Tuan_Jim wrote:Wouldn't surprise me if Floyd's compubox stats are superior to Sugar Ray's. Sugar Ray was fighting the best of the best, the absolute elite, fight after fight. Difficult to score Compubox landslides against such an exalted level of fighter.
Floyd Mayweather is fighting handpicked opponents against whom he can conduct dizzying Compubox landslides. That's why no one with a semblance of cognitive function would bring up Compubox stats.
Floyd also has a trophy cabinet full of glittering belts that Sugar Ray never won. They didn't exist in Ray's day, but no doubt some people will still hold that against him.
One of the biggest overstatements that exists when comparing old school fighters to todays fighters. Half of Ray Robinsons opponents had more than 15 losses or a losing record. What makes Ray Robinson so great is that he fought so often, but the best of the best, fight after fight? For example Ray Robinson fought a guy by the name of Ossie Harris who had a record of 38-35-6 for his 73rd fight, not only did he fight him once, he fought him twice!! Ray Robinson fought several opponents that weren't even contenders. LMAO get a grip.
You also don't fight 26 world champions by cherry picking. Floyd has fought more world champions than anyone that's currently in boxing, what's that say for the rest of the boxing world? Floyd has proven his superiority time and time again, against some of the best the sport has to offer.
Record padding wasn't in effect until the modern era. In the old days match makers put together 50/50 contests in order to draw live crowds - and so that is reflected in the records. The culture now is to preserve an undefeated television friendly record and accumulate paper titles. Many of these present 'champions' you cite would be, in the deep waters of the 50s, men with numerous losses. Men you would skim and sneer at, as you are doing now.
Mayweather would not be 46-0 in the 40s and 50s. And he certainly wouldn't be 128-1, as Robinson was at his peak, clobbering middleweights senseless.
Pureist wrote:Floyd is fighting in an era where ther is more world champions because of the sanctioning bodies, how could Robinson fight that many world champions, he would have had to go up in weight 26 times, HE WAS THE WORLD CHAMPION, stand alone world champion
I am comparing Floyd to his peers of his era, I wasn't using that as a debate to say he's better than Ray Robinson, I'm using that as a debate to contradict the statement that Floyd is a cherry picker when he's fought more World Champions than any other current fighter.
I think it's safe to say that Floyd is the best Welterweight in world today. If there was one major belt for every division, Floyd Mayweather would still be the one on top.
I'm not saying Floyd is better than Ray Robinson, I'm simply educating people who like to talk out of their ass.
Last edited by NateJR on 25 Apr 2015, 21:35, edited 1 time in total.
Tuan_Jim wrote:Wouldn't surprise me if Floyd's compubox stats are superior to Sugar Ray's. Sugar Ray was fighting the best of the best, the absolute elite, fight after fight. Difficult to score Compubox landslides against such an exalted level of fighter.
Floyd Mayweather is fighting handpicked opponents against whom he can conduct dizzying Compubox landslides. That's why no one with a semblance of cognitive function would bring up Compubox stats.
Floyd also has a trophy cabinet full of glittering belts that Sugar Ray never won. They didn't exist in Ray's day, but no doubt some people will still hold that against him.
One of the biggest overstatements that exists when comparing old school fighters to todays fighters. Half of Ray Robinsons opponents had more than 15 losses or a losing record. What makes Ray Robinson so great is that he fought so often, but the best of the best, fight after fight? For example Ray Robinson fought a guy by the name of Ossie Harris who had a record of 38-35-6 for his 73rd fight, not only did he fight him once, he fought him twice!! Ray Robinson fought several opponents that weren't even contenders. LMAO get a grip.
You also don't fight 26 world champions by cherry picking. Floyd has fought more world champions than anyone that's currently in boxing, what's that say for the rest of the boxing world? Floyd has proven his superiority time and time again, against some of the best the sport has to offer.
Record padding wasn't in effect until the modern era. In the old days match makers put together 50/50 contests in order to draw live crowds - and so that is reflected in the records. The culture now is to preserve an undefeated television friendly record and accumulate paper titles. Many of these present 'champions' you cite would be, in the deep waters of the 50s, men with numerous losses. Men you would skim and sneer at, as you are doing now.
Mayweather would not be 46-0 in the 40s and 50s. And he certainly wouldn't be 128-1, as Robinson was at his peak, clobbering middleweights senseless.
