elmersalsa wrote:Another reason why I vote Armstrong over Robinson. Armstrong fought almost everybody from featherweight to welterweight. Maybe 2 or 3 guys he missed from facing them like the greats Tony Canzoneri, Freddie Miller and Jimmy McLarnin, but overall, he fought almost everyone.
Robinson? Well, now how come nobody says that he did not fight these guys: Tony Zale, Cocoa Kid, Holman Williams, Charley Burley, Eddie Booker, Ezzard Charles at middleweight, and Archie Moore? At least the great Jake LaMotta fought Holman Williams.
How could he be voted by The Ring Magazine as best fighter of the 1940s, if he did not beat these guys?
That is why to me, the great Willie Pep was the best fighter pound per pound of that era. He fought everybody at featherweight. And dominated the division.
Beating guys like LaMotta, Gene Fullmer, Carl 'Bobo' Olson, Henry Armstrong :P , Randy Turpin, Rocky Graziano and Kid Gavilan was enough.
He fought the MAJORITY of those guys in the 1950s...Only Armstrong, LaMotta and Gavilan he fought them in the 1940s...What happened the fights with Charley Burley or Holman Williams and Cocoa Kid? what about Tony Zale and Ezzard Charles?
Armstrong was past his best in the 1940s.
So from above, he only fought Gavilan and LaMotta...Pep in the 1940s fought the greats Manuel Ortiz and Sandy Saddler. He fought Chalky Wright, Sammy Angott, Ted "Red Top" Davis, Willie Joyce, Sal Bartolo, and Joey Archibald. He fought THE CREAM OF THE CROP of the featherweight division of the 1940s. Robinson? He did not fight in the 1940s THE VERY BEST.
The fact you bring up Ezzard Charles and Tony Zale proves you have no idea what you're talking about . . .their paths never crossed, and just b/c Robinson fought Lamotta as a welter doesn't suddenly mean he should've been fighting all the best middles of the 1940s before he grew into the division.
As for Holman Williams and Cocoa Kid, they were already well on the slide by the time Ray became champ, and Gavilan was better than both of them anyway.
'Frilla wrote:
Beating guys like LaMotta, Gene Fullmer, Carl 'Bobo' Olson, Henry Armstrong :P , Randy Turpin, Rocky Graziano and Kid Gavilan was enough.
He fought the MAJORITY of those guys in the 1950s...Only Armstrong, LaMotta and Gavilan he fought them in the 1940s...What happened the fights with Charley Burley or Holman Williams and Cocoa Kid? what about Tony Zale and Ezzard Charles?
Armstrong was past his best in the 1940s.
So from above, he only fought Gavilan and LaMotta...Pep in the 1940s fought the greats Manuel Ortiz and Sandy Saddler. He fought Chalky Wright, Sammy Angott, Ted "Red Top" Davis, Willie Joyce, Sal Bartolo, and Joey Archibald. He fought THE CREAM OF THE CROP of the featherweight division of the 1940s. Robinson? He did not fight in the 1940s THE VERY BEST.
The fact you bring up Ezzard Charles and Tony Zale proves you have no idea what you're talking about . . .their paths never crossed, and just b/c Robinson fought Lamotta as a welter doesn't suddenly mean he should've been fighting all the best middles of the 1940s before he grew into the division.
As for Holman Williams and Cocoa Kid, they were already well on the slide by the time Ray became champ, and Gavilan was better than both of them anyway.
'Frilla wrote:
Beating guys like LaMotta, Gene Fullmer, Carl 'Bobo' Olson, Henry Armstrong :P , Randy Turpin, Rocky Graziano and Kid Gavilan was enough.
He fought the MAJORITY of those guys in the 1950s...Only Armstrong, LaMotta and Gavilan he fought them in the 1940s...What happened the fights with Charley Burley or Holman Williams and Cocoa Kid? what about Tony Zale and Ezzard Charles?
Armstrong was past his best in the 1940s.
So from above, he only fought Gavilan and LaMotta...Pep in the 1940s fought the greats Manuel Ortiz and Sandy Saddler. He fought Chalky Wright, Sammy Angott, Ted "Red Top" Davis, Willie Joyce, Sal Bartolo, and Joey Archibald. He fought THE CREAM OF THE CROP of the featherweight division of the 1940s. Robinson? He did not fight in the 1940s THE VERY BEST.
The fact you bring up Ezzard Charles and Tony Zale proves you have no idea what you're talking about . . .their paths never crossed, and just b/c Robinson fought Lamotta as a welter doesn't suddenly mean he should've been fighting all the best middles of the 1940s before he grew into the division.
As for Holman Williams and Cocoa Kid, they were already well on the slide by the time Ray became champ, and Gavilan was better than both of them anyway.
Lying to yourself does not make the truth. Holman Williams, Cocoa Kid, Charley Burley were at the same time as Robinson. I could see why Robinson did not fight them. They were black, good and avoided by the supposedly best contenders of the welterweight division. It's funny how the great Jake LaMotta talks about "I fought Robinson so many times because there were no availbable fighters to fight"...That was TOTAL GARBAGE...Burley was there. Williams was there.... So was Kid and many other black fighters that could have fought Robinson and LaMotta. At least LaMotta tackle some of them. Robinson? I question his quality of opposition in the 1940s. It look like he protected his undefeated streak from 1943 to 1951 of 90something fights figthing guys he knew he could beat. At least the great Willie Pep, FOUGHT EVERYBODY IN HIS WEIGHT CLASS in the 1940s and some very good lightweights, too.
