Why Sugar Ray Robinson is the greatest

He isn't. He's top 5, but not #1.

 

I have argued (and occasionally got a bit of a kicking for it) that Robinson's spot at number one is sometimes a little too readily assumed. Luckily this place ain't too bad for that, and there are fewer sacred cows who simply can't be scrutinised here than there are on other forums or in other circles.

That's NOT me saying that he isn't the greatest - just that I think he's been put on a pedestal where even questioning it, for some people, is seen as a sign of lacking knowledge. I don't think that's healthy, and moreover I think it's a bit of an insult to Robinson, because I'm sure that if people were able to forget that 'rule' that he always has to be the automatic number one and judge him as impartially and objectively as they can, he'd still end up top of a lot of people's lists. His record and abilities as a fighter bear comparison (and let's be honest, nearly always come out on top) against anyone's. They don't need his most dedicated acolytes waiting in the wings to pounce on anyone who dares suggest that maybe his automatic claim to top spot might have to actually be questioned and examined from time to time.

He may well be the greatest of them all, but if he is I don't think it's by the huge margins which are often claims. As I said though, around here it's not bad at all in that regard.

 

He's number one in my book.

 

And mine.

 

Certainly not the greatest middleweight.

He's of course right up there with just a few others in the argument for P4P.

 

Definitely the greatest for me.
As you said, he just did so many things so well. His movement, balance, and technique are picture perfect plus an insane resume to back it all up.
I'm sure he is not perfect but he is the closest to it for sure and he presents the least (combined) stylistic and resume holes.

 

Greatest welterweight ever.

 

I think Robinson is in a league of his own.

He's the only fighter I've seen who I would describe as an artist.

He had superb balance, speed and footwork. He could box at long range, he could fight inside, he could knock out an opponent with either hand, his technique was flawless.

He could do EVERYTHING.

The accuracy of his punches was incredible, he would continue to land cleanly against a hurt opponent who was in retreat or was even falling backwards on the verge of going down.

He could also take a punch extremely well.

His record, particularly in the first stage of his career, was astonishing.

In his 137 fights before retiring in 1952, he lost only three times and two of those were against opponents with at least a 15lb weight advantage.
He avenged the first defeat four times, immediately avenged the second and was miles ahead in the third but had to quit due to heat exhaustion, the only time in 199 bouts where he was unable to complete the fight.

Those statistics would be undermined if he had built up this remarkable record by fighting weak opponents but he fought more World Champions in his career than any other fighter in the history of the sport.

I can't think of another boxer who comes close to threatening his claim to being the greatest fighter of all time.

 

Someone has to be the " Greatest " if not Robinson "who". Mayweather Jr. ? All jokes aside , when men with the knowledge of Eddie Futch, Angelo Dundee, Emmanuel Stewart, Ray Arcel, some of the greatest boxing writers, most of the greatest fighters like Louis, Ali, Leonard, are saying basically the same thing, Robinson was the GOAT. Who am I to argue?
He fought in a time when boxing was the # 1 sport in the world. Some of the fighters he defeated could arguably be in the top 5 fighters in history at any weight. All the boxes are checked with Robinson.
Skill level? Check. Chin? Check. Power? Check. Speed? Check. Endurance? Heart? Check, most importantly ( in my opinion) COMPETITION! check. Longivety? Check. Charisma? Check.
One doesn't win over 90 pro fights in a row, especially during his era and not be extremely special.....
Their are fighters in history that would've given Robinson pure hell, even at welter like R.Leonard, Napoles, Hearns, Duran , Griffith, Walker Some we wouldn't even think, like a focused Benitez but head to head , best of 3, Robinson wins two, against any fighter in history at welter.
At Middleweight it's a little tougher, but still can it actually be argued he's not in the top 5 at Middleweight?
Boxing will never produce the level of competition it had in past era's. It just wouldn't be allowed in today's for safety concerns, fighters are much more concerned about their health. So, who will in the future be better than Robinson?
To get the type of anticipation, timing, almost super natural instinct of fighters in the past, one must fight. Top fighters today are usually " when one punches, the other one blocks, and vise versa. Or hop in range throw your punches, hop out of range of the opponents.
Very little slipping and countering, parrying, etc. Boxing talent will never be as great as what I saw growing up, and years before. it just isn't possible, the way fighters train, and the schedules they fight on today.

Ray Robinson has my vote as the greatest of all time. He proved the most in a boxing ring. And ultimately that's what boxing used to be about. The best fighting the best when they are at their best.

 

Yes, for me, Sugar Ray Robinson is number 1. No fighter is perfect (SRR's defence wasn't perfect).
I can see arguments for any one of three fighters being the GOAT. So, I'll say...
Tier 1: Robinson, Langford, Greb.
Tier 2A: Armstrong, Ali, Charles, Fitz.
Tier 2B: Gans, B Leonard, Duran, Pep.
And then Louis, R Leonard, Walker, etc...
But, I don't know... it's tight at the top... I might change my mind tomorrow!

 

Robi is the goat

 

He's top 3 minimum in my view.

Personally, I don't rate Langford as high as some, rightly or wrongly. Greb is an enigma but his record suggests a top 5 place as a bare minimum. Armstrong is top 5 for sure. Charles is close to top 5 (I know you have him number 1) and I rate Pep very highly but I can accept him not being top 5 (he's top 10 though).

I mean, I have Robinson number 1, but I don't think I could put him lower than 3 objectively. He's the essence of the complete fighter to me as @Flash24 outlined very well in his post.

 

Is this a fact?

 

Controversial, Mr Crowcroft! I can see someone preferring Langford or maybe Greb for GOAT, and I gather you're a huge Ezzard Charles fan... Where do you place SRR?