Terence Crawford vs. Sugar Ray Robinson ?

Yes he would've been. Robinson footwork basic and outdated. He doesn't counterpunch. His defense is almost all athletic based. I get it boxing has evolved.

 

Basic?

Outdated?

Ha!

Stop embarrassing yourself.

You have ZERO knowledge of Ray.

Zero.

And apart from the absolute nonsense written above, you should know that any fight is determined by how the two fighters match up on the night stylistically.

So think about that.

A great fighter would be able to have success in any era.

Now let’s be clear here:

Terence has NEVER faced any fighter with all of the attributes that Ray possessed.

The power, the blistering hand and foot speed, the skill, the timing and the accuracy.

Nobody.

He’s fought nobody on Ray’s level.

Your ignorance is astounding.

You’ve just picked the more modern fighter.

I guess you think that the Fab Four were inferior and outdated too.

What are you going to be saying in 10 years?

That no WW from 50 years ago could have competed today?

Go and educate yourself.

 

Basic footwork ? I swear you just say things to sound controversial because there's no way anyone that's not trolling would think Robinson has basic footwork that is a horrendous take.

Robinson has better footwork than Crawford and has some of the best footwork ever.

Outdated style ? Pit Robinson in this era with HD quality TVs and colour and his speed, power, skills, footwork, would be stand out guaranteed.

Boxing has "evolved" that's why all these fighters now study former greats of the past you're clueless.

This content is protected

 

Basic footwork.

Ha!

He knocked out Fulmer going backwards.

These guys are something else aren’t they.

 

You're delusional if you think Sugar Ray Robinson had better footwork than Terence Crawford

 

You’re the delusional one.

He knocked Fulmer out whilst going backwards.

Who has Terence beaten on Ray’s level?

Name me someone.

Name me someone today with all of Ray’s attributes.

 

If Erroll Spence was copied and pasted in into the 40s people would be calling him an all time great too. With that said Crawford has never beaten anyone who has accomplished as much as Sugar Ray Robinson. Few have.

There's a difference between accomplishments and skillset

Joe Louis is more accomplished than Usyk especially at heavyweight
but Usyk has the far better skillset

Bill Russell is more accomplished than Nikola Jokic but Jokic has the far better skillset (not sure how familiar this forum is with basketball).

The point is that there's a difference between the 2 and yes Robinson is more accomplished than Crawford resume wise but he does not have Crawfords skillset

Maybe had Robinson grown up in today's times he would've but that's not the conversation at hand

To answer your last question Terence Crawford has better attributes than Robinson. Inoue probably does too on a pound for pound level

 

I always thought we were talking about the 2nd

 

Boxing is the only sport where people think that people from the 1940s were better than modern day greats. It's almost laughable.

Sugar Ray Robinson was great in his time and that's how you should measure his greatness but there are many boxers at welterweight and middleweight

Crawford, Hearns, Leonard, Mayweather, Roy Jones Jr, Hopkins all come to mind

 

This is what I mean by basic footwork. You just posted this proving my point.

I wish there was more tape off Robinson at 147

 

I never said accomplished.

I said name me a fighter who Terence has fought who was as great as Ray.

Name me a fighter who Terence has fought who possessed all of Ray’s attributes.

The more you type, the more you embarrass yourself.

Please go and study the fighter, before making anymore ridiculous comments. Because it’s absolutely cringeworthy.

1. Ray had GREAT footwork by any metric. Do you understand that? Great footwork. He knocked out a guy whilst going backwards. He had incredible balance.

2. There is no such thing as something being outdated.

The fighters today have still got 2 arms.

They’re still using the same punches.

They’re still using balance, timing and leverage.

There’s no difference between a left hook from the 50’s, and a left hook from today.

 

It’s not laughable you fool.

Leonard puts himself second to Robinson.

Robinson was an even better WW than Ray.

1. Great fighters could fight in ANY era.

2. Fights are determined by how the guys match up on the night stylistically.

This is like talking to a casual or a new fan.

What are you going to be saying in 10-20 years?

That Ray Leonard couldn’t compete, because no fighter from the 1980’s, could possibly be able to beat a guy from the 2030-2040’s?

Boxing doesn’t evolve in that way.

And styles make fights.

If a guy today had issues with an aggressive swarmer from his weight class, then he’d have had the same issues with any other great swarmer from any other era.

You are an ignoramus.

I actually pity you.

Go and watch footage of Archie Moore and Ezzard Charles.

I’m studying them now.

They had incredible speed and skills. Great technique and timing. One punch knockouts with either hand. They were studied by guys like Hopkins. Just unique fighters.

And not just for their time. But at any time.

Go and see for yourself.

There is no cut off point.

Great is great.

 

Terence does not have better attributes than Ray.

He isn’t as fast or as fluid.

He isn’t as powerful.

He doesn’t throw combinations like Ray did.

 

Yes.

 

After he get in with SRR he would realise why he was not number 1.