Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
How would this unification have gone?
Re: Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
I would think that Johnson would have been too good for Robinson and stopped him somewhere in the mid to late rounds
Re: Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
I think Johnson would've won a clear decision.p4p1 wrote:I would think that Johnson would have been too good for Robinson and stopped him somewhere in the mid to late rounds
Re: Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
Johnson would have been the favourite, but Robinson was underdog most of his life and I didn't expect him to beat Hodkinson, Mcmillan or Mckenzie but he did.
Robinson's fitness was most impressive.
Robinson's fitness was most impressive.
-
Counter-puncher
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 39141
- Joined: 20 May 2008, 11:41
Re: Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
put the Robinson who beat Hodkinson in with the Johnson who lost to Hamed, Robinson wins hands-down.
Johnson with 2 years' less ringrust beats any version of Robinson, though.
Johnson with 2 years' less ringrust beats any version of Robinson, though.
Re: Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
Johnson was superior to those fighters.Roco wrote:Johnson would have been the favourite, but Robinson was underdog most of his life and I didn't expect him to beat Hodkinson, Mcmillan or Mckenzie but he did.
Robinson's fitness was most impressive.
Re: Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
I'd pick the Johnson from the Hamed bout over SR. Past-prime he was; he struggled with Badillo a short time earlier.Counter-puncher wrote:put the Robinson who beat Hodkinson in with the Johnson who lost to Hamed, Robinson wins hands-down.
Johnson with 2 years' less ringrust beats any version of Robinson, though.
Re: Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
I don't agree that he was superior to all 3. Perhaps Mckenzie at FW only, as he was not a natural FW.Rover wrote:Johnson was superior to those fighters.Roco wrote:Johnson would have been the favourite, but Robinson was underdog most of his life and I didn't expect him to beat Hodkinson, Mcmillan or Mckenzie but he did.
Robinson's fitness was most impressive.
Re: Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
Hodkinson wasn't even prime v. Robinson. He's the best of the three. I'd take Johnson over prime Hodkinson.Roco wrote:I don't agree that he was superior to all 3. Perhaps Mckenzie at FW only, as he was not a natural FW.Rover wrote:Johnson was superior to those fighters.Roco wrote:Johnson would have been the favourite, but Robinson was underdog most of his life and I didn't expect him to beat Hodkinson, Mcmillan or Mckenzie but he did.
Robinson's fitness was most impressive.
Re: Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
He wasn't prime but though he would have had enough to beat Robinson.Hodkinson wasn't even prime v. Robinson. He's the best of the three. I'd take Johnson over prime Hodkinson.
I think Hoko has the cut/swelling problem, but if that doesn't happen then I think he wins and Mcmillan at his best like he was against Stecca wins also.
Re: Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
Interesting match.
Robinson was a hard man to beat if you gave him an inch.
Robinson was a hard man to beat if you gave him an inch.
-
polecateddy
- Heavyweight

Re: Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
Charles Shepherd managed to do it. I think a peak Robinson could too. Robinson on PTS. Definitely underrated because of the Naz fight.
Re: Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
Shall I use this logic, cite all Robinson losses and then say "if they managed to do it..."polecateddy wrote:Charles Shepherd managed to do it. I think a peak Robinson could too. Robinson on PTS. Definitely underrated because of the Naz fight.
Johnson was unbeaten for many years and fought and beat better fighters than Robinson.
Re: Tom Johnson v. Steve Robinson.
Johnson UD