In that case surely you'd also predict Robinson would've evaporated LaMotta who had lost to (by today's standards) 'nobodies'. Yet he lost unanimously. He may well have destroyed Thurman, but why is it beyond question that Thurman could beat him?
Lamotta is 160 and Robinson had no problems with 147. I guess...watch the Valentines Day Massacre and then Thurman v Garcia back to back and tell me who you'd pick. And that was Robinson after his peak!
Because Robinson is levels above Thurman and in the modern era you have all the time required to train, rest etc. Genuine boxing fans don't write off fighters who lose a fight, that is just morons with an agenda to discredit the boxer in question.
Funnily enough despite never being defeated Floyd is a prime example. He never got the credit he deserved either. God forbid Castillo got that decision, Floyd would be in the Audley Harrison category by now.
Almost everyone loses to guys levels below them, it's the modern day obsession with invincibility that confuses me. It's OK to lose, I have days when I suck at my job and it's not a tenth as tough as boxing.
Maybe its just passion . In the old days before internet most of boxing talk i had was with other fighters at the local gym . No matter what you said they would never say a bad word about their fav fighter. However if they didn't like a fighter they would never say a good thing. Now that conversation has been transferred to the internet.
That could explain it, it's still annoying though. I remember watching Floyd/Hatton in a social club, full of Hatton 'fans' screaming their head off in support of Hatton through the whole fight until Floyd sparked him. Then there was virtual silence as everyone left the building, occasionally muttering 'wanker' 'he was never any good' etc.
One of the problems with boxing today is that fighters are hyped beyond their skill level. Fighters are labeled as superstars, great, ATG's and a whole lot more BS and in reality, they are just good fighters. That's why GGG lost to Jacobs because he is just a good fighter. There is nothing special about him. He happened to fight another good fighter and the people got to see what he really is. Just a good fighter in the mix with a lot of good fighters. Yeah, he got the decision and I am cool with that but I don't agree with it and never will.
I don't see nobody out there special. Special fighters are not a dime a dozen. You might get one or two in a generation.
Or maybe the pioneers of boxing back in the day just stood out against primitive opponents. They're bound to look incredible when displaying skills that had never been seen before.
Also, there is zero chance of anyone being considered special even if they retire undefeated like Floyd. Nowadays there is nothing anyone can do to be considered special.
I am not talking about back in the day, I am talking right now. Steel sharpens steel and the good fighters need to fight each other and from that a truly great fighter might emerge. There is a lot of talent out there but that talent hasn't been tested to the fullest.
Surely if you think GGG lost to Jacobs he must have been at least tested somewhere near to the fullest?