If anyone mentions SRR as the GOAT..then they have good reason to. Most people on the general boxing forum will have SRR or Ali as the GOAT whereas on the classic its Harry Greb or perhaps Langford. Either way, SRR will and should always be considered as the possible greatest fighter ever
Seriously, there is No ONE who can compare to the greatest of them all, Sugar Ray... When they say he fought everyone, they mean EVERYONE ! Look at his roster of opponents,incompareable... At welter he was incredible, then for good measure. He moved up and conqured the middle`s too. He had Maxim beat, at lt. heavy ! Does anyone with any boxing sense really think that PBF or PAC would would stand up to the power that SRR brandished at welter ? He was superior in skills to anyone at welter,and here`s the scary part... He had way more balls too... He could dig down deeper than anyone. How about is Robbie truly, underated ??? I almost want to get sick at how easily they throw the `great`word around. It`s an insult to the truly great fighters who fought often,fought hard and fought the best and tuly learned their craft. Moore, SRR, Louis,Armstrong, to name a few...
I dont think hes overrated at all, but his fellow greats Pep and Armstrong are vastly underrated so it creates that illusion
In terms of his talant/skills/abillity no he's one of the best. However when it comes to results his record is disipoiting. That's right from the start of his career to 1960 or 61 he should have never lost. Yet he did lose 9 times, plus 3 draws. 7 of those 9 loses came in championship bouts. It would be more understandable if he lost one of the many non-tittle bouts he fought as both welterweight and middleweight champion. talant/skills/abillity means a lot but so dose results. I've herd every excuse in the book and than some, or about his amazing winning streak. He's not the only one. Willie Pep and Benny Leonard come to mind. All three had streaks for the same reason. They were suposed to. Leonard did have losses but never in a lightweight championship bout. He had a draw with Ted "Kid" Lewis and a contervisual loss to Jack Britton both for welterweight championships This content is protected Not only was Benny Leonard a better more acomplished boxer, as you can see he was a much more handsom man.
how is he overrated? There is not one fighter in the history of the sport that I would pick to beat him at welterweight and middleweight in his prime. What, you guys want him to be dominant at light heavyweight also?
As soon as I read the title I knew it was some dumbass *******. Robinson is pretty much a universally seen as the GOAT. In fact I would say that about 85-90% of the lists you we see has him number 1. The the phase pound for pound was indeed coined for Robinson, its no myth. PS Pac got his ass whipped several times in his prime at what ******* came is his best weight yet he would distroy SRR???
At Welter he was very tall, at 5 foot 11, fought all sorts of good 5-6 and 5-8 fighters; which was the normal size of welters back then.. At least one of those fights, the crowd thought the other fella won and bood like hell. I'd have to look up the record again name starts with A...one of the best welters of his time. Fought only one man of 5 -10, as welter. Was Hearns tall for his time. Dodged Bevins Big Time. Charles Burley??? Too. He was very very good, better than SRL.
Didn't fight charles burley but that aside, you cant really complain about him. The most skilled fighter in existence imo. Some fighters fought a couple of extra names and some achieved a bit more but he's right up there in my top 3.
And Armstrong too, probably argued about as much as Greb, from what I've seen rationally argued. Armstrong, Langford, Greb, all fair and rational cases to be above SRR. A tiny, tiny, tiny fraction go for the very dark horse (ironically described? :huh) of Fitzsimmons. SRR's at the head of my own ATG list though.