Is Ray Robinson's place as the #1 indisputable?

Ray Robinson is the usual pick as the greatest fighter ever, and deservedly so.

In Your opinion, is he the clear-cut #1, or is there a legit case to be made for someone else?

If there is somebody to challenge his status, who is it? Perhaps Willie Pep with his dominance or Ezzard Charles or Ray Leonard with their resumes?

What say you?

 

Because so much time has passed and eras are judged so differently I think it's pretty much set in stone.

 

He's pretty clear cut to me, regardless of whatever other revisionists might come up with.

Unfortunately with the boxing climate the way it is in the present day, it may be nearly impossible for anybody to come along to ever knock him off.

He came right in at the sweet spot for quality of opposition, where the sport had evolved to, and the economics of the time dictating he needed to fight frequently to keep his position in the sport.

 

Since i have srl as nb 1, i have to say no

 

What does #1 P4P mean exactly? That’s the question. Does it mean that he’s the best ever fighter on a who beats who basis? Because that’s what it should mean. By that metric he’s NOT the best fighter ever IMO. Does it mean the best resume? Or does it mean he’s the first to hold that distinction and therefore he’ll always hold that title by default ?

 

When assessing Ray Robinson you have to go by:
* fights you've watched
* reading other people's views on him who've watched many of his fights
* his record
* his opposition

Of the above I can only use 2-4 as criteria because I've not seen many of his fights (do many exist?)

 

Many of his fights at Middleweight exist. His Welterweight reign, which was his most dominant weight class, there is not very much out there.

He was obviously beatable at Middleweight, but you can also obviously see what he was capable of by looking at the film in many of those bouts. Also, nobody from any era is going to fight as often as he did.........and not have off nights every once in awhile.

 

Robinson had a beautiful style of fighting and was the perfect offensive machine. Great combination puncher and power in either hand led to many highlight reel KOs. He also had a very dependable chin and good stamina. The only thing he wasn’t GREAT at was avoiding punches and mid fight adaptations when things weren’t going his way. His strengths coupled with the excitement his style generated is why he’s so highly rated but people seem to ignore or overlook his limitations.

 

Robinson also retired when he was still close to his middleweight best... his "beatability" as a middleweight is often overstated because he had such a roller coaster career when he came back after three years

If Ezzard Charles had maybe 10 fewer losses, I might be inclined to call him the GOAT... his quality of opposition is the best ever as far as I'm concerned, just an endless parade of dangerous opponents

 

If charles had beaten marciano, i think he would be the goat. But, as the saying goes, if my aunt had balls shed be my uncle

 

He's definitely the greatest welterweight. And to have been that dominant fighting that often with only losing once to Lamotta which was later avenged 5 other times, and the list of hall of famers on his record is something you don't see.

A few guys give him a run, but I'd probably say he's the GOAT.

 

Dude was 30 years old and 129-1-2 when he lost his title to Turpin in '51.

The fight with Turpin was his 5th bout in 4 different countries in the span of 1 month.

Going a little further back it was his 7th bout in 6 different countries in the span of 49 days.

 

Today doing the same just to promote a fight is considered a grind.

 

Holy fuck.

 

Impressive, especially given the guys that he fought in that span:

The Notorious Cyrille Delannoit
The Destructive Gerhard Hecht
The Bombastic Jean Walzack
The Executioner Jan de Bruin

And going further back the thunderous Jean Wanes of 24 wins and 33 losses.

The busy schedule kept him active which was to his advantage; he was still warm and ready. These poor guys today suffer from inactivity being forced to wait 6 months for fights...and getting fat in between. Robinson had it easy. ;)

 

Are you seriously criticizing SRR’s resume??

 

I think you have to considér the difference between the era when you make these kind of ratings. Its obvious a contemporary fighter will never be able to assemble the kind of resume srr has.

The reason why i have srl has nb 1 is that yes, his resume is far from being as lenghty as the one of srr, but i dont think anyone on srr resume is better than either duran, hearns and hagler

 

I’m part trolling (hence the wink at the end of my post), but I’m also pointing out that while Robinson’s Number of wins in number of fights is ridiculously impressive, I honestly think his opposition wasn’t that great compared to many fighters that have since come along. I don’t rate lamotta, Turpin, Olson, fulmer and basilio has high as most do...by today’s standards they were average IMO (Robinson himself was ahead of his time ) and the other big names he fought were past prime and or naturally much smaller.

 

Oh ok I get you. This is the part where you say that Floyd has a better resume than SRR, right?

 

LOL, nearly everything you said in this paragraph is false. I started to try to pick it apart..........but it's just too much.

For starters, Lamotta.............who should rate by any standards you go by, outweighed Robinson by 16 lbs...................on the scales, that one time he beat him. Outside of that, Robinson would have been undefeated in his first 132 bouts.

...........and it wasn't like his opponents were Butterbean'esque or even early Julio Cesar Chavez. His record's littered with HOF'ers, and at the time he fought them, Top 10 contenders throughout.


and I'll leave it at that.

 

Outweighed Robinson by 16 pounds? Big deal. By how much did Carnera outweigh Joe Louis? Ruiz outweigh Jones? Corrales and Canelo outweigh Mayweather. That’s no excuse

 

Alright, now you're just fucking trolling me.

 

John the 'raging squid' ruiz

 

I do believe Robinson benefits a bit from the fact that there is no videos from his welterweight fights. People's imagination is difficult to surpass.

In my opinion SRL looks more impressive on videos than SRR, but it can always be argued that we haven't seen the best of SRR. Difficult to say how much better he was in his absolute prime

 

Yup Robinson does benefit from the lack of welterweight footage. People simply imagine how good he must have been, and imagination is something that creates limitless possibilities.

 

Although I have admittedly done a little trolling on this thread, I do rate Robinson as #1 myself. However if Roy Jones had retired after beating Ruiz he’d have the top spot now...as I believed that a prime Roy Jones would have beaten a prime ray Robinson and was just a better fighter overall. All of Roy’s subsequent KO losses however have given me doubts about his chin and resolve unfortunately

 

I have Ali as co-number one. I actually think head to head if they were the same size that Ali would have won. In a pound for pound sense, Robinson hit harder and had a better offensive arsenal but Ali (prime 60s version) was more elusive and just a much better ring General.

 

I tend to ignore everything with regulated to RJJ after the Ruiz fight. He clearly was not the same fighter after that fight and is hard to hold the subsequent losses against him.

 

Anything to push his Money Team agenda.

 

#TMT
#TBE

Can’t a man have an opinion about any fighter without it having anything to do with Mayweather you cunting pendejo?