Where are the facts? Talk is cheap and you only prove your bias by speaking with speculation and then saying it as a fact. Is it a fact that Floyd wouldn't be a great in that Era or couldn't go 47-0 fighting the competition Ray Robinson did in his first 47 fights? Is it a fact that other champions of today would be in deep waters in the 40s and 50s? I want to see you prove your statement as fact.
I guess you've never heard the story of Ray Robinson openly ducking a man by name of Charlie Burley. "I'm to pretty to fight Charley Burley" ~ Ray Robinson.
It's also a fact that once Ray Robinson reached a certain point in his career he would pick and choose who he wanted to fight, when he wanted to fight, he's a documented diva. Yes Ray Robinson was great (IMO the greatest of ALL TIME), he proved he was the best of his era just as Floyd has done. But do I think Ray Robinson would walk through Floyd Mayweather with ease? HELL NO! I can't prove it and neither can you, but I'm confident that no one Floyds size walks through him with ease in any era.
thunderfromdownunder wrote:Could you imagine if sugar ray was around now? With modern training and diet ect.
Plus not having two fight every other day. He'd have torn through these guys
I have no intention of disparaging the legacy of Sugar Ray Robinson, but let’s be honest; a lot of the men he faced were defensively irresponsible.
Rather than looking through record books, it’s better to evaluate Robinson’s legacy by actually watching his fights against the likes of Kid Gavilan, Jake LaMotta, Georges Estatoff, Randolph Turpin and even Joey Maxim… to realise that none of those men could have given Floyd a stern test.
I’m not going to pretend that I have the sort of skills to critique fighting styles in the very same manner that great trainers like Freddie Roach and Virgil Hunter do, but I honestly don’t believe that it takes a great deal of intellect or experience to appreciate the simple fact that today’s boxers are much more fundamentally refined (in terms of skill) and defensively responsible than the majority of the men that competed sixty years ago.
A great deal is made of Robinson’s heroic, but ultimately doomed attempt to wrest the light heavyweight championship from Joey Maxim. However, fighters from that era fought so often that they didn’t have to trim down to make weight. So Robinson was defeated by a stylistically flawed opponent that outweighed him by 15½lbs.
The thing is… Mayweather regularly gives up that sort of weight against the majority of opponents he faces (such as Maidana & Ortiz), so when Robinson did it against Maxim, Sugar Ray’s performance in their fight was deemed by many as miraculous, but when Floyd does it… no one bats an eyelid.
For sure, Sugar Ray Robinson had extraordinary ability that could have transcended any generation, but unfortunately many of his opponents did not. That’s precisely the reason why I believe that it’s incredibly naïve to believe that Sugar Ray could have “torn through” today’s generation of fighters.
Well let's turn it around, could floyd fight as many times as Robinson did a year, carrying injuries, fighting bigger opponents carrying those injuries, fighting 15 rounds on occasions, then there was the diet for boxers, meat, meat and some more meat, while keeping up a Ko rate of 54% over so many fights, if maidana had of kept the pace up over 12 rounds he would have beaten floyd in the 1st fight, lamotta never let up over the whole fight, he was as tough as nails, Castillo beat floyd, in 1941 sugar fought 20 times, 14 times in 42, 16 times in 46, floyd couldn't do one year at that level
If he beats Pacman he deserves to be ranked amongst the greatest boxers of all time. Look at who he has defeated. It ranks amongst the best - if we include Pacquiao. As good as RR, that can be debated until the end of time.
just for the record: floyd is the favourite in the
biggest fight in the history of boxing. so if he is
delusional, he has quite some argument to back
it up.
NateJR wrote:
Where are the facts? Talk is cheap and you only prove your bias by speaking with speculation and then saying it as a fact. Is it a fact that Floyd wouldn't be a great in that Era or couldn't go 47-0 fighting the competition Ray Robinson did in his first 47 fights? Is it a fact that other champions of today would be in deep waters in the 40s and 50s? I want to see you prove your statement as fact.
I guess you've never heard the story of Ray Robinson openly ducking a man by name of Charlie Burley. "I'm to pretty to fight Charley Burley" ~ Ray Robinson.
It's also a fact that once Ray Robinson reached a certain point in his career he would pick and choose who he wanted to fight, when he wanted to fight, he's a documented diva. Yes Ray Robinson was great (IMO the greatest of ALL TIME), he proved he was the best of his era just as Floyd has done. But do I think Ray Robinson would walk through Floyd Mayweather with ease? HELL NO! I can't prove it and neither can you, but I'm confident that no one Floyds size walks through him with ease in any era.
