Can You Judge Greatness w/o Video Evidence?

[Heru]

There's only so much I can take from word of mouth and hearsay. Resume is the most important part to judging ATG status, but watching the skills for oneself and comparing them to opponents and rivals of the time is also important.

Greb, Leonard, Jeanette, McVea, Jeffries, and numerous other greats get the benefit of the doubt from some and get penalized by others.

What do you think?

[JAB5239]

There's only so much I can take from word of mouth and hearsay. Resume is the most important part to judging ATG status, but watching the skills for oneself and comparing them to opponents and rivals of the time is also important.

Greb, Leonard, Jeanette, McVea, Jeffries, and numerous other greats get the benefit of the doubt from some and get penalized by others.

What do you think?

If we cannot take the word of those who actually saw them fight, why should we take the word of anything thats actually happened in history?

[Heru]

If we cannot take the word of those who actually saw them fight, why should we take the word of anything thats actually happened in history?

Exactly, if you take everything you read on history at face value without taking into account possible embellishments and conjecture than you might be gullible.

History is written by the winners.

Getting off that topic, do you believe everything you read from single accounts?

Have you been on NSB after a close fight?

[Heru]

When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.

[JAB5239]

Exactly, if you take everything you read on history at face value without taking into account possible embellishments and conjecture than you might be gullible.

History is written by the winners.

Getting off that topic, do you believe everything you read from single accounts?

Have you been on NSB after a close fight?

Q, NSB is full of idiots who can't even tie their own shoe's yet. Some very good posters there, but mostly idiots.

To answer your question, no I don't believe everything I read from a single account. I try to read multiple accounts and opinions of the time. True boxing historians dig even deeper than that. I have no reason not to believe these accounts anymore than I do to not believe in the battle of Gettysburg.

[Stoppage]

I judge a fighter mostly by his accomplishments. Like who he's won/lost against, what significant things he's done in his career and so on.

Video footage is important when comparing fighters in a fantasy fight or comparing their skills to one another.

[Heru]

Q, NSB is full of idiots who can't even tie their own shoe's yet. Some very good posters there, but mostly idiots.

To answer your question, no I don't believe everything I read from a single account. I try to read multiple accounts and opinions of the time. True boxing historians dig even deeper than that. I have no reason not to believe these accounts anymore than I do to not believe in the battle of Gettysburg.

Fair enough. They will still suffer from the lack of video evidence, especially as the years go on. Just to elaborate my point:

Do you think Willie Pep would have the top 5 ranking he has without the video evidence that exists? He has a great resume, but without newer historians being able to see how graceful and smooth he is, definitely helps.

[JAB5239]

Fair enough. They will still suffer from the lack of video evidence, especially as the years go on. Just to elaborate my point:

Do you think Willie Pep would have the top 5 ranking he has without the video evidence that exists? He has a great resume, but without newer historians being able to see how graceful and smooth he is, definitely helps.

I agree video evidence helps immensely if you know what you're looking at. I see a lot of people on here judging fighters from the 20's and earlier based on crappy footage shot from a distance and on flicker film.

As far as the Pep question goes.....newr historians are seeing on film what older historians printed. If they weren't lying about Pep, why would they be lying or exaggerating about fighters who are on on film?

[Heru]

I agree video evidence helps immensely if you know what you're looking at. I see a lot of people on here judging fighters from the 20's and earlier based on crappy footage shot from a distance and on flicker film.

As far as the Pep question goes.....newr historians are seeing on film what older historians printed. If they weren't lying about Pep, why would they be lying or exaggerating about fighters who are on on film?

I don't have any stories I can make an example with right now, but when I come across one, I will post it. Some accounts just have to be questioned when there's no visual evidence.

[JAB5239]

I don't have any stories I can make an example with right now, but when I come across one, I will post it. Some accounts just have to be questioned when there's no visual evidence.

As I said my friend, that is why I try and read more than one account.