Ambling Alp II wrote:elmersalsa wrote:Ambling Alp II wrote:No the "better winning streak" does not speak volumes. The level of competition counts a lot more than the sheer number of opponents that you beat.
If you just want to go by the number of title defenses, than yes Hagler had more than Robinson. Doesn't not make him better. If that was the case, then Bob Foster should be regarded as the best light heavyweight champion because he had the most title defenses for a light heavyweight. You yourself recently stated that Foster was not the best light heavyweight.
No one here is arguing that winning the middleweight title 5 times means that Robinson is the best.
The argument that I and others are making is basically that Robinson beat far better competition than Hagler did and that there is only one loss relevant loss for Robinson at middleweight, while Hagler had more losses and unimpressive performances. That is what you need to counter.
Well, if you say that Sugar Ray at middleweight beat better quality fighters, is not that far off. Hagler and Monzon beat great fighters, too. Hagler and Monzon were better at 160 because of:
winning streaks
more title defenses
More years with the crown
Retired at the right time.
Sugar Ray best win at 160 was WTKO14 Jake LaMotta
Marvelous' best win at 160 was WTKO2 Thomas Hearns
King Carlos' best win at 160 was WTKO11 Nino Benvenutti.
Most of you criteria doesn't mean very much. Are you really that impressed with beating Caveman Lee?
More years with the crown? Johnny Kilbane had the featherweight crown for more than 11 years. Does that make him the best featherweight.
Retired at the right time? That makes you a better fighter? (I will have to remember that the next time we are talking about Henry Armstrong or Roberto Duran.) You mean retiring after losing to a guy who had 1 fight in the previous 5 years.
Look at what you listed as the best wins. Was Thomas Hearns a great middleweight? No. Was Jake LaMotta and Nino Benvenuti? Yes.
Who were the next best wins? Monzon also beat Valdes and Griffith. Great middleweights.
Robinson beat Fullmer, Basilio, Turpin. He beat LaMotta 5 times.
Hagler next best wins were what? Duran? Mugabi? Hamsho? Were they great middleweights?
What do you mean it does not mean that much? You want to throw in "some wins" that does not have nothing to do with the domination of Marvelous and Monzon at middleweight.
Marvelous had to fight FOR YEARS, TOUGH COMPETITION in Philadelphia of all places. Do you remember that? Hagler was fighting guys that NOBODY WANTED TO FIGHT. AND HE BEAT THEM. What are you talking about?
What about Eugene Hairston, Bobby Watts, Sugar Ray Seals and those guys? Marvelous had to pass through those guys in the 70s, and still, DID NOT GET A TITLE SHOT UNTIL LATER. He went 37 fights in a row, FIGHTING THE BEST, until he lost to Sugar Ray. That was a period of almost 10 years! 10 years! Did Robinson did that?
Carmen Basilio was a welterweight that beat Sugar Ray. You want to compare that to Sugar Ray Leonard win over Marvelous?
How about Sugar Ray losing to Ralph "Tiger" Jones?
Monzon also beat Bennie Briscoe, that was a tough fighter to beat. So what you are saying?