Where is Harry Greb in your All time Greats Top list?

[Bad_Intentions]

i have him at #6

[Bad_Intentions]

1. Robinson
2. Greb
3. Armstrong
4. Langford
5. Ali
6. Duran
7. Pep
8. Charles
9. Moore
10. Whitaker:good :good

[brooklyn1550]

1. Robinson
2. Armstrong
3. Greb

[robert ungurean]

1, Robinson
2. Greb
3. Armstrong
4. Langford
5. Ali
6. Duran
7. Pep
8. Charles
9. Moore
10. Whitaker
Whitaker at 10 :lol: :lol: :lol:

[jonesjrp4p1]

1. Robinson
2. Armstrong
3. Greb

im gonna have to agree with you even though it is hard just because their was no footage and we have to go by mouth

[robert ungurean]

What's funny?
Whitaker at no.10 all time p4p. Thats whats funny :lol:

[robert ungurean]

Alright I'll put him at #6 then if he was too low for you.
I like your sense of humor:thumbsup

[robert ungurean]

Honestly though, I don't see what's funny about Whitaker being #10. Whitaker was great at what he did.
I just dont have him anywhere near my top 10 p4p.
Jusy my oppinion though.

[jonesjrp4p1]

yea i dont have whitaker in my top 10 but he was damn good

[hopkinsfan07]

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Henry Armstrong
4. Carlos Monzon
5. Willie Pep
6. Harty Greb
7. Roberto Duran
8. Marvin Hagler
9. Sugar Ray Leonard
10. Alexis Arguello

[hopkinsfan07]

Interesting, you got Monzon pretty high. Arguello top 10 all time is different. Care to explain?

He beat the great Ruben Olivares (greatest bantamweight champion of all time) won titles at 130 and 135lbs, fought 14 world champions and his fighta with Alfredo Escalera and Aaron Pryor were classic fights




Monzon held the world middleweight Belt for seven years and made 14 defences
he was unbeaten for the last 81 fights of his career. He beat fighters like Rodrigo Valdes Emile Griffith and Jose Angel Napoles in that unbeatable time

[Minotauro]

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Roberto Duran
4. Sam Langford
5. Harry Greb
6. Ezzard Charles
7. Willie Pep
8. Joe Louis
9. Muhammad Ali
10. Joe Gans

[jyuza]

Arguably number 3 but I have absolutely no problem with him number one.
He was that good.

ps: SRR and Armstrong are my first two.

[Holmes' Jab]

Definitely Top 10. Probably around 5 or 6 All-Time P4P.

[janitor]

He is a verry serious candidate for the No1 spot.

I personaly have him top 3.

[TBooze]

20 Bob Fitzsimmons
19 Stanley Ketchel
18 Harry Greb
17 Ezzard Charles
16 Benny Leonard
15 Julio Cesar Chavez
14 Mickey Walker
13 Ray Leonard
12 Carlos Monzon
11 Muhammad Ali
10 Charley Burley
9 Sammy Langford
8 Archie Moore
7 Jimmy Wilde
6 Willie Pep
5 Sandy Sadler
4 Georges Carpentier
3 Roberto Duran
2 Henry Armstrong
1 Ray Robinson

A brilliant fighter who was taken away from us too soon.

If hed, had another four/five years, he could easily become top 10 if not top 5, IMO.

[jonesjrp4p1]

Don't you have Roy Jones in your top 10 though? So why do you guys rip on my opinion?

i dont have roy in my top 10 not anywhere near

[sweet_scientist]

20 Bob Fitzsimmons
19 Stanley Ketchel
18 Harry Greb
17 Ezzard Charles
16 Benny Leonard
15 Julio Cesar Chavez
14 Mickey Walker
13 Ray Leonard
12 Carlos Monzon
11 Muhammad Ali
10 Charley Burley
9 Sammy Langford
8 Archie Moore
7 Jimmy Wilde
6 Willie Pep
5 Sandy Sadler
4 Georges Carpentier
3 Roberto Duran
2 Henry Armstrong
1 Ray Robinson

A brilliant fighter who was taken away from us too soon.

