The reality of Greb vs Tunney

[them_apples]

Everything I've ever read, witnesses to Greb and Tunney, old men when I was young; it all lines up with what you've posted here.

I an mostly gathering my info from comptons book. And this is all there really is. The majority info about Greb is largely bull****. Well according to compton. And he does post a lot of supporting evidence. I believe one day Greb will get his just due. He was an incredible fighter

[them_apples]

Come on man. He wasn't that crippled. Hyperbole. He was 300 wars in and Flowers got him at the right time. Beating him twice.

Flowers himself suffered from an eye injury as well, but still took two decisions.

2 major car accidents. Head injuries. Reconstructed nose. Missing eye. A broken arm that healed bent. A broken rib that got rebroken from fighting too soon. And by the sounds of it gave him problems near the end. One car crash flung him face first to the pavement, his nose was torn and he sufferred headaches afterwards

He was certainly damaged goods. Even common sense would tell you that. 300 recorded bouts, maybe 400+ in reality.

[them_apples]

Lets just use common sense too. Tunney is much bigger, we all know what they about a good bigger man beating a good smaller man. Somehow the idea where little guys beat HW greats didn't actually translate into the era's where fights were recorded on video, not just on newspaper clippings.

Don't mind OP. He just got a little over-excited finding out about the Greb legacy of old newspaper hyperbole.

Ya so the farther back you go when the world produced genuine fighters. Size becomes less of an issue because these men were fearless and adapted styles to beat men of different sizes. This happened in the roman colosseum as well. Its only really contemporary boxing that weight became the end all be all. But even look at a man like Armstrong for example he had a style that was hard to deal with for anyone.

if you look up the best fighters from the colleseum - weight has absolutely nothing to do with it. The smaller men were quicker - the larger men stronger - but this wasn’t even always the case. Everyone is built differently. Whats funny though - is the largest of men were almost never considered the best fighters. There is a threshold. A big milkbag like Fury is a big target thats it.

if you look at Langford, another middleweight. Its his build - temperament and style that allowed him to beat so many men of different sizes. I don’t know why common sense doesn't explain this for you. ANYONE can be a heavyweight if they eat enough.

lastly we saw little pacman dismantle larger men in the last era. He did it with speed and heart. He wasn’t scared and he knew how to get the job done.

these weak smartphone fighters have not experienced anything that would produce a fighter like a prime pacquiao so its only natural they wilt to a man of larger size.

[Bronson66]

Yeah he actually was thinking about his death in the book by compton. He had loads of injuries. Its nit bull**** at all. Ill dig out the book if I have to.

Everyone thinks about death from time to time.
That is totally different to your statement,"he knew he was going to die soon anyways."
You have a history of getting carried away and ,exaggerating, gilding the lily,using hyperbole,and you have done it here.


Name a fight he went into withTunney in which he had "busted ribs, arms ,and head trauma"?

Harry Greb is Steve Compton's GOD.

[Bronson66]

Ya so the farther back you go when the world produced genuine fighters. Size becomes less of an issue because these men were fearless and adapted styles to beat men of different sizes. This happened in the roman colosseum as well. Its only really contemporary boxing that weight became the end all be all. But even look at a man like Armstrong for example he had a style that was hard to deal with for anyone.

if you look up the best fighters from the colleseum - weight has absolutely nothing to do with it. The smaller men were quicker - the larger men stronger - but this wasnât even always the case. Everyone is built differently. Whats funny though - is the largest of men were almost never considered the best fighters. There is a threshold. A big milkbag like Fury is a big target thats it.

if you look at Langford, another middleweight. Its his build - temperament and style that allowed him to beat so many men of different sizes. I donât know why common sense doesn't explain this for you. ANYONE can be a heavyweight if they eat enough.

lastly we saw little pacman dismantle larger men in the last era. He did it with speed and heart. He wasnât scared and he knew how to get the job done.

these weak smartphone fighters have not experienced anything that would produce a fighter like a prime pacquiao so its only natural they wilt to a man of larger size.

;
To dismiss Tunney's weight advantages over Greb

12lbs
8 1/2lbs
3/2lbs
9 1/2lbs
13 1/2lbs
Is silly.
"Only in contemporary boxing that weight became the be all and end all"
Johnson v Ketchel,Jeffries v Fitzsimmons,Wilde v Herman,Loughran v Carnera,Schmeling v Walker,Jeffries v Sharkey,Johnson v Burns,


Langford was a sawn off heavyweight with huge shoulders and arms, and a 44 in chest he was no middleweight in build!

