Why does Turpin get rated so highly?
Sure he beat Ray Robinson, once. But contrary to popular opinion, Ray Robinson was not the best middleweight ever.
Ray Robinson is one of my favourite boxers of all time, and deserves to be rated as the best boxer p4p ever. But he was better at welterweight and lost too often at middleweight.
So why does Randolph Turpin always get rated so highly when somebody like Lloyd Honeyghan who also beat impossible odds, and away from home I might add, gets rated so often behind him?
How good was Randolph Turpin really?
Randy Turpin was a good boxer, a very good boxer, you just need to see his victory over light-heavyweight Champion at the time Don Cockell to be sure of that.
Turpin also fought Olsen who was very highly regarded...
However, (and there is always a however) he wasn't as good as his predecessors, though it might be still save to regard him as an all-time great he WAS NOT Britain's Greatest middleweight,
that Honour goes to Jock McAvoy and even Jock had his Howevers!!!
There are a few Boys who take 1rst. place over Randolph Turpin and I think many boxing people would well agree! (???)
Turpin also fought Olsen who was very highly regarded...
However, (and there is always a however) he wasn't as good as his predecessors, though it might be still save to regard him as an all-time great he WAS NOT Britain's Greatest middleweight,
that Honour goes to Jock McAvoy and even Jock had his Howevers!!!
There are a few Boys who take 1rst. place over Randolph Turpin and I think many boxing people would well agree! (???)
Re: How good was Randolph Turpin really?
Good question, It's something I've often thought about myself. His win against Robinson was indead a great victory.. But I agree with you that Robinson was a far better Welterweight than Middleweight. Also Robinson was coming to the end of his Euro tour when he fought Turpin and may well have been a bit drained.tonyevs wrote:Why does Turpin get rated so highly?
Sure he beat Ray Robinson, once. But contrary to popular opinion, Ray Robinson was not the best middleweight ever.
Ray Robinson is one of my favourite boxers of all time, and deserves to be rated as the best boxer p4p ever. But he was better at welterweight and lost too often at middleweight.
So why does Randolph Turpin always get rated so highly when somebody like Lloyd Honeyghan who also beat impossible odds, and away from home I might add, gets rated so often behind him?
In a top ten British Boxers list I would put Turpin near the bottom. He was a very good fighter but well short of great.
I think Randolph definately ranks along with Britains greatest fighters and would rank him alongside Mcavoy as our best Middleweight.... a fight between the two of them would have been just amazing. At his best Turpin was a great boxer with a deadly punch... it's often said that he caught Robinson on a bad night when they fought in London but the truth is he was having the better of the rematch in America and had Ray badly cut... only to get stopped by a desperate Robinson attack.
Robinson wasn't interested in a 3rd match.
The trouble with Turpin is many look at his later career and judge him on that but he started going down hill after the Robinson defeat.... lost his desire perhaps, ....when he fought BOBO Olsen for the vacant title he hadn't trained properly and took a hammering for 15 rounds. After this fight Randy seemed to become 'chinny'.... and was really finished as a world class fighter.... but he should be judged on his form at and around the time of the Robinson fights when he proved himself one of our best ever fighters.....
Robinson wasn't interested in a 3rd match.
The trouble with Turpin is many look at his later career and judge him on that but he started going down hill after the Robinson defeat.... lost his desire perhaps, ....when he fought BOBO Olsen for the vacant title he hadn't trained properly and took a hammering for 15 rounds. After this fight Randy seemed to become 'chinny'.... and was really finished as a world class fighter.... but he should be judged on his form at and around the time of the Robinson fights when he proved himself one of our best ever fighters.....
Randolph Turpin was indeed a fantastic puncher as his KO percentage indicates, and what I have read about him he was also fantastically fit.
Though I still cannot understand why he gets rated so highly, Ray Robinson I have mentioned before, and just because he beat Don Cockell still does not convince me of anything, I do not rate Cockell as much better than average, certainly no where near say John Conteh or even Chris Finnegan at light heavy, Cockell`s best win would have to have been over LaStarza who had just been badly battered by the Rock in his previous fight, and Cockell had been knocked out much sooner himself the previous year before he fought Turpin.
No Turpin rates well behind the likes of Benn, Eubank, Watson, Graham, Collins and even Eastman in the list of British middleweights.
Though I still cannot understand why he gets rated so highly, Ray Robinson I have mentioned before, and just because he beat Don Cockell still does not convince me of anything, I do not rate Cockell as much better than average, certainly no where near say John Conteh or even Chris Finnegan at light heavy, Cockell`s best win would have to have been over LaStarza who had just been badly battered by the Rock in his previous fight, and Cockell had been knocked out much sooner himself the previous year before he fought Turpin.
No Turpin rates well behind the likes of Benn, Eubank, Watson, Graham, Collins and even Eastman in the list of British middleweights.
-
TheRiverCityHippy
- Middleweight
- Posts: 8466
- Joined: 08 Mar 2014, 15:39
ray robinson was on a 91 fight winning streak when turpin beat him, and as someone has already mentioned was having the better of the second fight until s.ray`s all or nothing assault suceeded.
in robinsons autobiography he seems more impressed with turpins strength and physique than anyone else he faced, including maxim.
some might say robinson was better at welter and that is undoubtably true, but he still had enough to stop jake lamotta in 13 only five months before the turpin fight. and a year after ko`d rocky graziano in 3.
hardly the form of a shot fighter.
maybe turpin isn`t the best fighter that ever lived, but he probably beat him, and deserves credit for that.
in robinsons autobiography he seems more impressed with turpins strength and physique than anyone else he faced, including maxim.
some might say robinson was better at welter and that is undoubtably true, but he still had enough to stop jake lamotta in 13 only five months before the turpin fight. and a year after ko`d rocky graziano in 3.
hardly the form of a shot fighter.
maybe turpin isn`t the best fighter that ever lived, but he probably beat him, and deserves credit for that.
Robinson considered Turpin the most dangerous fighter he'd fought at Middleweight. In their fights you see Turpin pushing Ray around, he was tremendously strong and Ray was not a 'weakling' at Middleweight. But the reason why Turpin was so good was not just his strength and power but also the fact that he was fast and skillfull.... he had a pole-like jab and out jabbed Robinson for much of their two fights. If Randy had been able to keep his form then theres little doubt he'd have beaten Bobo Olsen in their bout and won the title back but sadly he was a mere shadow of the fighter who'd beaten Robinson when he fought Olsen.
Those who rank Eubank, Benn, Watson and Eastman above Turpin are ignoring the facts that in the 50s the competition was much stronger and Turpin could do things in the ring that most fighters just dream about.
Those who rank Eubank, Benn, Watson and Eastman above Turpin are ignoring the facts that in the 50s the competition was much stronger and Turpin could do things in the ring that most fighters just dream about.