Is Shane Mosley worthy of the nickname "Sugar"

It's just a name. But if you're asking if he deserves to mentioned in the same breath as Robinson and Leonard, the answer is no. Which isn't a criticism, nor anything to be ashamed about. Few fighters DO deserve to be mentioned in the same breath.

 

Many would argue that only Robinson warrants the moniker 'Sugar'

 

I always thought it was a bit of a **** nickname to be honest.blasphemy no doubt, but it's not up to much imo.Almost as bad as "kid".

You could have called Robinson anything and hte guy was such a great figher it would have had a good chance of sticking

 

Sugar Poo Robinson

 

Watermelon Ray.

 

Really Rather Good Ray Robinson

 

Well, Mosley is better than Sugar Ray Seales.

 

I think so, one top fighter an era should be allowed it and Shane warrants it this era. Theres only one 'real' Sugar though.

 

I think so too. In terms of ability hes at the bottom of those three, but this is a new generation of boxing, and Shane has fought just about everyone and fought everyone tough. He didnt miss too many of the name guys of his era, and always fought hard.
I knew the Vernon Forrest fight was going to test that "sugar" tag, and Forrest kicked the **** out of him.

 

Hes better than Thulani "Sugarboy" Malinga too

 

Probably not. Tito had a good jab and a massive lefthook, he also fought pretty tall, which troubled Mosley against Forrest.

 

Oh! Quite Excellent Ray Robinson