BoxRec

I can understand what you are saying, but I dont think a win over Armstrong at that stage of his career is something to totaly disregard.Since losing his title in 41 to Zivic, Armstrong was 23-3 in his next 26 fights leading up to his fight with Ray over the next two years. Including wins over Sammy Angott, Tippy Larkin< Juan Zurita, Lew Jenkins,Willie Joyce and he beat Zivic in a ten rounder. Heck those 26 fights would be a career for some fighters nowadays.

Take a look at Maxie Rosenbloom's record. What's
more, there may be some more unrecorded bouts
out there.

- Chuck Johnston

The fact that is hard to ignore is that Robinson moved up in weight and caught hell. His record at middleweight is spotty. Greb moved up in weight and completely dominated over BETTER opposition. Nothing spotty about it. His resume reads like a who's-who of great Light Heavyweights. This cannot be ignored.

Tunney and Loughran are in every single respectable top 10 LH list. Jack Dillon and Maxie Rosenbloom are not too far behind. The best middles Ray beat are usually ranked in the mid(LaMotta) to bottom(Fullmer) top 20.

expug wrote:I can understand what you are saying, but I dont think a win over Armstrong at that stage of his career is something to totaly disregard.Since losing his title in 41 to Zivic, Armstrong was 23-3 in his next 26 fights leading up to his fight with Ray over the next two years. Including wins over Sammy Angott, Tippy Larkin< Juan Zurita, Lew Jenkins,Willie Joyce and he beat Zivic in a ten rounder. Heck those 26 fights would be a career for some fighters nowadays.

You are correct. Not totally, but let's not go overboard and compare it with Greb's wins over Mickey Walker, Gene Tunney, Tommy Loughran and Tiger Flowers. As an accomplishment it's not even in the same universe.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:armstrong wasnt even in his prime when he lost to zivic


however armstrong was still a good fighter when robinson beat him even though he was well past his prime. i give credit to the robinson victory


hank even said on his best day he would never beat sugar ray because he was too fast

I agree, although Hank would have given him a helluva lot better fight than he did. Robby won easy. A prime Armstrong NOBODY would win easy against.

Nero3000 wrote:

expug wrote:I can understand what you are saying, but I dont think a win over Armstrong at that stage of his career is something to totaly disregard.Since losing his title in 41 to Zivic, Armstrong was 23-3 in his next 26 fights leading up to his fight with Ray over the next two years. Including wins over Sammy Angott, Tippy Larkin< Juan Zurita, Lew Jenkins,Willie Joyce and he beat Zivic in a ten rounder. Heck those 26 fights would be a career for some fighters nowadays.

You are correct. Not totally, but let's not go overboard and compare it with Greb's wins over Mickey Walker, Gene Tunney, Tommy Loughran and Tiger Flowers. As an accomplishment it's not even in the same universe.

Its my opinion, that overall Robinson has fought the toughest opposition . I base this opinion on the fact that he has fought more world champions and Hall of Famers than any other fighter that I am aware of. Grebs resume is outstanding also no question.

expug wrote:

Nero3000 wrote:

expug wrote:I can understand what you are saying, but I dont think a win over Armstrong at that stage of his career is something to totaly disregard.Since losing his title in 41 to Zivic, Armstrong was 23-3 in his next 26 fights leading up to his fight with Ray over the next two years. Including wins over Sammy Angott, Tippy Larkin< Juan Zurita, Lew Jenkins,Willie Joyce and he beat Zivic in a ten rounder. Heck those 26 fights would be a career for some fighters nowadays.

You are correct. Not totally, but let's not go overboard and compare it with Greb's wins over Mickey Walker, Gene Tunney, Tommy Loughran and Tiger Flowers. As an accomplishment it's not even in the same universe.

Its my opinion, that overall Robinson has fought the toughest opposition . I base this opinion on the fact that he has fought more world champions and Hall of Famers than any other fighter that I am aware of. Grebs resume is outstanding also no question.

