2 version of the same fighter

He was called a Bantamweight Ray Robinson in his time.

But once winning the title, yeah, he fought more like Joe Louis than Ray Robinson.

 

JC Chavez.

At 130, he looked a touch skinny and could be pushed around by pressure fighters (i.e.: Martinez, Lockridge), but he was a more versatile fighter who could box on his toes and even counter off the ropes.

It wasn't until he moved up to 135 that he emerged as the relentless, stalking pressure fighter for which he's renown.

 

There's the Robinson at 147, who conveniently wasn't filmed and who's physical attributes were supposedly much, much better than the MW version we normally see. He was supposed to have the power of Tommy Hearns, and the speed which would embarrass Roy Jones Jr.

Then there's the other version, which exists.

 

I think the peak Robinson of 147 was likely just a faster and more athletic version of the Lamotta IV Robinson.

I highly highly highly doubt he was ever as fast as Roy.

Probably never quite as fast as Leonard either.

But he was extremely fast, and he had fight-ending power in both hands.

 

From the footage of Robinson vs Angott and Bell, I think the verison who fought LaMotta looks much better. He's quicker, stronger, sharper and more experienced. He isn't as quick as Roy (or Leonard IMO) or as hard hitting as Hearns but he was absolutely brilliant at both.

I just don't buy the whole "Robi looks great, but he was even greater when you can't see him" schtick.

 

Yeah, the last paragraph is just propaganda a Bert Sugar type would push to promote the Robinson legend.

 

Bert Sugar was always more of a storyteller than a true historian. I've seen him perpetuate a number of myths like the claims that Barney Ross was never dropped in his career, or that Willie Pep won a round without throwing a punch (contemporary newspaper accounts of their fights debunk both of these).

What stands out to me about Robinson as a WW is how physically imposing and powerful he looked at the weight. I think a big misconception about him is that he must've been some ultra elusive defensive master as a WW. In actuality, although he obviously had a good defense, I think it's more likely he overwhelmed opponents with his (natural) size and sheer firepower at the weight. He probably used his legs and boxed more as he moved up in weight and fought bigger, sturdier opponents that he couldn't so easily overpower.

 

I completely agree if we're talking about power, speed and style. Robinson would supposedly go out in a blitzkrieg of aggression, and destroy his guy, or go through the motions, dazzling the crowd and the opponent. I'm not saying either are false, by any means. I think that it's more to do with his technique when throwing combinations rather than Hearns-esque power, or Jones-esque speed. Although, he was obviously very fast and hit very hard. And I think his 'dazzling' mostly came down to how good his footwork was, rather than some Locche type reflexes.

I think saying Robi looked physically imposing at 147 is a bit of a misnomer. He was like Spinks was at 175, very tall and long with a good frame for adding weight, but could always come in a couple pounds short of the limit. Robinson's main physical weakness was that he lacked the raw strength of guys like Basilio or LaMotta.

 

That was the 1st Thing that Stood Out to REED, Having READ Sooooo Much About Sugar Ray Robinson vs. Actually SEEING Film of Him...

He was a Lot More COMBATIVE Than Advertised and Defense Wasn't His Strongest Suit, Necessarily...Robinson LIKED Mixing It Up....







REED

 

Robinson was essentially the fighter Mosley TRIED to be. Shane modeled his style after Robinson, and it's apparent.

The natural comparison is always made with Leonard, but Leonard modeled himself more off Ali, although obviously with far better offensive capabilities.

 

Ezzard Charles at his LHW peak reminds me a bit of WW Ray. Probably almost as great in a P4P sense too:

 

Yep, the Swift, Powerful, Looping Flurries...The ANGLE of Those Punches, in Particular and the Way They Double/Triple Up w/the Same Hand, Mid Flurry...

w/Their Backs Turned, Sugar Ray and Sugar Shane Look Nearly Identical Firing Away...Shane Did his Homework...




REED

 

I do think Robinson has benefited from his welterweight videos not existing, and the middleweight fight being rare for so long.

Now that I look him from the film, he does not look like an astonishing fighter, not compared to Leonard, Whitake, Roy or Floyd.

He is fast but not supremely fast, he clinches much more than the legends of him would suggest and he can be hit. His technique is obviously great, but imo, and I'm sure many will disagree, not in another level compared to Hagler or Hopkins.

What can't be denied is his miraculous stamina (the amount of fights and stopped only against Maxim) and that he had plenty of one-punch power. Outside of the stamina, which is a 10, I'd rank him as 8/10 or 9/10 in pretty much everything.

The Robinson of legends and mental images is 10/10 in every aspect and that obviously isn't true. He might still be TBE, but I do agree that there are two versions of him, the real and the imaginary ones

 

I would still argue that he was possibly the most talented/well-rounded fighter that ever lived, though.

