Originally Posted by nervousxtian
No, because fans overrate the old timers.
I dare you to take a look at SRR resume, how many of those fights could you toss out as bum of the week canidates.
If the champs of today fought those kinds of tune-up paycheck fights in between "real" title fights they'd be crucified.
I think the question that needs to be asked is this. If Sugar Ray Robinson fought today, would he win 173 fights? Would he be light years better than Winky, Miranda, Pavlik, Taylor, Calzaghe, Abraham, etc?
Do you not think that those same guys couldn't hang with Basilio, Fullmer, LaMotta, and Turpin??
You really think Robinson would win against Hagler? You think he could of dominated Leonard, Hearns, Nunn, and Toney? Let alone Roy Jones.
He might win some of those fights, but he wouldn't dominate all those guys.
He was a superior athlete in a era of tough guy punching bags and a few other skilled fighters who fought too much and got their heads beat in for a living, and not to name the dirty fights and fixed outcomes of the era.
Where do you find these people who say that Robinson's middleweight era was the best of all time? Or that Robinson would dominate Leonard, Hearns, Nunn, Toney, and Jones? Because whoever these people are, they are wrong. Fortunately, there don't appear to be any on this thread or really on this site.
Nobody says that every guy Robinson fought was an ATG. Sure, there were some weak fighters, but, more often than not, he was fighting excellent fighters.
And if any fighter from any era has over 200 fights, I will forgive the occasional tuneup against a weak fighter. On the other hand, anybody fighting twice a year should be fighting the best opposition in every fight.