But Greb fought the BETTER champions and Hall of Famers. If I beat Monzon and Hagler and you beat Freddie Steele, Al Hostak, Hugo Corro and George Chip, you have beaten more champs but who has beaten the better, tougher champs? Me.

Don't forget that a lot of those "world champions" on Ray's resume are only world champs cuz they BEAT Ray(Turpin, Pender, Fullmer, etc.)

So then I guess all roads lead to the question of who wins head to head. Maybe the greatest fight in history.But ya did score a knockdown with that last point. I hadnt tought of that. Pretty good point.

Take a look at the year that Harry Greb had during 1919.
He fought in about forty-five bouts AND a total of over
four hundred rounds that year! Moreover, he won every
bout on records that include newspaper decisions. In 1919,
Greb had one of the most remarkable years in boxing
history.

People write quite a bit about the rivalry that Greb had
with Gene Tunney, but ignore his series of bouts with
Tommy Gibbons and Jeff Smith. During the early
1920s, Gibbons was a much better fighter than
Tunney. Smith was an outstanding fighter who
was rated highly by Nat Fleischer.

- Chuck Johnston

Take a look at Fidel La Barba's record, especially his
early years. Can you imagine a current fighter
facing foes like Jimmy McLarnin (three times),
Newsboy Brown, or Frankie Genaro in his first
year or two as pro? Yes, I know that McLarnin
also was a young fighter at the time, but no
current manager would let a top prospect fight
someone as talented as McLarnin so early. I have
come to the conclusion that professional boxing has
changed dramatically over the years.

- Chuck Johnston

Just got to mention Ezzard Charles... Archie Moore 3 times, Burley, Bivins, Marhsall, Yarosz, Basora, Maxim, Louis, Walcott, Ray, Lesnevich, Layne, Satterfield. There are a lot of fighters there who nobody wanted to face and who, in different circumstances, could have had championship belts. If they'd have got thier dues then Ezzard's legacy would be enhanced.

expug wrote:So then I guess all roads lead to the question of who wins head to head. Maybe the greatest fight in history.But ya did score a knockdown with that last point. I hadnt tought of that. Pretty good point.

Thanks. You made some pretty good points yerself*s*

[quote="Decagon"]I think we have to take into account how they did against that great opposition. Sure, Agnott fought a bunch of top fighters, but how many did he beat? And how many were at his weight class? Jimmy McClarnin's even worse. Sure, he beat eight Hall-of-Fame fighters, but all of them were smaller than he was.

You know, I've heard that a lot from people. How McLarnin fought smaller men. Not too sure how accurate that is. The major argument being that his opponents rose up in weight to fight him. But let's not forget that Jimmy started his career as a FLYWEIGHT; the smallest of the small at that time. He rose up in weight, too. So in actuality he was fighting guys who started their careers bigger than he was!

Nero3000 wrote:

DoubleM wrote:Check out Sammy Angott's resume then...

Henry Armstrong (my #1 of all time)
Ray Robinson (#2)
Willie Pep (#4)

'Nuff said.

Oh, hang on. Add these lot:

Ike Williams
Beau Jack
Bob Montgomery
Lew Jenkins
Fritzie Zivic
Baby Arizmendi
Freddie Miller

All Hall of Famers.

Then there's the other guys... Champions/contenders such as Petey Sarron, Leo Rodak and Milt Aron. There are another dozen or so world contenders who Sammy faced.

Greatest resume of all time, by a long way

Lost to Zivic. Lost to Williams twice. Lost to Rodak. Miller was ANCIENT.

Sammy LOST to most of the best he fought. His resume is not comparable to Greb's. Harry BEAT the great fighters he fought.

Who said anything about a winning record?

If it's winning records you're after, check out Ezzard Charles' resume:

Jimmy Bivins x4
Archie Moore x3
Charley Burley x2
Joey Maxim x5
Jersey Joe Walcott x2
Elmer Ray x2 (in reality)
Lloyd Marshall x2

I won't list the many, many contenders and other various champions, there are too many. The above are just the great or excellent fighters, some of them historically underrated.