If hed, had another four/five years, he could easily become top 10 if not top 5, IMO.

Come on now T, Carpentier at 4 and Greb at 18? Greb would have wiped the floor with Carpentier.

[brownpimp88]

I know what they did, but why do they rate above guys like Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore? Or guys like Benny Leonard or Whitaker in Arguello's case?
Archie Moore lost most of his big fights, thats why most rank monzon higher, even ring magazine ranks monzon higher than moore.

[TBooze]

:lol: :lol: :lol: You've got to be joking? You are joking correct? He has the best resume of all time, what does he need another 4 years for? Carpentier over him or any of those guys is laughable as well. Greb should be way higher, your reason for ranking him so low is ridiculous and holds no water.

Carpentier was the only fighter to claim a national title in all classic eight divisions.

He was a European Champion at 135, 147, 160, 175 and Heavyweight.

He was the best Light Heavyweight in the world from 1910 all the way though to 22. He was Light Heavyweight Champion of the world (1913 to 1922). He also claimed a white World Championship at Heavyweight.

That resume is better than Greb's, thus Carpentier is my all time #4 and Greb #18.

Greb was brilliant but is slightly overrated by most because of SSS. ('Salvador Sanchez Syndrome' he died too early)

[UpWithEvil]

He was the best Light Heavyweight in the world from 1910 all the way though to 22.

That's a pretty heady claim. I'm not sure I could so easily rank Carpentier thusly given the presence of Battling Levinsky, Tommy Gibbons, Jack Dillon, and Kid Norfolk during that period. Still, that's an interesting argument you make for including Carpentier in the top-5 all-time, even if I don't agree.

[brownpimp88]

Ring Magazine ranks Dempsey at #18 and Marciano at #12 P4P, so I don't think they are that reliable. Still they're better than most other publications like ESPN.
Well i dont agree with how low they rank carlos ortiz and how they overrate basilio and lamotta, but IMO Carlos Monzon simply ranks higher because he won every big fight he was in. You can make any excuse you want like this guy was blown up, or the other guy was out of his prime. The fact of thet matter is that you can look at archie moore's resume and you will notice that he lost to most elites that he fought.

[joe33]

One only has to look at grebs record to see he was frigging awesome,about number 2 or 3 for me,also he had a dodgy eye i believe for a part of his career,is that true?

[TBooze]

He was a European champ! Whoopedy doo. How many quality fighters did he ever beat?

He was most certainly not better than Tunney either. Greb has a MUCH better resume. You can point out statistics all you want, but in the end it comes down to who you faced and beat, and Greb FAAAAAAAAAAAR outdoes Carpentier in that category, as do many fighters.

And once again, Greb didn't die too early, he had a good career and has the best ever resume in boxing, it doesn't matter when he died if you accomplished what he did. He was around for a good amount of time, I don't think anyone sees Greb as one who didn't fulfill his potential.

European titles were very important in that era.

Ledoux, Sulivan, Lewis, Smith, Levinsky, Lewis and Gibbons were excellent names. And even in 1924 he was able to compete with a primed Tunney for 10 rounds, despite being as much as 10 years past his pomp.

Greb was in his fighting prime in 1926 and died, another symthom of SSS is an inabilty to recognize that a death can give you an emotional attachment to a fighter... you are after all human!

[brownpimp88]

Wins over:

Bob Olson
Nino Valdez X2
Harold Johnson X4
Bob Baker
Joey Maxim X3
Oakland Billy Smith X2
Jimmy Bivins X4
Bob Satterfield
Alabama Kid
Ted Lowry
Buddy Walker
Holman Williams
Cocoa Kid
Lloyd Marshall X2
Bandit Romero X2

Losses to:

Ali
Floyd Patterson
Rocky Marciano
Harold Johnson(4 wins)
Ezzard Charles X3
Holman Williams(also holds a win)
Jimmy Bivins(4 wins)
Charley Burley

As you can see, he has quite a good wins resume, and his losses were either to bigger opponents when past his prime(and ATG opponents at that) or he avenged them. Monzon doesn't have a resume like this.
When i look at how good a resume, i usually mean the people that you beat. I could care less if someone fought 10 or 11 hall of famers, if you lose to most of them, it just makes you look bad. Harold Johnson is the only guy he beat that i would put on a top 100 of all times list, while monzon beat 3 guys that you can put on the list. He is better and detloff(ring magazine) agress with me.

