Who fought the most champions?

[Woddy]

I'm wondering who fought the most fighters who at one point in time held a world title, in any weight division.

Here is just one example of what I'm looking for:

Muhammad Ali fought:

Sonny Liston
Floyd Patterson
Joe Frazier
Jimmy Ellis
Ernie Terrell
George Foreman
Ken Norton
Leon Spinks
Larry Holmes
Trevor Berbick
Archie Moore

[janitor]

Harry Greb must be a prety good call.

He fought 18 lineal champions in all I believe.

[BIG DEE]

BIG DEE HERE= I believe it was HARRY GREB as he fought and defeated 18 men who held or would hold world titles and not this half or quarter championship bullshit you have today. Eight divisions in boxing and one champion and all 100,000 Middleweights in the world are at your throat to get you. The men Harry greb beat were as follows MIDDLEWEIGHTCHAMPIONS Al McCoy, Mike O`Dowd, George Chip, Mickey Walker(Welterweight champ at the time of the defeat), Tiger Flowers, Johnny Wilson, Frank Klaus MIDDLEWEIGHT TITLE CLAIMANTS
Eddie McGoorty, Jeff Smith, Bryan Downey, Frank Mantell, LT.HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPIONS Battling Levinsky, Jack Dillon, Mike McTigue, Tommy Loughran,
Jimmy Slattery and Maxie Rosenbloom FUTURE HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION Gene Tunney. I think this puts this thread to rest as far as fighting champions goes and how many HALL of FAMERS BEING RING MAGAZINE OR THE ONE IN
CANASTOTA, NY. Actually 19 if you count Mickey Walker twice as a welterweight and a middleweight.

[brownpimp88]

Harry Greb must be a prety good call.

He fought 18 lineal champions in all I believe.
yeah but back then only white people were allowed to fight for or become lineal champ, except for a few people. You're not really the undisputed champ if there is a coloured champ that has a strong claim to being superior.

[dpw417]

yeah but back then only white people were allowed to fight for or become lineal champ, except for a few people. You're not really the undisputed champ if there is a coloured champ that has a strong claim to being superior.Wow..."brownpimp"... It is true the color line was unjustifiably drawn in that era...That is a total shame! BUT Greb was not one of those men, he fought EVERYONE....Problably the greatest career record in history.

[janitor]

yeah but back then only white people were allowed to fight for or become lineal champ, except for a few people. You're not really the undisputed champ if there is a coloured champ that has a strong claim to being superior.

Greb was one of the few champions of that period who had nothing to do with the colour line.

He would fight any man and most animals.

[brownpimp88]

Wow..."brownpimp"... It is true the color line was unjustifiably drawn in that era...That is a total shame! BUT Greb was not one of those men, he fought EVERYONE....Problably the greatest career record in history.
Im not accusing him of ducking people, but alot of his 'extra' wins were very close newspaper decisions and no contests where people debate over who won. This is why his resume on this forum is turning into a mythical figure, people just want to give greb as many wins as possible so they can say he would smash monzon and hagler.

[janitor]

[quote=brownpimp88]Im not accusing him of ducking people, but alot of his 'extra' wins were very close newspaper decisions and no contests where people debate over who won.

This is a valid criticism. Some of his main wins are debatable.

That cuts both ways though. He arguably beat Gene Tunney 3 out of 5 times, but if he did he dosnt get the credit for it.


This is why his resume on this forum is turning into a mythical figure, people just want to give greb as many wins as possible so they can say he would smash monzon and hagler.


If you took the most negative view of his resume possible it would still be better than the combined resumes of Monzon and Hagler in terms of who he beat.

Hard to say wether he would beat them but they would obviously have their hands full.

[Woddy]

Thanks guys. It sounds like Harry Greb is the winner.

[brownpimp88]

[quote]

This is a valid criticism. Some of his main wins are debatable.

That cuts both ways though. He arguably beat Gene Tunney 3 out of 5 times, but if he did he dosnt get the credit for it.



If you took the most negative view of his resume possible it would still be better than the combined resumes of Monzon and Hagler in terms of who he beat.

Hard to say wether he would beat them but they would obviously have their hands full.
well it depends on how you hold monzon and haglers opponents. To me, valdez, benvenuti, minter and antuofermo were all legit middleweight champs. Many of the middleweight champs greb beat didnt have to face blacks. Many of the light heavyweights greb beat didnt have to face blacks, tell me if i'm wrong buddy.

[dpw417]

Im not accusing him of ducking people, but alot of his 'extra' wins were very close newspaper decisions and no contests where people debate over who won. This is why his resume on this forum is turning into a mythical figure, people just want to give greb as many wins as possible so they can say he would smash monzon and hagler.
That is true re newpaper decisions...I recently noticed a change in Greb's record re his fight with Kid Norfolk...They changed it to a 'W' for Greb...:huh

[brownpimp88]

That is true re newpaper decisions...I recently noticed a change in Greb's record re his fight with Kid Norfolk...They changed it to a 'W' for Greb...:huh
exactly, if you have film, then yeah you can change it. But its all hypothetical. Not to mention that greb was an extremely dirty fighter, he would get dq'd all the time in todays era.

[janitor]

[quote=janitor]
well it depends on how you hold monzon and haglers opponents. To me, valdez, benvenuti, minter and antuofermo were all legit middleweight champs. Many of the middleweight champs greb beat didnt have to face blacks. Many of the light heavyweights greb beat didnt have to face blacks, tell me if i'm wrong buddy.

