ray robinson is actually overrated

blas·phe·my [blas-fuh-mee]
(–noun, plural -mies.)

1. impious utterance or action concerning god or sacred things.

2.Judaism.
(a. an act of cursing or reviling God.)
(b. pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton (YHVH) in the original, now forbidden manner instead of using a substitute pronunciation such as Adonai.)

3. Theology. the crime of assuming to oneself the rights or qualities of God.

4. Hatesrats by comparing SRR to God.

 

I don't think you've embarrassed yourself, nothing wrong with an opinion.

The thing is with what you said about fighting guys with bad records, compared to the majority of fighters today, every fighter had a "bad" record. You can't get so hung up on the #s with guys who fought 20-25 times a year. Fritzie Zivic has a shitty looking record by todays standards but he was a great fighter. LaMotta had tons of losses but he was a killer. These guys fought all the time and fought anyone they could, whenever they could. Todays fighters fight 2 or 3 times a year max. If you multiplied that by 10 and figured in losses, most fighters today would have tons of losses too.

 

happy In a nutshell, Nice. (Why can't I do that?)

 

Paychecks were kinda slim back then, "You don't work, You don't eat".

 

Back then fighters fought ! They didn`t run their lives and careers by trying to protect their 0`s. They fough so much more than today`s fighters,and they truly learned their craft. What people seem to miss with this post, is not only was SRR HIGHLY skilled. But had the true heart of a warrior as well. He could dig in and get nasty as well when he had to... And his skill level translates well into today fighters as well. How the hell would anyone beat a prime,147 SRR ????? Outbox him? Knock him out ? Use more ring savvy and outfox him ? Yep, he`s overrated... He in fact is underrated in terms of skill and toughness.

 

130 wins against fighters who are part -time truckies, fireman, policeman, loggers, is not really spectacular. Sure, they are as tough as they come, but they don't really have much boxing skill to show for.

In those era, the only fighters who actually train like today's fighters (meaning no second job, no fly-by- night, second income generating job), are the ones that we always say are the ATG now. Most of the others hold other jobs, untrained by credible trainers, with sloppy technique.

Out of the 130 wins, how many are actually full-time fighters, with real trainers?

I contend that even Cotto or Margarito would win probably 120 + fights out of the 130 he fought, if facing the same calibre of opponents.

It is not a knock on SRR but rather a knock on how current generation are awed by fighters simply by the sheer number of fights they had.

500 fights, 25 losses - surely ATG because only an ATG can fight 500 fight and win 475!!!!

That is a problem in comparing generations of fighters using a set of standards that favor older generation. example, number of fights.

I have seen Ezzard Charles videos and if he faced prime Tyson (pre-prison) he would be steamrolled, or even Lewis for that matter. He would probably be at par with Michael Spinks skillwise, or even Holyfield.

Dissecting a fighter based on skillset, power, speed, ring generalship, intelligence is very hard, yet probably doable. Looking at SRR, he tends to be vulnerable to some punches, even looping ones like those thrown by La Motta. In boxing, everybody is beatable and at times, styles make fight.

Like JMM has the style that is always a nightmare for Pac. Against other welters, Pac's style is a nightmare. JMM knows how to maintain distance, a style negated by Floyd by refusing to engage first and instead be the counterpuncher to a counterpuncher.

And to answer the thread, SRR's rating is justified. The oint of saying he is overrated or rated at par to his abilities is a subjective one. Example, PFP in prime, SRL vs. SRR, I would pick SRL.

 

Then you have idiots like rooster saying that Norris would give him a run for his money. Can anyone imagine what Robbie would have done to, Jackson (one dimensional )Brown, Mullings, or the likes therof ??? And if he is that dated with his style, and training methods, I beg you to look at films of his incredible footwork while he jumped rope...

 

Really ? How by KO ? You really think that the guy who was being outboxed by Hearns would outbox SRR ? Do you see SRL roaring back and stopping SRR ? And I thought SRL was a fantastic fighter. You see SRL then beating up and outppointing SRR ???

 

On the same note, La motta, a 5'8" fighter, able to land and knock down SRR tells you something. Or Hagler KOing Herans.

Comparing fighters is difficult but does SRL have the tools to be competitive with SRR. Or even Hearns, Hagler, vs. SRR?

Styles makes fight and Hearns will always be a nightmare for any fighter. He fights tall behind a good jab, and has power to go with it.

But to say outright that these fighters have no chance whatsoever is wrong.

SRR struggled too against fighters with less skills than the aforementioned fighters.

 

No one said he's invicncible. I'd say his losses already kind of prove that.

 

he's not invincible if facing a middleweight, but at welterweight he's unbeaten