Ranking Harry Greb above Sugar Ray Robinson. Can it be justified?

[BigStereotype]

What would film change of his achievements though? Say he's not aesthetically pleasing to watch, would that make anything he did less impressive?

Am I understanding you right? Does actually viewing his accomplishments have anything to do with them? Because I really think they do. Honestly, just looking at somebody's record isn't enough to tell me how good they are. I rate Marquez as slightly better than his record because I give him credit for the second Pacquiao fight. I don't care about aesthetically pleasing, I can recognize quality.

[JAB5239]

Am I understanding you right? Does actually viewing his accomplishments have anything to do with them? Because I really think they do. Honestly, just looking at somebody's record isn't enough to tell me how good they are. I rate Marquez as slightly better than his record because I give him credit for the second Pacquiao fight. I don't care about aesthetically pleasing, I can recognize quality.

What does viewing them have to do with them actually happening?
You can read multiple accounts of plenty of his fights, all with pretty equal descriptions. Was everyone lying to make Greb appear great nearly 100 years later?

[JAB5239]

Personally I don't compare fighters prior to the Long Count to those after. I consider it a different variant of the sport, no neutral corner rule was a vital part of the success of many fighters of the era like Dempsey.

Only two things I can really say here. 1, Greb wasn't known as a huge puncher so I don't think this would apply as much as to say Dempsey. And 2, the rules were the same for him as his opponent.

[Miburo]

Only two things I can really say here. 1, Greb wasn't known as a huge puncher so I don't think this would apply as much as to say Dempsey. And 2, the rules were the same for him as his opponent.

I never made a specific reference to Greb, I spoke only of a general policy. The rules would be the same for two baseball players if only home runs counted too, that doesn't mean the advantage wouldn't shift one way or the other for most of the athletes involved. It's a very significant adjustment both ways, and even more so the farther back one goes. Put a modern champ in a 50 round fight with no clinch breaks and see how he would do. Put Jack Johnson in a 10 round fight and most of his game against top opposition goes out the window. The difference between 20s era fighting and now is mostly in the neutral corner rule, but it's still akin to stud vs. stud eight - they're different variations of the sport.

The point of this was initially supposed to be comparing records though, not fighters. I don't have much of an issue rating several people over Robinson at MW, as I stated. BS does make a point that all of Greb's accomplishments can only be evaluated on paper, there's nothing else to go on, so the entire issue is nebulous by nature.

[BigStereotype]

What does viewing them have to do with them actually happening?
You can read multiple accounts of plenty of his fights, all with pretty equal descriptions. Was everyone lying to make Greb appear great nearly 100 years later?

I want to see how the fight actually played out. You know how we all love to talk about overrated and underrated fighters, I'd like to come to my own conclusions about him. The resume is important, but I feel the eyeball test is equally important. We just have differing philosophies. I'm not disparaging Greb, I just don't rate him.

[Wild Blue Yonda]

Absolutely, it can be justified. No question.

[katsidis]

Ranking anyone above Ray Robinson cannot be justified IMO

[Barn]

Ranking anyone above Ray Robinson cannot be justified IMO

The more you study Langford and Greb the more it seems plausible all three have an arguement for GOAT.

[JAB5239]

Absolutely, it can be justified. No question.

I think so to. You don't have to see a fighter, nor does he have to look good on film in order to be great. Winning is the bottom line and if you continually beat great fighters it only stands to reason you were a great fighter. I respect everyones opinion here, but where he ranks I see as being debatable. Whether he ranks is not debatable at all.

[JAB5239]

The more you study Langford and Greb the more it seems plausible all three have an arguement for GOAT.

Agreed. At the moment I rank Langford above Robinson. No fighters status is set in stone.