This guy is supposed to be the P4P #1 all time boxer?

[HandsofIron]

He doesn't look anything special to me.

1925 newsreel footage of all-time great middleweight Harry Greb training #boxing #history pic.twitter.com/vLEZeHKTHe

— Boxing History (@BoxingHistory) August 25, 2016

The pre-WW2 boxers are vastly overrated but today's so called "experts" and "historians" love to romanticize these guys and the casuals eat it up. The old timers were ok for their time but boxing has since changed and improved drastically throughout the ages.

The way I see it, if one weren't there to witness these guys fight live, then it's silly to even try to rank these guys or their greatness.

[HandsofIron]

I laugh when I see these young ass dudes whose never seen Harry Greb fight listing him as the greatest whatever..

If you didnt live through his time as a boxing fan, you cant really analyze him. How the *** can anybody break him down when they never saw him fight live? Hearing folk tales from grandfathers dont count, that sht is laughable.

Ive been crazy about Boxing since the late 80s yet i dont know enough about Harry Greb to rate him. I dont care what the old timers claim.

From the wack ass black and white footages ive seen of him lmfao, he would get the dog sht beaten out of him by any modern contenders.

Hell, Julian Williams and Chavez Jr would beat the crap outa him.

That's exactly what I was trying to say. Thank you, good post.

[Thuglife Nelo]

You lot have no respect for the early road warriors. Different era, different heart and intestinal fortitude.

Greb’s shadow boxing is raw, true grit. Most shadow boxing today is more fitness-world than actual in-ring emulation. If you wanted more finesse shadow boxing then you could see Tunney as well.

Greb is ATG swarmer. These guys were fighting on diesel fuel back in the day. The distance fights and brawls I don’t think guys of these days could last that long. Greb would be like Maidana vs Floyd 1. The Tunney series alone proves Greb was a natural born brawler perfect for boxing

[Marchegiano]

Greb is pretty overrated. As are Tunney and Dempsey. It's a bit of a circle jerk that goes on. Greb must be good because he went toe-to-toe with Tunney and Tunney must be good because he beat Jack and Jack must be good because our grandfathers' historians loved to suck them dempsey nuts.

Resume? Jack's is ****.

Tunney's is just alright

Greb's is also middle of the road when compared to other nominees for GOAT.

Don't get me wrong, they fought top guys. Like how Wilder fought top guys. Not the best available, not even the second, but 6 and below sure. You know, outside of one another.

Jack lost to a black fighter that never even was a colored champion

Greb lost to two colored MW champions

Tunney was too racist to have ever fought any black man in his career.

Their best wins also either lost to the colored champions of the era, or, never fought any. With the exception of like two names.

Did a lot of ducking, fought like no one, and was praised for it and the praise continues to this day. The only real metric where these guys actually shine is found in historian rating. Y'all dig into their resumes yourself, you'll see, they're a bit **** and well **** compared to what they could have been.

People to this day praise the million dollar gate and how Dempsey, who avoided top contenders, brought Georges over who loast to the men Jack was avoiding as if it was more than a hyped ass hypejob. If Wilder had three or four losses and Joshua had one two top five contenders then they fought would we act like the goat just fought the closest second to him or like just a pretty basic, middle of the road, title defense happened?

Basically, **** that trio. They top my lists for the best of the worst and that's about as far as I'd go with any of them

[Marchegiano]

The pre-WW2 boxers are vastly overrated but today's so called "experts" and "historians" love to romanticize these guys and the casuals eat it up. The old timers were ok for their time but boxing has since changed and improved drastically throughout the ages.

The way I see it, if one weren't there to witness these guys fight live, then it's silly to even try to rank these guys or their greatness.

You need movie adaptations of a book to judge the book?

[boliodogs]

Many of those very old timers were badly overrated because the guys rating them were as old as they are. When you see actual film of them it is plain to see they were not very good compared to the best more recent boxers. Boxers made very little money back then so the was not much reason for a athletic young man to become a pro boxer.

[_Rexy_]

In 100 years time some kid on futureinternet will be looking at a gif of Fury uppercutting himself "lulz no way this guy was good"

LMFAO excellent point.

[Coreytrevor12]

The guy beat 15 Hall of Famers, went 50-0 in one year and regularly beat guys 30 pounds heavier than him, including giving Tunney his only loss in 80+ fights. He was 5'8 with a 71 inch reach and weighed less than 160 and he beat up Heavyweight Champions. That's basically like Crawford going in and beating up on Usyk or Briedis.

[removed]

In 100 years time some kid on futureinternet will be looking at a gif of Fury uppercutting himself "lulz no way this guy was good"

Yeah fair point lol.

[removed]

The guy beat 15 Hall of Famers, went 50-0 in one year and regularly beat guys 30 pounds heavier than him, including giving Tunney his only loss in 80+ fights. He was 5'8 with a 71 inch reach and weighed less than 160 and he beat up Heavyweight Champions. That's basically like Crawford going in and beating up on Usyk or Briedis.

I respect his credentials, and don't get me wrong, he must have been good in his day.

That shadow boxing is s*** tho, I don't care what anyone says.