[BKM-]

Ya so the farther back you go when the world produced genuine fighters. Size becomes less of an issue because these men were fearless and adapted styles to beat men of different sizes. This happened in the roman colosseum as well. Its only really contemporary boxing that weight became the end all be all. But even look at a man like Armstrong for example he had a style that was hard to deal with for anyone.

if you look up the best fighters from the colleseum - weight has absolutely nothing to do with it. The smaller men were quicker - the larger men stronger - but this wasnât even always the case. Everyone is built differently. Whats funny though - is the largest of men were almost never considered the best fighters. There is a threshold. A big milkbag like Fury is a big target thats it.

if you look at Langford, another middleweight. Its his build - temperament and style that allowed him to beat so many men of different sizes. I donât know why common sense doesn't explain this for you. ANYONE can be a heavyweight if they eat enough.

lastly we saw little pacman dismantle larger men in the last era. He did it with speed and heart. He wasnât scared and he knew how to get the job done.

these weak smartphone fighters have not experienced anything that would produce a fighter like a prime pacquiao so its only natural they wilt to a man of larger size.

Size becomes less of an issue the higher you go up in weight, yes, this has been covered often here. But we're not talking CW's/HW's now, we're talking about a MW here. At the lower weights it matters, a lot. You got your Pacquiao vs De La Hoya and Margarito examples but do you really want me to educate you on those circumstances?

I repeat, this folklore of MW's going up and smashing HW's is not on tape for a reason. Because it was still in the newspaper clippings era with no physical evidence, that is why those stories are able to thrive there.

If you want to indulge yourself in the newspaper clippings era that is fine, there are still some boxing fans who do. I personally do not make conclusions about things my own eyes cannot judge.

I get it I get it, this is your issue playing up as usual. You being a below average sized male who has to idolize the smaller fighters to feel better about himself.

[BKM-]

Everyone thinks about death from time to time.
That is totally different to your statement,"he knew he was going to die soon anyways."
You have a history of getting carried away and ,exaggerating, gilding the lily,using hyperbole,and you have done it here.

Accurate statement about the little guy.

I agree with you about Sam Langford's built btw. His fists, arms, joints, skull etc. would indicate a rugged man of above average size, he just had a very short torso which kept him short and lighter.
sam-langford-1912.jpg

But no even he would not be competitive against ATG HW's despite the stories about him.

[QueensburyRules]

- - No footage exists, but newspaper type is prolific.

Stick to what exists.

[billeau2]

Ya so the farther back you go when the world produced genuine fighters. Size becomes less of an issue because these men were fearless and adapted styles to beat men of different sizes. This happened in the roman colosseum as well. Its only really contemporary boxing that weight became the end all be all. But even look at a man like Armstrong for example he had a style that was hard to deal with for anyone.

if you look up the best fighters from the colleseum - weight has absolutely nothing to do with it. The smaller men were quicker - the larger men stronger - but this wasnât even always the case. Everyone is built differently. Whats funny though - is the largest of men were almost never considered the best fighters. There is a threshold. A big milkbag like Fury is a big target thats it.

if you look at Langford, another middleweight. Its his build - temperament and style that allowed him to beat so many men of different sizes. I donât know why common sense doesn't explain this for you. ANYONE can be a heavyweight if they eat enough.

lastly we saw little pacman dismantle larger men in the last era. He did it with speed and heart. He wasnât scared and he knew how to get the job done.

these weak smartphone fighters have not experienced anything that would produce a fighter like a prime pacquiao so its only natural they wilt to a man of larger size.

It also had to do with the style. Punching hard became more of a normative approach post Dempsey. Fighters could wether many things in the ring, but breaking a hand was not one of them. One learned how to punch accurately, with no rotation on the strike. This took a major advantage away regarding size.

[Willie Pep 229]

Size becomes less of an issue the higher you go up in weight, yes, this has been covered often here. But we're not talking CW's/HW's now, we're talking about a MW here. At the lower weights it matters, a lot. You got your Pacquiao vs De La Hoya and Margarito examples but do you really want me to educate you on those circumstances?

I repeat, this folklore of MW's going up and smashing HW's is not on tape for a reason. Because it was still in the newspaper clippings era with no physical evidence, that is why those stories are able to thrive there.

If you want to indulge yourself in the newspaper clippings era that is fine, there are still some boxing fans who do. I personally do not make conclusions about things my own eyes cannot judge.

I get it I get it, this is your issue playing up as usual. You being a below average sized male who has to idolize the smaller fighters to feel better about himself.

Petty!