So you are telling me that Robinson fought better fighters than Pep in the 1940s?
the Ring Magazine vote wrong on Robinson as the best fighter of two decades. I disagree with that. Pep should be the best of the 1940s. He clearly deserved it.
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Just stop it Elmer, it was funny for a while. Now this stupid shit is just dull. I refuse to believe that anyone is this stupid, even you.
Everyone has the right to their own opinion. But nobody gave an absolute answer on why Robinson was the best fighter of the decade of the 1940s. Nobody gave an absolute answer in why Robinson is the most complete fighter ever, which to me, IS A BUNCH A CRAP. NOBODY, ABSOLUTELY NOBODY IN THIS FORUM, has given the reason to say in why Robinson is the greatest pound per pound fighter ever when the great Henry Armstrong in one year alone eclipsed everything any other fighter did, including Robinson.
Pep and Armstrong fought the very best in their respective decades....Robinson in the 1940s? Lots to be desired.
When discussing Armstrong, Robinson, and Greb, is have to choose Robinson. Yes, he didn’t fight heavier men like Greb did, but he was undisputedly seen as better than Greb was, being dubbed the best “pound for pound” by most knowledgeable historians. Robinson in his peak at Welterweight was the most complete and unbeatable fighter ever seen, outclassing every one of his opponents in every way. Overall, Robinson, regardless of record, is the most perfect fighter to enter the ring.
I don’t think there’s a best ever. Armstrong has the best achievements, Robinson looks the best (of the GOAT candidates) on film and received the best press and reviews whereas Greb has the best resume of opposition faced. At least that’s to me. Robinson was thrown in deep out the gates and amasssed some incredible numbers in addition to beating a slew of great opponents whilst having incredible longevity. Armstrong’s championship years have to be considered the best ever. His 1937-1939 is really just incredible.
One vote for SRR. Both were great of course, but a prime Sugar Ray was too fast and a little too big for Armstrong. To the latter's credit, it is interesting to look back and see how many welterweight title fights he won when he was at or under the lightweight limit.
elmersalsa wrote:
He fought the MAJORITY of those guys in the 1950s...Only Armstrong, LaMotta and Gavilan he fought them in the 1940s...What happened the fights with Charley Burley or Holman Williams and Cocoa Kid? what about Tony Zale and Ezzard Charles?
Armstrong was past his best in the 1940s.
So from above, he only fought Gavilan and LaMotta...Pep in the 1940s fought the greats Manuel Ortiz and Sandy Saddler. He fought Chalky Wright, Sammy Angott, Ted "Red Top" Davis, Willie Joyce, Sal Bartolo, and Joey Archibald. He fought THE CREAM OF THE CROP of the featherweight division of the 1940s. Robinson? He did not fight in the 1940s THE VERY BEST.
The fact you bring up Ezzard Charles and Tony Zale proves you have no idea what you're talking about . . .their paths never crossed, and just b/c Robinson fought Lamotta as a welter doesn't suddenly mean he should've been fighting all the best middles of the 1940s before he grew into the division.
As for Holman Williams and Cocoa Kid, they were already well on the slide by the time Ray became champ, and Gavilan was better than both of them anyway.
Lying to yourself does not make the truth. Holman Williams, Cocoa Kid, Charley Burley were at the same time as Robinson. I could see why Robinson did not fight them. They were black, good and avoided by the supposedly best contenders of the welterweight division. It's funny how the great Jake LaMotta talks about "I fought Robinson so many times because there were no availbable fighters to fight"...That was TOTAL GARBAGE...Burley was there. Williams was there.... So was Kid and many other black fighters that could have fought Robinson and LaMotta. At least LaMotta tackle some of them. Robinson? I question his quality of opposition in the 1940s. It look like he protected his undefeated streak from 1943 to 1951 of 90something fights figthing guys he knew he could beat. At least the great Willie Pep, FOUGHT EVERYBODY IN HIS WEIGHT CLASS in the 1940s and some very good lightweights, too.
So you are telling me that Robinson fought better fighters than Pep in the 1940s?
the Ring Magazine vote wrong on Robinson as the best fighter of two decades. I disagree with that. Pep should be the best of the 1940s. He clearly deserved it.
There's some truth in this actually. Robinson fought a lot of guys that were borderline walkovers in the 40s. That long winning streak of his also does not include many of the top black fighters from the time or in fact many of the top contenders, I was looking through the lists of ring rankings throughout the 40s at welter and at middle and SRR didn't fight as many as you'd think. Grab is the greatest anyway. His record knocks SRR's out imo.
Robinson fought much better competition than Pep in the 1940s. Not even close.
Robinson went well out his way to fight elite competition. You can't fight everyone even if you want to. Of course some of the weren't that good, as is the case with everyone.
However this is a guy that won 45 fights in his career against an opponent that was either in the top 10 or the champion at the time of the fight. There were a lot of depth in his weight classes, during his time, so to be the top 10 (remember only 1 champ) you had to be pretty good.
Robinson has 21 wins over opponents who made the HOF.
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑25 Oct 2018, 14:46
Robinson fought much better competition than Pep in the 1940s. Not even close.
Robinson went well out his way to fight elite competition. You can't fight everyone even if you want to. Of course some of the weren't that good, as is the case with everyone.
However this is a guy that won 45 fights in his career against an opponent that was either in the top 10 or the champion at the time of the fight. There were a lot of depth in his weight classes, during his time, so to be the top 10 (remember only 1 champ) you had to be pretty good.
Robinson has 21 wins over opponents who made the HOF.
In the 1940s the great Willie Pep had better competition than the original Sugar Ray.