Well now you're having to drag the conversation down dead ends. I don't possess the technology to reanimate Ray Robinson and set him loose among the living welters and middles. Certainly there is enough evidence to suggest that if I did, Floyd would opt to temporarily retire, swerve him or demand that he cut his hair or box while hopping on one foot in order to not fight him. How can I say Floyd wouldn't be 47-0 against Robinson's opposition? Well, he would be obliged to box, among others, the middleweight Jake LaMotta at least three times.
Your first post demonstrated a fundamental ignorance of the most basic facts of old time boxing, as well as an assumption that Boxrec records are complete, and you also turned a blind eye to many of the greatest fighters of all time so that you could focus on one man who has, by the padded, distorted standards of today, a 'bad record' - and yet now you're suddenly rattling off all sorts of new information about the era! It doesn't compute I'm afraid, I sense rush googling and poor research. We agree on one thing at least, if anyone can claim to be boxing's greatest fighter it's Robinson, and not Mayweather.
man wrote:just for the record: floyd is the favourite in the
biggest fight in the history of boxing. so if he is
delusional, he has quite some argument to back
it up.
The biggest fight in 30 years yes, in history definitely not
I think Ray Leonard would have been too much for Floyd Jnr and Leonard himself said that he wasn't as good as Robinson. When Robinson was active there were thousands of active boxers in each division, to be highly ranked meant they'd fought a gauntlet of tough, skilled and hungry boxers. Someone mentioned Ortiz and that because Floyd had bested him he'd be OK boxing Maxim - I have to disagree
palooka wrote:I think Ray Leonard would have been too much for Floyd Jnr and Leonard himself said that he wasn't as good as Robinson. When Robinson was active there were thousands of active boxers in each division, to be highly ranked meant they'd fought a gauntlet of tough, skilled and hungry boxers. Someone mentioned Ortiz and that because Floyd had bested him he'd be OK boxing Maxim - I have to disagree
Agree 100%, I think Floyd would have been beaten by hearns, hagler and Duran, no way he could have kept them off him, he struggled with maidana, his own father said the same thing in an interview, the point you made palooka about the pool of fighters being so large in those days is quite true, everyone was trying anyway possible to earn a quid, boxing paid well in those days, the larger the pool, the better quality the fighter has to be to make it to the top
palooka wrote:I think Ray Leonard would have been too much for Floyd Jnr and Leonard himself said that he wasn't as good as Robinson. When Robinson was active there were thousands of active boxers in each division, to be highly ranked meant they'd fought a gauntlet of tough, skilled and hungry boxers. Someone mentioned Ortiz and that because Floyd had bested him he'd be OK boxing Maxim - I have to disagree
i think the number of fights of boxers back
then is overrated in two respects. first it
was not always top opposition. if a top ten
boxer today fights easier opposition he is
heavily criticised - different back then. it
is clear why. today everything is televised,
back then everything was more local and
the visiting, and paying!, crowd was more
important.
second is the financial aspect. i doubt SRR
would have fought as often had he made as
much as fighters can do now. people back
in the day were not morally better, they
just had different circumstances. yes they
were tougher, but they had to. there were
two world wars and a great depression within
thirty years.
man wrote:just for the record: floyd is the favourite in the
biggest fight in the history of boxing. so if he is
delusional, he has quite some argument to back
it up.
The biggest fight in 30 years yes, in history definitely not
It's funny that should Manny win that I can guarantee how everyone here who is putting Mayweather down will be here saying that Pacquiao is the Best Of All Time, I bet they'll be here licking his lumpia.
Ray Robinson’s achievements are no less impressive. Robinson amassed a peak professional record of 128-1-2 while winning the welterweight and middleweight titles. The only fighters to surpass Robinson’s peak won-loss record are Willie Pep’s 134-1-1 and perhaps Rocky Marciano’s 49-0, although neither faced close to Robinson’s quality of opposition.
Robinson went 40-0 as a pro before losing a decision to Jake Lamotta, a middleweight who outweighed him by nearly 16 pounds. He was unbeatable for the next eight years going on a 91 bout winning streak. His career record against Lamotta, the only man to ever beat a prime Robinson is 5-1. Lamotta outweighed him by an average of 12 pounds in all of their fights.
