Why is there no fight footage of Harry Greb?

[QueensburyRules]

At least with Jack Johnson we know for a fact that he could beat Langford, McVea, and Jeannete.

We don't have to resort to "he would have probably beat them if they had fought" fantasy victories.

- -Mcvey a JJ best fighter friend along with gunboat smith, but we know that welter Langford gave him all JJ could handle in their sole fight. Novice Jeannette did beat him.

The Sporting Club of England financed hi Burns excursion to Oz with the proviso he return to England to fight the now heavywt terror Langford.

JJ broke that contract and later stripped by the French for fighting baitfish. Langford and Jeannette fought for that title won by Langford who carried Jeannette in the the last half of the fight.

Dempsey is alleged to have KOed JJ in a gambling private fight of gold miners in Saskatoon.

[travestyny]

These dudes are pathetic. The truth gets revealed, and they can't handle it. Keep telling the same lies that they know have been disproven

A lame attempt to try to "retaliate" by telling lies on Jack Johnson. Shame shame shame!!!!

How did Jack Johnson draw the color line by fighting a black man after he became champion and having fights with Jeannette taken away from him by the NY commision, and fights with McVey and Langford taken away from him over the Mann Act bullshlt


Pathetic Pathetic Pathetic.

[ShoulderRoll]

- -Mcvey a JJ best fighter friend along with gunboat smith, but we know that welter Langford gave him all JJ could handle in their sole fight. Novice Jeannette did beat him.

The Sporting Club of England financed hi Burns excursion to Oz with the proviso he return to England to fight the now heavywt terror Langford.

JJ broke that contract and later stripped by the French for fighting baitfish. Langford and Jeannette fought for that title won by Langford who carried Jeannette in the the last half of the fight.

Dempsey is alleged to have KOed JJ in a gambling private fight of gold miners in Saskatoon.

Yeah, with Jack Dempsey we have a lot of "allegeds" and "I'm pretty sure he could have beat him if they fought."

Jack Johnson has real wins in the record books over Langford, Jeannete, and McVea.

There's no equivalency between the two.

[QueensburyRules]

Yeah, with Jack Dempsey we have a lot of "allegeds" and "I'm pretty sure he could have beat him if they fought."

Jack Johnson has real wins in the record books over Langford, Jeannete, and McVea.

There's no equivalency between the two.

- -We have Willard leaving JJ splotto next to dead on the canvas.

Dempsey KTFO outta Big Jess.

What part of stupid don't you understand?

[travestyny]

- -We have Willard leaving JJ splotto next to dead on the canvas.

Dempsey KTFO outta Big Jess.

What part of stupid don't you understand?

We also have Dempsey running for his dear life from Wills, Jeanette, admitting to being scared shltless of Langford, and even being afraid of an old post prison Jack Johnson.


He didn't like his odds after what the last one did to those ribs

[billeau2]

Yea, absolutely. I think that's completely fair.

With regards to your second issue in particular, I would say that it doesn't really seem like the kind of thing that can be researched to the point of a conclusion. I mean, very few people believed Ruiz was going to beat Joshua. People tend to want to point to Wills' loss to Jack Sharkey in 1926, but how long had he been chasing Dempsey before that? Wills had more fights and much much tougher competition than Dempsey. Besides, Dempsey himself lost the month before. In all honesty, both were likely out of their primes by 1926, much like Mayweather and Pacquiao in 2015. It's true that Dempsey then took out Sharkey the next year (with what looks honestly to me like a low blow. I think Klompton also mentioned this, if I'm not mistaken). But it's not like that was their only common foe (I think Klompton already compared their Firpo encounters). Wills beat Meehan in their only meeting, while Dempsey lost the first, won the next one, drew the next two, then lost the final one, if boxrec is accurate. Harry Wills went 13-2-2 against Sam Langford. Langford was an absolute beast that guys wouldn't go near even when he was damn near blind.

But beyond all that, the point, as you know where i'm going with this is...."That's why they fight the fights. Because you never know who has who's number." Who would have thought Mayorga would have made his name off of Vernon Forest, who made his fame off of Shane Mosley. Know what I'm saying?

