If you have Ray Robinson as P4P number 1 please explain....

Both fighters were evaluated by the same crew of folks who were monumental evaluators of fistic talent who you could make hardy any modern comparison to in todays scene.
All said Robinson!!

 

I know that Sugar Ray Robinson beat Henry Armstrong on points when they fought but does anyone have any actual newspaper reports of how this one actually went down?

 

PFP ratings are always a problem for me considering that the very nature of 'P4P' means that yo0u really have to disregard any Natural Middleweights, Light Heavyweights and Heavyweights .. There must be a better way to evaluate fighters on their own terms no matter what size they are ....

Its impossible for me to evaluate the merits of Henry Armstrong against Sugar Ray Robinson simply because i havent seen enough of Armstrong to make an educated analysis .. But for a simple PFP argument i'd be very interested in how some of you guys see Roberto Duran, hes one of my favourites and his career of going up the weights is phenomenal ....

Buchanan (Lightweight)
De Jesus (Lightweight)
Ray Leonard (Welterweight)
Davey Moore (Light Middle)
Iran Barkley (Middle)

Coupled with close decisions against guys of the calibre of Wilfred Benitez and Marvin Hagler ..

How do you guys think Duran stacks up against Armstrong PFP ?? And do you think Sugar Ray Leonard's stupidly macho approach to the Montreal fight boosts Durans legacy more than it should be ?? I'd be very interested to hear some thoughts ..

 

They seemed wide the last time I scored those fights.
Duran would be in my top 10 or at least close to it.
Astounding fighter.

 

yup
http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...J&pg=6954,1149875&dq=robinson+armstrong&hl=en

 

Well first of all i'm a huge fan of both fighters,2 of my favorites of all time.I believe Robinson is the best of all time because the guy had everything every fighter wants power,speed,chin,heart,and much more.Robinson fought for almost 26 years and fought more champions and HOF'S than anyone in history and beat them most of the time.Armstrong's career was only 8 years compared to ray's 26,although ray had 200 fights(26yrs) compared to armstrongs 180(8yrs).Both of them are legends and will always be considered by most real boxing fans to be top 5 P4P,Everyone will have their own opinion on who was better just as any fan is entitled.

 

Duran v Hagler wasnt wide when i last watched it, its been awhile but i remember Hagler closing it out in the last 3 rounds .... Benitez was more comfortable .. Interesting though, any thoughts on a comparison between Armstrong and Duran ??

 

Thats the astounding thing, Robinson was competitive for a quarter of a decade .. It may have been said a million times before and often becomes boring to listen too but Robinson and Ali are the ultimate standard bearers of boxing, true skilled operators and true warriors with longevity who just kept fighting .. As long as boxing survives the names of Robinson and Ali will reign supreme on the top tier of Champions, and deservedly so ..

 

Agreed

 

Personally, I consider Robinson #1, Armstrong #2 but considering the subjective nature here, I can perfectly see how someone would have it the other way or even two different fighters. It's subjective, no one can say it's this person, no ifs ands or buts. You can seriously argue the cases of a handful of fighters. I don't have to agree to at least take you seriously. Carmen Basilio actually said in an interview that he thought Pep was the best. It's a respectable opinion too. For what it's worth, I've watched interviews where Jou Louis, Muhammad Ali and Floyd Patterson all said they considered Robinson the p4p best. Impressive endorsements.

 

I'd never mention Ali and SRR in the same breath as
fighters. Ali never partook in any infighting whatsoever. His offensive arsenal lacked a left hook. On the few occasions in his career he threw it, it was "like a womans slap" to quote Eddie Futch.

 

That fight report is quite interesting. Ray Robinson clearly respected Armstrong's power. Its like Robinson fought the perfect fight by staying at a distance and flicking the jab. Even then, it says that Henry did make him miss quite regularly. This is an old Armstrong and a close to prime Welterweight Ray Robinson. And it is very interesting that Robinson did not want to take risks and unload in close and finish off Armstrong, although it does say that ARmstrong struggled when he did. This would be one great fight, prime for prime.

 

You can pick apart 99% of fighters with the parameters that you describe, you like to concentrate on Ali's supposed negatives while not mentioning his positives .. Your a biased hater of Ali and thats your perogative but at least be honest about it ..... Surely if he didnt have a left hook and a body attack (which ive heard a million times) he was an even better fighter than thought, as he didnt attack the body and he had no left hook but still beat more talented fighters than most fighters in history and for longer ..... Ali haters are just so obvious and easy to pick apart .... I'd love to hear your critical analysis on guys like Dempsey, Marciano, Tyson, Lewis etc, using the same parameters as you judge Ali .....

Ali himself said that Robinson was the best of all time, i was simply using the longevity of career, the stellar nature of his opponents and his general skill set as a comparison .. I wasnt literally comparing Robinson and Ali as fighters ..

 

Yes but check out the comedy gold that you provided me with in my signature Mr Dempsey, is your judgement the apex of all judgement ?... I think not :good

 

Armstrong was past it & Robinson carried him.

Clear UD for Robinson.

(The `carried him` part is the most arguable but Ive heard it more than once)