[brownpimp88]

The guys Monzon beat were WW's. People give B-Hop shit for this, but it's OK for Monzon?
Charley burley was a WW and moore lost to him. Last time i checked, bennie briscoe, rodrigo valdez and nino benvenuti were all legit middleweights and all 3 of them are usually in the top 50 middleweights of all time. Hell make a list of the top 75 middleweights ever and about 9 or 10 monzon victims will be on it. So, lets look at it this way monzon beat 2 ATG welterweights, one ended up being a middleweight champ and on top of that he beat every top middleweight of his era and 3 top 50 middleweights of all times.

Archie Moore only became light heavyweight champ after Ezzard charles left the division, he lost most of his big fights, whether you like it or not, you can come up with 101 excuses, it wont change reality.

[sweet_scientist]

It has nothing to do with that. Look at who he fought and beat, it's that simple. It has ntohing to do with how young he died. Sal Sanchez maybe(although he had quite a career to that point as well), but Greb not at all. If you accomplish more than anyone else to that age than what does it matter if you didn;t fight till you were 40?

Greb did twice as much as Carpentier did in half the time.

Look at Henry Armstrong for instance, who T obviously rates highly. How long did his period of dominance last? Not that long at all. But he cleaned out half the sport in that time, and nothing else needs to be said. It doesn't matter that he didn't have a 10 or 15 year prime.

Patrick Charpentier imo has DLH syndrome. Competent in a lot of weight classes, but never really that outstanding in any of them.

[TBooze]

It has nothing to do with that. Look at who he fought and beat, it's that simple. It has ntohing to do with how young he died. Sal Sanchez maybe(although he had quite a career to that point as well), but Greb not at all. If you accomplish more than anyone else to that age than what does it matter if you didn;t fight till you were 40?

But Greb did not that is my point. Caprentier fought and won tiles in an era when titles mattered, Greb fought in that era as well, but his title count is nothing to Carpentier, and that is in part because he died young and could not fulfill his true potential.

When I rate my all time greats (which Greb was) I do not use potential as a criteria, thus Greb's early death means I can place him no higher than #18. IMO to place him any higher would be to punish fighters who had full careers.

[UpWithEvil]

But Greb did not that is my point. Caprentier fought and won tiles in an era when titles mattered,

How much could the heavyweight championship of Europe matter when all you had to do to earn it was defeat Bombardier Billy Wells?

[TBooze]

Are you not listening? He didn't die too young! ?

Maybe that is where you going wrong, your listening rather than reading;)

Greb was in his pomp in 1926 when he died following an operation to remove a tooth if memory serves me right.

[TBooze]

After a 13 year career of over 300 fights and the best resume of all time. That doesn't qualify as "not living up to potential" to me. Yes he died young, but he was probably past his prime when he died, just as Armstrong was by that age, due to the wars over the years and all that they had accomplished. He didn't have much more to give.

Are you suggesting Greb is above Robinson? Now that is just plain silly!!!

[sweet_scientist]

Maybe that is where you going wrong, your listening rather than reading;)

Greb was in his pomp in 1926 when he died following an operation to remove a tooth if memory serves me right.

Greb wasn't exactly in his pomp when he died, but so what if he was? How does that take away from what he accomplished?

Even if he went into vertical drop, would that have changed things? It's not as though some losses were going to "expose" him. He had already done everything and more that needed to be done.

By the way, Greb is # 3 for me all time, and he is arguably the best. He's definitely in the discussion. We'd have a clearer idea from some fight footage just what he was about, but seeing some of the men he beat on film, he MUST have been something special.

[janitor]

Are you suggesting Greb is above Robinson? Now that is just plain silly!!!