Respect, Bill.

The bolded absolutely. and when we talk "primes" it is one of the reasons I do not like to deconstruct a fighter's career fight by fight... First off: the prime of a fighter is short, and it seldom matches up perfectly with another fighter's lol.

the second reason, and historians are really very guilty of this: you have to know what to look for in the tape. Jack Johnson was called "a grinning Ethiopian" by Jack London and Johnson knew who the real embarassed party was... London thought in his arrogent strevedore way that a nice strong corn husker could take care of johnson...I guarantee you that anyone who studied Johnson could have seen the results. Its all there... Johnson does things that you have to look for and understand how they work, otherwise, especially with film at that time... it will look like a lot of chaos.

A more modern example would be Ward: When he beat Dawson everyone talked about Dawson being weak...But great trainers deconstructed what Ward did to be effective and it shows a lot of subtle skills.

With that said, yes of course anyone has an opinion and little else about what would have happened in this fight... for sure.

[QueensburyRules]

- -John L a regular at both Jeffries and JJOHNSON camps picked JJ.

He knew Jeffries attempting the impossible. Jeff made a mistake dropping 100lbs after 6 yrs absence. When Big George came back, he worked down to 235, but instinctively knew he's a big man so needs to be at a big mans natural wt. had Field hanging on for dear life and wrecked permanently.

Field was a prime 29 yrs went 18-10-2 with 8 KOs after George mullered him with the most title losses in hvywt history.

[jack p]

[QUOTE=ShoulderRoll;19879711]You and I get along, billeau2. And I'm a huge fan of Dempsey's book.

But Rusty and Queenie don't have the intellectual firepower to hang with Klompton's 12 years of research. They're arguing out of hero worship not out of having pored through countless newspaper articles from the period.

And let's be frank. With those two race seems to be a huge motivator for what opinions they choose to have. I've seen comments about Ezzard Charles being overrated and not really that good for instance. Which is silly enough on its own...yet the same posters will then up the ante on silly by using him as an example of a top win for Marciano.

Ezzard Charles is an All Time Great.
I think along with Gene Tunney Those two are the greatest Light Heavys of all time. I think Tunney was more perhaps more cerebral but that Charles had greater natural gifts,
Personally i think any one who thinks Charles is over rated. Does not know Boxing as well as they think they do

[ShoulderRoll]

Ezzard Charles is an All Time Great.
I think along with Gene Tunney Those two are the greatest Light Heavys of all time. I think Tunney was more perhaps more cerebral but that Charles had greater natural gifts,
Personally i think any one who thinks Charles is over rated. Does not know Boxing as well as they think they do

I'm in complete agreement.

The guy that made those comments about Charles is really just trolling for attention. And that's what we're dealing with here: trolls vs. a writer who has put in years researching.

I hope they haven't succeeded in running Klompton off the forum because he would have added a lot of value to this section.

[GhostofDempsey]

[QUOTE=jack p;19882557]

You and I get along, billeau2. And I'm a huge fan of Dempsey's book.

But Rusty and Queenie don't have the intellectual firepower to hang with Klompton's 12 years of research. They're arguing out of hero worship not out of having pored through countless newspaper articles from the period.

And let's be frank. With those two race seems to be a huge motivator for what opinions they choose to have. I've seen comments about Ezzard Charles being overrated and not really that good for instance. Which is silly enough on its own...yet the same posters will then up the ante on silly by using him as an example of a top win for Marciano.

Ezzard Charles is an All Time Great.
I think along with Gene Tunney Those two are the greatest Light Heavys of all time. I think Tunney was more perhaps more cerebral but that Charles had greater natural gifts,
Personally i think any one who thinks Charles is over rated. Does not know Boxing as well as they think they do

Ezzard Charles is to me the greatest LHW of all time. He had a technical style that wasn’t exactly fan friendly, but he could do it all. If you haven’t already, get yourself a copy of Ezzard Charles: A Boxing Life. Great read.