity, but Tunney convincingly beat him twice, so Tunney is clearly a number one for me. Sharkey was around the top in the 20s and got a bunch of decent scalps, including Wills, who had been considered a dodged top contender for a long time. Schmeling was a rising contender then, who had the scalp of Uzcudun. So, top 4 is pretty clear for me:

1. Gene Tunney
2. Jack Dempsey
3. Jack Sharkey
4. Max Schmeling

The other part of the ranking is very variable, but it should include the likes of Greb, Uzcudun, Godfrey, Wills, Loughran, Tommy Gibbons, Young Stribling.

Though inconsistent, Johnny Risko was in the mix. He was one of the top contenders for a while.

As for Greb, he did have some success against heavyweights. You do have the gray area where he had so many no-decisions. There are a lot of guys close. Firpo, Brennan, and Heeney should probably be considered as well.
Lots of close calls.

Luis Firpo

DrDuke wrote: ↑24 Mar 2021, 02:35 The decade started with a long reign of Dempsey, although with a part of inactivity, but Tunney convincingly beat him twice, so Tunney is clearly a number one for me. Sharkey was around the top in the 20s and got a bunch of decent scalps, including Wills, who had been considered a dodged top contender for a long time. Schmeling was a rising contender then, who had the scalp of Uzcudun. So, top 4 is pretty clear for me:

1. Gene Tunney
2. Jack Dempsey
3. Jack Sharkey
4. Max Schmeling

The other part of the ranking is very variable, but it should include the likes of Greb, Uzcudun, Godfrey, Wills, Loughran, Tommy Gibbons, Young Stribling.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑24 Mar 2021, 12:27 Though inconsistent, Johnny Risko was in the mix. He was one of the top contenders for a while.

As for Greb, he did have some success against heavyweights. You do have the gray area where he had so many no-decisions. There are a lot of guys close. Firpo, Brennan, and Heeney should probably be considered as well.
Lots of close calls.

Caractacus wrote: ↑24 Mar 2021, 15:24 Luis Firpo

Thanks all for the replies. I thought about what people said about Loughran and Greb. It's really difficult to place them using only The Ring rankings for Heavyweight, so I tried look for some other good sources and decided on these three:

The Ring Magazine annual Heavyweight rankings]:1924-1929. (Light Heavies are ranked separately, and gives a lot of credit to the black heavyweight champions of the time)

Boxrec Annual Rankings: 1920-1929. (Includes Lower weight class fighters campaigning at heavy, but barely credits the black heavyweight champions)

A youtuber called 'Hardline boxing talk' (I really recommend checking out): 1920-1923. (I understand he calculates his rankings of a larger personal database he maintains. Gives credit to the black heavyweight champions, in the same vein that Ring Magazine did from 1924 onward, but did also rank the lower weight class fighters).

(top 10)
1. Jack Dempsey
2. Harry Wills
2. Gene Tunney
4. Jack Sharkey
5. George Godfrey
6. Jack Renault
6. Tommy Loughran
8. Billy Miske
9. Tommy Gibbons
9. Young Stribling

(top 15)
11. Paolin Uzcudun
12. Harry Greb
13. Charley Weinert
14. Max Schmeling
15. Luis Angel Firpo
15. Jim Maloney
15. Johnny Risko

NOTE: This was again purely a calculation based on Heavyweight rankings across the decade rather than who was the best fighter in a head to head.

Its funny that Greb is being called a "grey area" when he beat more men on any of these lists than other guy on those lists, several of whom are being rated higher than him here.

I meant that a No-Decision Win is a gray area. He had a ton of them. How much does it count for ?

If you whip a guys ass and every newspaper says it is it worth less? Besides of the men mentioned here on these lists as being contenders and/or rated higher than Greb the only two Greb didnt hold an “official” decision over were Miske and Renault and he dominated Renault in both matches, dropping him in the first one. Against Miske they both drew as young clubfighters, he won something like 7 or 8 rounds of their first fight before he got badly cut allowing Miske to come on, and he dominated Miske in their final bout. He beat Tunney in brutal fashion, dominated Gibbons, Brennan, Weinert. He dominated Loughran in their 15 rounder and overall won their series. So Im not sure why Newspaper Decisions would detract from his standing when he was winning those as well. In addition to that Young Stribling, rated #9 above, ducked Greb as did Dempsey rated #1. If you are basing your ranking on actual accomplishments at HW its hard to see how anyone not named Dempsey or Wills outranks Greb and frankly Greb was often more impressive against common opponents than Dempsey was.

Yes it does mean less if it is a Newspaper Decision. First of all, it's unofficial. There might have been 15 newspaper writers there. there may have been one. There may have been some fights in which we never got the opinion of every single newspaper writer there.

Second, and perhaps more importantly, if the fight is unofficial, one or both of the fighters might have have given it their all. They might not have trained as hard as they would had their been a official that would count.