I think that a strong case can be made. Greb has a much deeper resume.

[rekcutnevets]

There was a thread going around the other day with people trying to give opinions of how they think a head to head match up featuring greb would turn out. I disagree with being able to analyze a fight between people, when you can't view one of the fighters to analyze his style.

You can read Greb's record, and view some his opponents on film. It is fair to put him in your top 10 pound for pound. You choose where, you won't get an argument from me on this one.

[TBooze]

I think that a strong case can be made. Greb has a much deeper resume.

No ones winning resume compares to Robinson's...

That has to be a given

[TBooze]

Greb wasn't exactly in his pomp when he died, but so what if he was? How does that take away from what he accomplished?


It does not, but his early death does give people 'SSS', and you cannot judge him on a full career like everyone else who I rated above him.

[janitor]

No ones winning resume compares to Robinson's...

That has to be a given

In terms of sheer number of world class fighters beaten Greb has no peer apart from perhaps Sam Langford.

[McGrain]

In terms of sheer number of world class fighters beaten Greb has no peer apart from perhaps Sam Langford.

Who did Greb and Lanford miss out on?

Because Robinson, who I have p4p no.1 ducked - or "failed to fight" - plenty.

[TBooze]

In terms of sheer number of world class fighters beaten Greb has no peer apart from perhaps Sam Langford.

Depends what you term world class, if standards slip, you can spin better numbers than Robinson, but for sheer quality name wins Robinson is in a league of his own.

[janitor]

[quote=McGrain]Who did Greb and Lanford miss out on?


The people who did not want to fight them and that's it.

[McGrain]

[quote]


The people who did not want to fight them and that's it.

I think if you want to manuevere Greb or Langford above SRR it should be on the fighters Robinson failed to fight rather than those he did. If you see what I mean.

But circumstance shouldn't be paramount.

So what significant names ducked, or should have fought, Langford and Greb, in your opinion.

[janitor]

Depends what you term world class, if standards slip, you can spin better numbers than Robinson, but for sheer quality name wins Robinson is in a league of his own.

I have to disagree there.

In all Greb defeated 14 fighters that held a lineal title at some stage of their careers, from welterweight to heavyweight. He defeated an incredible seven light heavyweight champions.

Whatever you think of the era Greb fought in, Robinson is up against it here.

[janitor]

So what significant names ducked, or should have fought, Langford and Greb, in your opinion.

The list is a long one and there will inevitably be debate on some points. However I am prepared to commit to the following-

Langford was avoided by Philadelphia Jack O'Brien as Light Heavyweight champion, Jack Johnson as Heavyweight champion, Jess Willard as Heavyweight Champion. A lot of the top white hopes steered clear of Langford for fear of damaging their colour line credentials.

Greb was avoided by Georges Carpinter as Light Heavyweight Champion and Jack Dempsey as Heavyweight Champion (at least by his managment). He also called out Harry Wills at least once.

[janitor]

I believe it was actually 18 he defeated that had held titles. Read this article. Best article on Greb ever.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

The guy sure had a busy schedule.

[McGrain]

The list is a long one and there will inevitably be debate on some points. However I am prepared to commit to the following-

Langford was avoided by Philadelphia Jack O'Brien as Light Heavyweight champion, Jack Johnson as Heavyweight champion, Jess Willard as Heavyweight Champion.

Greb was avoided by Georges Carpinter as Light Heavyweight Champion and Jack Dempsey as Heavyweight Champion.

So, if was Langford failed to fight Jack O'Brien and and Jess Willard it's fair to say that these two wouldn't be up and around the cream of his opposition isn't it?

Greb is more problematic. Wouldn't Dempsey and Carpantier both be among the best fighters Greb would ever have faced?

[McGrain]

He would've whooped Carpentier up something fierce. Dempsey is a tough one to call, as he probably would've been the toughest Greb faced, due to the size difference and all.

I pretty much agree with you - but what i'm interested in here is how these two compare to Greb's other competition, rather than Greb himself.

Thoughts?