Overall Robinson defeated 10 Hall of Famer’s in his career; Jake Lamotta, Sammy Angott, Fritzie Zivic, Henry Armstrong, Kid Gavilan, Rocky Graziano, Randy Turpin, Gene Fullmer and Carmen Basilio. He also defeated some skilled challengers such as Tommy Bell who could have been champion in the modern era. Ray was undefeated as welterweight champion and won the middleweight title for a record 5 times.
Robinson should have won the middleweight tile for a 6th time but received a dubious draw against Gene Fullmer at age 39. The film clearly demonstrates that Robinson should have received the decision. Ray won the fight in the ring only to be robbed of the decision. Robinson’s longevity puts him among the 5 best geriatric champions of all time with Bob Fitzsimmons, Archie Moore, George Foreman and Bernard Hopkins.
Robinson was absolutely outstanding in rematches. He won rematches against 11 men before finally losing twice to the same fighter. No one ever beat him twice until he was 40 years old and had over 150 fights and even then they were two split-decisions against Paul Pender.
One should also consider that Robinson’s activity level made him sharper and more experienced than modern fighters. For example in 1946 the year he won the welterweight title Sugar Ray fought 16 times. In 1947 he fought 10 times. In 1949 he fought 13 times. In 1950 he fought 19 times. The other “Sugar Ray” Leonard only fought 40 pro fights in his entire career. Robinson’s total record is 175-19-6 2 NC with 109 kayo’s. 16 of his 19 losses came after his first comeback at age 34, 12 after the age of 40.
To sum it up, Robinson was the consummate professional fighter who possessed every physical asset; speed, agility, mobility, and tremendous punching power. He rates among a select few of the all time greats who could defeat fighters using their own best assets against them. Robinson, a true sharpshooter, easily rates among the best pound for pound punchers in history. Robinson is possibly the greatest combination puncher of all time. His quality of opposition is among the top five. Ray’s peak won-loss record is among the top three. Ray’s overall ring record and accomplishments also rate among the top three. Robinson is among the top five of all time in the category of longevity. Ray had all the intangibles, great experience, killer instinct, a tremendous chin and heart. When one adds it all up it is easy to see why the respected IBRO rated Sugar Ray Robinson as the greatest fighter of all time.---------- I've watched many SRR fights Fergus , you mentioned Volume and frequency but I see you didn't touch on injuries and diet, these have to be added to the equation , what you also failed to note was wear and tear, you said the quality wasn't as good aswell citing la motta, have you ever had a brutally strong boxer who throws awkward punches hunt you around a boxing ring, when you hit him it doesn't hurt him, your forced to go backwards meaning every punch you throw lacks power and you not only have to survive but win, maidana is somewhat like lamotta, except he didn't hit as hard, he could be hurt and he ran out of steam after 5 rounds, lamotta just kept going, if maidana kept going in that first fight he would have won, Castillo beat Floyd but was robbed via decision, to make a claim like you did about quality is a joke, some of the world title holder of today wouldn't have been good enough to win a commonwealth title 30 years ago, let alone a world title 60 years ago
KBB wrote:It's funny that should Manny win that I can guarantee how everyone here who is putting Mayweather down will be here saying that Pacquiao is the Best Of All Time, I bet they'll be here licking his lumpia.
the most important thing is Pacquiao has never said that, isn't saying that and likely won't say that if he does in fact win.
KBB wrote:It's funny that should Manny win that I can guarantee how everyone here who is putting Mayweather down will be here saying that Pacquiao is the Best Of All Time, I bet they'll be here licking his lumpia.
the most important thing is Pacquiao has never said that, isn't saying that and likely won't say that if he does in fact win.
Like I said before
="KBB"]It's funny that should Manny win that I can guarantee how everyone here who is putting Mayweather down will be here saying that Pacquiao is the Best Of All Time, I bet they'll be here licking his lumpia
Pureist wrote:Floyd is running his mouth off again claiming to be better than sugar Ray Robinson, I think with the number of fights Floyd has had he would qualify to lace up robinsons gloves but let's face facts, Floyd can't fight more than twice a year, Robinson fought twice a month in some instances, diets were meat before fights in his days, he fought everyone sometimes multiple times, I can't believe Floyd could even think along those lines, what a knob
He's the very best of his era that's all you can ask. A rich knob ;;-)