DoubleM wrote:If it's winning records you're after, check out Ezzard Charles' resume:

Jimmy Bivins x4
Archie Moore x3
Charley Burley x2
Joey Maxim x5
Jersey Joe Walcott x2
Elmer Ray x2 (in reality)
Lloyd Marshall x2

I won't list the many, many contenders and other various champions, there are too many. The above are just the great or excellent fighters, some of them historically underrated.

Can't dent the greatness of Ez's opposition. He's my #1 light-heavy, but I'd still rate Greb's opposition over his. Many historically underrated battlers on his resume as well(Gibbons Bros., Norfolk, Moha, ad infinitum)

Archie Moore (not winning record)

Ezzard Charles x3
Muhammad Ali x1
Rocky Marciano x1
Floyd Patterson x1
Harold Johnson x3
Joey Maxim x3
Jimmy Bivins x4
Willie Pastrano x1
Jack Chase x5
Holman Williams x2
Charley Burley x1
BoBo Olson x1
Eddie Booker x3
Cocoa Kid x1

What a fuckin' resume. They are just the great/excellent guys, there are too many contenders to name. BB knows about this era, he'll agree with me when I say Archie Moore had probably the stiffest competition of them all.

Oy, bot like Ali fought some big lads as well...


Sonny Liston, George Foreman, Larry Holmes...

Need I say more?

Harry Greb, Maxie Rosenbloom, Jack Britton, Johnny Dundee, Archie Moore...

DoubleM wrote:Archie Moore (not winning record)

Ezzard Charles x3
Muhammad Ali x1
Rocky Marciano x1
Floyd Patterson x1
Harold Johnson x3
Joey Maxim x3
Jimmy Bivins x4
Willie Pastrano x1
Jack Chase x5
Holman Williams x2
Charley Burley x1
BoBo Olson x1
Eddie Booker x3
Cocoa Kid x1

What a fuckin' resume. They are just the great/excellent guys, there are too many contenders to name. BB knows about this era, he'll agree with me when I say Archie Moore had probably the stiffest competition of them all.

i agree, thats an incredible resume filled with all time greats and incredible depth but u left off a couple names that should be on there


-lloyd marshall should automatically defintley be on there
-eddie cotton- a very underated light-H, robbed against jose torres

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

DoubleM wrote:Archie Moore (not winning record)

Ezzard Charles x3
Muhammad Ali x1
Rocky Marciano x1
Floyd Patterson x1
Harold Johnson x3
Joey Maxim x3
Jimmy Bivins x4
Willie Pastrano x1
Jack Chase x5
Holman Williams x2
Charley Burley x1
BoBo Olson x1
Eddie Booker x3
Cocoa Kid x1

What a fuckin' resume. They are just the great/excellent guys, there are too many contenders to name. BB knows about this era, he'll agree with me when I say Archie Moore had probably the stiffest competition of them all.

i agree, thats an incredible resume filled with all time greats and incredible depth but u left off a couple names that should be on there


-lloyd marshall should automatically defintley be on there
-eddie cotton- a very underated light-H, robbed against jose torres

I thought I put Marshall down! I must have thought I did, since I'd just made the Ezzard Charles post and wrote his name on there. Got mixed up.

expug wrote:Armstrong ,Lamotta,Basilio,Gavilan, Ill give ya Tunney as probably the best single opponent for both.

Umm, a washed up Armstrong and Basillo/Lamotta are really not up there with a prime Walker, Delaney, Tunney, and Loughran.

Add Tiger Flowers, Kid Norfolk, Gunboat Smith, Bill Brennan, Billy Miske (the last 3 top HEAVYWEIGHT challengers, with two of them title challengers)

The Gibbons brothers alone were two outstanding fighters who were avoided by many. Greb beat them both.

Robinson has a great resume but I don't think it's even an argument when compared to Grebs