There have been plenty of fighters who did individual things better than Robi - i.e.: Mayweather and Whitaker were better defensive technicians, Leonard was probably a quicker combination puncher, LaMotta had a better pure chin, etc. - but seldom has there been a single fighter who excelled so much in so many different categories.

 

I agree with all of this.

One thing I repeat often though is that in boxing you don't have to be all around better than your opponent. It is enough to have one advantage, if you can make that count.

In a head-to-head matchup I'd pick Leonard over Robinson, based on the edge in speed and added to Leonard's tactical smarts

 

Good post mate. I'd like to add, that while I don't think Robinson is the best fighter ever - tied for second on my list, with Duran at number one and Charles joining him at second - you'd be extremely hard pressed to find a fighter who was born with more physical gifts.

He's a speed demon. He's a ridiculously hard puncher. His coordination was impeccable. He had a granite chin. He was so fluid, well balanced and had such a natural flow/rhythm. His stamina was naturally brilliant. He had damn good reflexes and could judge distance perfectly. The only weakness he had, physically, IMO is that he wasn't particularly strong. He could be pushed back, which is precisely why guys like Basilio, Fullmer, LaMotta etc did well vs him. One thing he also seemed to have, which I can only really think of a few others who had, is this next gear he could go into if he needed. Charles had it. Duran had it. Leonard had it. So did Jones. Greb, too it sounds like. I guess the difference there is that Greb didn't have any lower gears.

 

The Thing w/Robinson was How Faaaaaaaaaaaaaaar AHEAD Of His Time He Was, Stylistically...Watching Him TODAY, It's NATHAN You Haven't Seen Before, But it WAS for the Era Sugar Ray Competed In...

More Than Any Other "Black and White Film" Era Fighter, Robinson's Style and Athleticism Would Make Him EFFECTIVE Today...Not Unbeatable, But Certainly Successful...

There was NATHAN Crude or Archaic in the Way Robinson Operated, Which Can't Be Said for Most "Black and White Film" Era Boxers...



REED

 

Frankie Randall was a fairly speedy boxer-mover down at 135, but perhaps lacking a bit in durability (if the Primo Ramos fight is any indication).

At 140 and beyond, he was a step slower and more flatfooted, but sturdier and harder hitting.

 

I don't know this for sure but at 5' 11 he might have been the tallest (certainly one of the tallest) welterweights who'd lived up to that point - all the 6 ft or 6ft plus WWs I can think of came much later (from late 70s with Hearns being the first in a line of them including Milt McCrory, Mark Breland and Maurice Blocker). So yeah, Robinson would have been a unique proposition for guys who fought him - very tall with a long reach and dynamite power. He probably could overwhelm fighters due to those advantages (and his obvious talents, of course).

 

Great post, George. The greatest of the great ones definitely have that extra gear that they can call on - it's not even a technical attribute. I guess you can call it 'finding a way to win'. When nothing else is working they have that ability to turn things their way, almost through sheer force of will. It takes remarkable confidence and self-belief to do it. Ali had it, Leonard had it and yes, Robinson had it too.

 

Ray was very tall for a WW of that era, but his height also didn't come at the expense of his durability. The 6-foot-plus WWs that came afterward (including the ones you listed) typically suffered from durability issues as a result of being so tall for the weight. It's as if Ray was essentially the perfect height for a WW.

 

Well, he started off 32-0 before losing to Hopkins and from there he’s gone 22-21-2, so I’m gonna have to class this as incorrect.

 

The poster boy. Beat me to it.

 

As far as Robinson goes, I think it’s just as much mischaracterization as romanticism. He was never the pure boxing master/defensive genius that some want to claim he was on top of everything else. He wasn’t much of a defensive boxer, period. He had a graceful athleticism and footwork that, combined with his physical dimensions, allowed him to box on the move behind the jab beautifully at times. I figure it was always something of a ruse, though.

That same footwork is what enabled him to launch into his volleys of dynamite two fisted combinations, seemingly in the blink of an eye. Unless he was looking to carry his opponent, that was always the most important and effective aspect of his game. He was more fighter than boxer.

At Welterweight, he was just younger and lighter while facing smaller, less durable opponents. Therefore more effective at it, from a physical standpoint, especially.

 

I think the real turning point in his career was the Julio Gonzalez fight. That's when he seemed to shift his style from an economical boxer-puncher to a swarming infighter.

 

Yep exactly. The guy that lost to sheika at 168 wasnt the same fighter as the one who runned Tarver close two times

 

I always assumed shieka vs glen would he a great fight, but never got round to it. Was it?

 

I wouldn't say it was great, at least not in the way you might expect from these fighters. It had spurts of action alternating with a lot of inside holding and grappling. Johnson boxed cautiously at times and Sheika looked like the effort to make weight undermined his performance.

 

Sheika actually came on strong late and Johnson faded.