Many people consider Sugar Ray Robinson the GOAT...

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by China_hand_Joe

Anyhow, LaMotta was a one dimensionsal fighter, Lacy would likely beat him.

Depends what you mean. He only fought on pressure, that's true. But he was hard to hit for a come forward guy and had all the shots. It's also less ridiculous to utilise a single attribute if you are the amongst the best who have ever lived in that department (chin).

It isn't Sugar Rays fault everyone else was so abysmal though, so lets not get on his back.

Why was Kid Gavlin "abyssmal"?

[Thread Stealer]

Originally Posted by Street Lethal

Can you explain this? What are you trying to say?

China Hand always spams and talks about how great Joe Calzaghe is, so I like to bash Slappy whenever he does it.

[brooklyn1550]

Originally Posted by tobkhan

Well, did you really think China Hand would bring some serious points?

Good point...no, I did not

[China_hand_Joe]

Originally Posted by tobkhan

Well, did you really think China Hand would bring some serious points?

I'm truly sorry you see things this way mate.

My points have been solid, you all however have been brainwashed. You are sheep.

People may bring up a name, like say Armstrong, congratulations. There is a problem however, which a limited amount of video (and of questionable quality) available we have to go by a fighters record.

Let me tell you this though my friend. In 2057, on these very classic forums, I'll be pulling the same trick. With Mario Veit. Super Mario was undefeated for yonks, with the exception of two fights against Calzaghe.

In 2057 there will not be a great deal of video evidence around on Mario, so I'll be pulling the exact same trick. "Oh no, Calzaghe's resume is brilliant, just look at all those great names! Veit for instance."

This is an exact parrellel with each any every name on Robinson's record. You are all hyping up wins over Mario Veit.

[brooklyn1550]

Originally Posted by China_hand_Joe

Let me tell you this though my friend. In 2057, on these very classic forums, I'll be pulling the same trick. With Mario Veit. Super Mario was undefeated for yonks, with the exception of two fights against Calzaghe.

In 2057 there will not be a great deal of video evidence around on Mario, so I'll be pulling the exact same trick. "Oh no, Calzaghe's resume is brilliant, just look at all those great names! Veit for instance."

This is an exact parrellel with each any every name on Robinson's record. You are all hyping up wins over Mario Veit.

Please stop! There is footage of Henry Armstrong and there is obviously footage of Mario Veit. The two will NEVER be mentioned in the same breath and in 2057, people wont be saying that Veit was great. Armstrong was clearly the better fighter and clearly had the better resume.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by brooklyn1550

Please stop! There is footage of Henry Armstrong and there is obviously footage of Mario Veit. The two will NEVER be mentioned in the same breath and in 2057, people wont be saying that Veit was great. Armstrong was clearly the better fighter and clearly had the better resume.

Atually Veit probably was better than the verion of Armstrong that Sugar beat

Of course this argument is still insane - there was no footage so they were no use.

[China_hand_Joe]

Originally Posted by brooklyn1550

Please stop! There is footage of Henry Armstrong and there is obviously footage of Mario Veit. The two will NEVER be mentioned in the same breath and in 2057, people wont be saying that Veit was great. Armstrong was clearly the better fighter and clearly had the better resume.

I am aware Veit wasn't great mate.

But I will brainwash people in 2057 like you are being brainwashed now about many of the 1940s fighters.

Veit will be great in 2057, if I choose for him to be.

[brooklyn1550]

Originally Posted by China_hand_Joe

I am aware Veit wasn't great mate.

But I will brainwash people in 2057 like you are being brainwashed now about many of the 1940s fighters.

Veit will be great in 2057, if I choose for him to be.

If you can brainwash people in 2057 into believing Mario Veit was great, more power to you

[China_hand_Joe]

Originally Posted by brooklyn1550

If you can brainwash people in 2057 into believing Mario Veit was great, more power to you

It is no different to what cross-trainer knowingly does now with an entire era.

[Street Lethal]

Originally Posted by China_hand_Joe

Globalisation and advances in knowledge and also technology and communications.

Mayweather would similarly have been able to reach a ridiculous 150-1 recond back then - you cannot get away with fighting so frequently these days, not near the top level.

Why is Robinson let off for fighting in a weak era, but Calzaghe penalised for happening weight 168, an unheralded weight, with no elite names willing to square off with Joe?

I don't understand your answer. Simplify. Why was the 1940s a weak era? Was it weaker than the 1930s? Was it weaker than the 1950s? Why? Why not?

[Street Lethal]

Originally Posted by McGrain

Robinson fought in what was arguably the strongest era in boxing history. Burley, Williams, LaMotta, Gavlin, Chase, Moore, Bivins, Kid Chocolate, Soose, Zivic, Charles, these men were monsters, absolute world class fighters without exception. Any one of these guys would bea multi-weight world champ were they fighting now, or anytime, if things were done fairly.

That what I was thinking.

[Street Lethal]

Originally Posted by brooklyn1550

How were the 1940s a weak era? Have you seen all of the names on Sugar Ray Robinson's resume?

Henry Armstrong
Kid Gavilan
Jake LaMotta
Sammy Angott
Fritzie Zivic
Carmen Basilio
Gene Fullmer
Randolph Turpin
Joey Maxim
Rocky Graziano
Rocky Castellani
Charley Fusari
Carl Bobo Olson
Joey Giardello
Maxie Shapiro
Jimmy Doyle
Tommy Bell
Jean Walzack

Come on China_hand....Robinson's competition was far superior to the Lacy, Eubank, Bika, Veit, and Ashira of Calzaghe's resume.

Rocking post!

[China_hand_Joe]

If you want to go on believing boxing is the only sport which has not advanced in the last 60 years because it is 'special', then be my guest.

It is so obvious I'm not even going to elaborate further, we don't even need to look at the causes.

You are classic boxing fans, so you think boxing is somehow different, whatever the reasons, pretty much all sports have progressed over that period of time.

I am aware you will come out with counter-arguments, I don't care though. You can argue pretty much any ridiculous thing (flying spaghetti monster for example). The fact is advancements across the board in sports in substancial evidence. All the subject rubbish Pep-perts come out with is not. Debate over.

[Street Lethal]

So China Hand Joe is a notorious troll?

[Manassa]

Robinson was GOOD but, barney ross was the greast OF all time.