Let me put it this way. Fighter A and fighter B fought one time and Fighter A won a newspaper decision. With nothing else to go on, fighter A would be considered the better fighter and had the edge in the series.
But lets say they fought one more time and Fighter B won an official decision. I would argue that Fighter B won the series.
Official decision trumps Newspaper Decision.

You can also certainly argue that Greb's wins over Tunney and Gibbons don't count as wins over a heavyweight and should not be factored in when rating Greb strictly as a heavyweight. Tunney and Gibbons each were light heavyweights at the time of the fight.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑26 Mar 2021, 15:24 Yes it does mean less if it is a Newspaper Decision. First of all, it's unofficial. There might have been 15 newspaper writers there. there may have been one. There may have been some fights in which we never got the opinion of every single newspaper writer there.

Second, and perhaps more importantly, if the fight is unofficial, one or both of the fighters might have have given it their all. They might not have trained as hard as they would had their been a official that would count.

Let me put it this way. Fighter A and fighter B fought one time and Fighter A won a newspaper decision. With nothing else to go on, fighter A would be considered the better fighter and had the edge in the series.
But lets say they fought one more time and Fighter B won an official decision. I would argue that Fighter B won the series.
Official decision trumps Newspaper Decision.

You can also certainly argue that Greb's wins over Tunney and Gibbons don't count as wins over a heavyweight and should not be factored in when rating Greb strictly as a heavyweight. Tunney and Gibbons each were light heavyweights at the time of the fight.

In this era most towns had at least two or three newspapers. Its easy to track what newspapers existed in each town for a given time to determine if sources are missing. If you think myself or anyone else is missing sources which would swing newspaper decision tallys in favor of Grebs opposition then by all means step forward but thats simply not the case. Newspaper decisions, particularly as they pertain to Greb, were remarkably consistent and while “we” (whoever your “we” is supposed to refer to) may not have a complete picture of the sources, I do and cited them in my book for posterity. Anyone questioning those results is invited to follow the breadcumbs. Your point about fighters not trying as hard because no decision was rendered is not born out by any fact of the era. The fighters were paid to try their best. If there was any suspicion of a fighter not giving his best it was not uncommon for fighters to be tossed out of the ring, their purse withheld, and a ban placed on them. That was a sufficient deterrent to “dogging it” in no decision fights. The are called prizefighters (then and now) for a reason. Nevermind the fact that it was universally understood that newspapermen (who in this era were often far more expert in the sport than the vast majority of judges today) would render the unofficial decisions. Wagers were placed on these outcomes, title fights were given to fighters based on their performance in these fights, and indeed a title could even change hands in these fights by KO or DQ. Fighters took pride in these fights and nearly to a man they carried around huge scrapbooks which told the tale of their ring exploits written entirely by the newspapermen youd have us believe nobody cared about. Men suffered injuries and even died in ND fights. All of that aside it still does nothing to offset my point that Greb beat most of those men easily in official decisions and the ones he didnt youd be hard pressed to find a dissenting opinion. While we are trumpeting the greatness of judges decisions lets not forget that in the second Tunney fight the VAST majority of newspapermen present, Tunneys hometown newspapermen, stated that Greb was an easy winner and had been robbed. So goes the infallibility of “official” judges. If we are going to toss out Grebs wins over Tunney and Gibbons because they weighed 175 in an era when the HW champion barely weighed ten pounds more than that then lets be fair about this. Toss out all of the wins Tunney, Gibbons, Dempsey and everyone else had at or below 175. That makes things interesting doesnt it? Because suddenly Tunney only has a handful of wins at HW and yet hes easily considered a top five HW for the 20s. Gibbons only weighed 175 1/2 for Dempsey, does that 1/2 pound make that much difference in his performance or do we toss that as well? If we toss Gibbons and Carpentier who only weighed 172 (and reputedly they fudged his weight up four pounds to make it look like less of a mismatch) suddenly Dempsey has only four winning fights in the 20s: Brennan who Greb dominated four times, once in a 15 rd decision, Miske who had had one fight against a total nobody in the previous year since retiring due to his kidney disease and who hadnt won against a good fighter in a couple of years, Firpo who wasnig but thats it, and Sharkey who kicked the shit out of Dempsey until he was fouled. Thats hardly the stuff of legends. You really have to do some impressive mental gymnastics to disqualify Greb but consider Renault, Tunney, Gibbons, Brennan, Miske, etc. Your point about official decisions is particularly vexing. Im curious, in 2017 or 2012 did you consider Horn or Bradley better fighters than Pacqiaou? Both men got what most considered to be terrible decisions over Pacqiaou. Tunney and Greb had three official fights and two ND fights. Greb beat the hell out of Tunney in the first, beat him nearly as bad in the second but was robbed as pointed out almost universally, lost the third, won the fourth (when Tunney was a HW btw) by the reckoning of the majority of newspaper opinions and lost the fifth. So do you just have tunnel vision and refuse to acknowledge a fighter is better if hes robbed and slavishly adhere to the judges as infallible? My guess is no if we are being honest. There is certainly an asterisk by Tunneys second win over Greb which even if you ludicrously toss out newspaper decisions leaves doubt as to the old story that Tunney emerged as the victor of their series. Again, one must close the door entirely on logic to suggest Grebs name shouldnt be considered but men like these others (many of whom he beat well and proper) should.