[Robbi]

Harry Greb was a Jewish monster. One of the greatest ever to lace'em up. Top 10 pound for pound of all time.

[janitor]

[quote=McGrain]So, if was Langford failed to fight Jack O'Brien and and Jess Willard it's fair to say that these two wouldn't be up and around the cream of his opposition isn't it?


Langford beat O'Brien decisively in a no decision bout. O'Brien should then have given him a shot at the light heavyweight title.

In answer to your question the biggest potential fight of Langfords career was a heavyweight title fight against Jack Johnson which never happened.


Greb is more problematic. Wouldn't Dempsey and Carpantier both be among the best fighters Greb would ever have faced?


Dempsey would have been the best fighter Greb had ever faced.

Carpinter would just have been another head to mount on the wall somewhere between Jack Dillon and Jimmy Slatterey.

[robert ungurean]

Harry Greb was a Jewish monster. One of the greatest ever to lace'em up. Top 10 pound for pound of all time. Sorry Thats a myth.
Greb was German on Fathers side and Irish on Mothers side.

[McGrain]

[quote]


Langford beat O'Brien decisively in a no decision bout. O'Brien should then have given him a shot at the light heavyweight title.

In answer to your question the biggest potential fight of Langfords career was a heavyweight title fight against Jack Johnson which never happened.

Let's leave Langford alone then - he seems to be a lock. Based on the criteria i've set up, facing the best available, he'd be number one.



Dempsey would have been the best fighter Greb had ever faced.

How much do you think that failing to face Dempsey hurts Greb if at all? After all, one was a heavy, the other a big middle.

Carpinter would just have been another head to mount on the wall somewhere between Jack Dillon and Jimmy Slatterey.

:lol:

Possibly. Why do I never hear anything about Battling Siki and Greb by the way?

It's shaping up like Robinson might have been the worst offender in terms of failing to fight the best fighters available, certainly as far as any argument regarding Greb goes.

What does everyone else think?

[robert ungurean]

Robinson avoided so many badass black fighters. Im suprised more people dont make light of that.

[janitor]

[quote=McGrain]
How much do you think that failing to face Dempsey hurts Greb if at all? After all, one was a heavy, the other a big middle.


It hurts Dempsey more because Greb was willing to make the fight. Even without fighting Dempsey Greb's resume is uneique.

If he had somehow beaten Dempsey then he would have established himself as the consensus P4P No 1.

If he had been competitive in loosing it might have enhanced his legacy slightly.

If he had been destroyed early then nobody would hold it against him.


Possibly. Why do I never hear anything about Battling Siki and Greb by the way?


Perhaps because Siki was in the driving seat for a short period.

Incidentaly there was a lot of interest in matching Siki with Dempsey and Doc Kearns seemed willing to consider it.

[McGrain]

[quote]



Incidentaly there was a lot of interest in matching Siki with Dempsey and Doc Kearns seemed willing to consider it.

I have the opposite - that Siki was after it and Dempsey (or Kearns) wasn't interested. The source is an aside in a book about another fighter though.

If we say Greb failed to fight two fighters - Dempsey and Carpantier - and say that the first doesn't hurt him to much but the second does, he still compares very favourabley with Robinson in this regard.

Concentrating only upon those fighters who were available and would have crashed Robinson's top 10 competitors we have: Charley Burley, Holman Williams, Archie Moore and Lloyd Marhsall. You could also mention Jimmy Bivins and Ezzard Charles though i'm unsure of the circumstances here. I'd also like to mention Jack Chase and the Cocoa Kid, although perhaps they wouldn't be in the top ten (it's getting crowded!).

[janitor]

[quote=janitor]

I have the opposite - that Siki was after it and Dempsey (or Kearns) wasn't interested. The source is an aside in a book about another fighter though.


What I have read is that the proposal was being considered untill Siki lost the title to Mike McTigure.

It makes sense in a way. Georges Carpinter had just drawn the first million dollar gate, on a slacker vs war hero card. Battling Siki who had just won the light heavyweight title from Carpinter was also a French war hero and minimal threat to Dempsey.

It would have made good business sense.