You are right. Though there are a few notable exceptions like Maxie Rosenbloom for example.

However, they fought in an era when most of the top fighters were white for socio-economic reasons. If the colour line had not been there, then there would have been a few aditional black champions but most of these guys would still have held the title at some point.

[Woddy]

The point of this thread was to determine who fought the most champions. Not who was favoured in a game of politics.

[brownpimp88]

[quote=brownpimp88]

You are right. Though there are a few notable exceptions like Maxie Rosenbloom for example.

However, they fought in an era when most of the top fighters were white for socio-economic reasons. If the colour line had not been there, then there would have been a few aditional black champions but most of these guys would still have held the title at some point.
What is greb's resume at middleweight, this is what i always wanted to know. It seems like all his top wins were at 175, heavyweight or catch weight fights.

[dpw417]

exactly, if you have film, then yeah you can change it. But its all hypothetical. Not to mention that greb was an extremely dirty fighter, he would get dq'd all the time in todays era.
I'm not going there...if you want undisputable proof of Greb's greatness...It's right there in the record book...To try to imply anything different is ridiculous...He is one of the all timers.

[janitor]

[quote=janitor]
What is greb's resume at middleweight, this is what i always wanted to know. It seems like all his top wins were at 175, heavyweight or catch weight fights.

You are right.

It is at light heavyweight that his record really shines. In all he defeated 7 lineal light heavyweight champions.

At heavyweight he beat most of Jack Dempseys title challengers.

He was a middleweight but he had to suffer to make the weight.

His middleweight record is not bad either.

[brownpimp88]

[quote=brownpimp88]

You are right.

It is at light heavyweight that his record really shines. In all he defeated 7 lineal light heavyweight champions.

At heavyweight he beat most of Jack Dempseys title challengers.

He was a middleweight but he had to suffer to make the weight.

His middleweight record is not bad either.
so at middleweight alone, its not unreasonable to rank monzon and hagler above fitszimmons and greb. I mean they did do more at 160, right?

[OLD FOGEY]

[quote=brownpimp88]

You are right.

It is at light heavyweight that his record really shines. In all he defeated 7 lineal light heavyweight champions.

At heavyweight he beat most of Jack Dempseys title challengers.

He was a middleweight but he had to suffer to make the weight.

I remember Ted Carroll pointing out that both Greb and Walker did better than any other middleweights against bigger men, but that both stumbled some against men their own size or smaller. Could be weight making, or perhaps speed gave them problems.

[OLD FOGEY]

Nice Greb discussion, but Henry Armstrong might be the proper answer to this question.
Armstrong fought--Baby Arizmendi, Midget Wolgast, Juan Zurita, Mike Belloise, Frankie Klick, Benny Bass, Petey Sarron, Chalky Wright, Barney Ross, Lou Ambers, Ceferino Garcia, Lew Jenkins, Fritzie Zivic, Leo Rodak, Tippy Larkin, Sammy Angott, Beau Jack, Sugar Ray Robinson, and Slugger White.

That is 19 title claimants.

[janitor]

[quote=janitor]
so at middleweight alone, its not unreasonable to rank monzon and hagler above fitszimmons and greb. I mean they did do more at 160, right?

Wrong.

If you ask me who the best middleweight is, I will name the best fighter whose optimum weight was under 160 lbs.

I will not reward men who stay at 160 and periodically fight welterweights in my rankings.

If you want to be my No1 then get ready to take on the big boys.

[brownpimp88]

[quote=brownpimp88]

Wrong.

If you ask me who the best middleweight is, I will name the best fighter whose optimum weight was under 160 lbs.

I will not reward men who stay at 160 and periodically fight welterweights in my rankings.

If you want to be my No1 then get ready to take on the big boys.
antuofermo, minter, hamsho, briscoe, sibson, monroe, watts, mugabi, roldan, finnegan, eugene hart, seales, are not real middleweight?

[Woddy]

Nice Greb discussion, but Henry Armstrong might be the proper answer to this question.
Armstrong fought--Baby Arizmendi, Midget Wolgast, Juan Zurita, Mike Belloise, Frankie Klick, Benny Bass, Petey Sarron, Chalky Wright, Barney Ross, Lou Ambers, Ceferino Garcia, Lew Jenkins, Fritzie Zivic, Leo Rodak, Tippy Larkin, Sammy Angott, Beau Jack, Sugar Ray Robinson, and Slugger White.

That is 19 title claimants.

Holy cow!!!

That is a lot of champions, although I'm not familiar enough with his era to know who those guys were. Very impressive though.

[Mantequilla]

[quote=brownpimp88]

Wrong.

If you ask me who the best middleweight is, I will name the best fighter whose optimum weight was under 160 lbs.

I will not reward men who stay at 160 and periodically fight welterweights in my rankings.

If you want to be my No1 then get ready to take on the big boys.


You shouldn't detract from fighters for staying at 160 either though.

Not saying you personally do, but just as a general rule.

[heerko koois]

Archie moore......

[Bummy Davis]

Harry Greb, Henry Armstrong,Archie Moore, in modern times Duran, he fought Marcel,Dejesus,Buchanan,Leonard,Palomino,Cuevas,Moore,Benitez,Hearns,Hagler,Barkley,Pazienza,Hiroshi Kobayashi,Guts Ishimatsu,Jorge Fernando Castro,Hector Camacho,William Joppy....I think thats 17 but not all wins