Try using paragraphs. Makes it a lot more readable.

First off we're talking heavyweights. Most legit commissions of the day classed a 'heavyweight' as a boxer weighing over 12 stone 7 pounds. So that eliminates any slap-happy middleweights.

The top heavyweights of the 1920s in no order would be: Jack Dempsey, Harry Wills, Jack Renault, George Godfrey, Jack Sharkey, Paolino Uzcudun, Larry Gains, Gene Tunney, Harry Persson and Johnny Risko. These were the marquee names of the heavyweight class during the 1920s.

Cap wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:05 First off we're talking heavyweights. Most legit commissions of the day classed a 'heavyweight' as a boxer weighing over 12 stone 7 pounds. So that eliminates any slap-happy middleweights.

The top heavyweights of the 1920s in no order would be: Jack Dempsey, Harry Wills, Jack Renault, George Godfrey, Jack Sharkey, Paolino Uzcudun, Larry Gains, Gene Tunney, Harry Persson and Johnny Risko. These were the marquee names of the heavyweight class during the 1920s.

I agree completely with that first paragraph. Harry Greb should not be classed amongst the heavyweights.

I haven't checked their records but Jim Maloney and Tuffy Griffiths may be worth consideration.

Miles Templeton

Cap wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:05 First off we're talking heavyweights. Most legit commissions of the day classed a 'heavyweight' as a boxer weighing over 12 stone 7 pounds. So that eliminates any slap-happy middleweights.

The top heavyweights of the 1920s in no order would be: Jack Dempsey, Harry Wills, Jack Renault, George Godfrey, Jack Sharkey, Paolino Uzcudun, Larry Gains, Gene Tunney, Harry Persson and Johnny Risko. These were the marquee names of the heavyweight class during the 1920s.

So Sharkey must have been the best, or at least most accomplished, of the bunch since by your reckoning he holds wins over more names than anyone else on that list and his loss to Dempsey, coming after kicking his ass for 6 rounds, was about as suspect as they come.

Since we are only considering boxers classed over 175 refresh my memory on all of the HWs Dempsey beat during the 1920s to gain consideration on this list.

prewarboxing wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 16:40

Cap wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:05 First off we're talking heavyweights. Most legit commissions of the day classed a 'heavyweight' as a boxer weighing over 12 stone 7 pounds. So that eliminates any slap-happy middleweights.

The top heavyweights of the 1920s in no order would be: Jack Dempsey, Harry Wills, Jack Renault, George Godfrey, Jack Sharkey, Paolino Uzcudun, Larry Gains, Gene Tunney, Harry Persson and Johnny Risko. These were the marquee names of the heavyweight class during the 1920s.

I agree completely with that first paragraph. Harry Greb should not be classed amongst the heavyweights.

I haven't checked their records but Jim Maloney and Tuffy Griffiths may be worth consideration.

Miles Templeton

Strange because Weinert, Madden, Renault, Miske, Tunney, Gibbons, Kid Norfolk, and Brennan among others were considered in contention for a title shot during the era and Greb beat all of them. Greb himself was considered in contention for a HW title shot for years as per promoters, polls, and even Dempsey himself (when he wasnt busy ducking him). If a fighter can beat the contenders hes set up against (several times in elimination bouts for a title shot) and is considered in contention we disregard him because he didnt typically weigh above 175 in an era when three career light heavyweights challenged for the title and one won it? That seems a very anachronistic way of looking at this time period. If Greb had fought and beaten Dempsey, which isnt out of the realm of possibility, would Greb then garner recognition as one of the better HWs of the era or would Dempsey simply be considered one of the lesser LHWs of that era?

prewarboxing wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 16:40

Cap wrote: ↑30 Mar 2021, 15:05 First off we're talking heavyweights. Most legit commissions of the day classed a 'heavyweight' as a boxer weighing over 12 stone 7 pounds. So that eliminates any slap-happy middleweights.

The top heavyweights of the 1920s in no order would be: Jack Dempsey, Harry Wills, Jack Renault, George Godfrey, Jack Sharkey, Paolino Uzcudun, Larry Gains, Gene Tunney, Harry Persson and Johnny Risko. These were the marquee names of the heavyweight class during the 1920s.

I agree completely with that first paragraph. Harry Greb should not be classed amongst the heavyweights.

I haven't checked their records but Jim Maloney and Tuffy Griffiths may be worth consideration.

Miles Templeton

Yes. You're correct, Miles. Maloney and Griffiths might well be included when we're talking of heavyweights certain to put backsides in seats in the Roaring Twenties. Lesser weights generally didn't fill the bill.

Cap