Analysis of Ray Robinson's Style

Excellent read!

Kudo's to Lee Wylie who obviously knows what he is talking about. Guys like him are great to study film with. I agree with just about all of it. I do have some disagreements and thoughts.

Physical - Was a very nice analysis on his advantages. They are obvious but I had never considered them to this degree. He was so much larger and had such a reach advantage that it is almost unfair when you consider that he hit so hard and had a great chin.


Ring Intelligence - Was the best read for me. He broke down that Fulmer KO to a "t". The Graziano breakdown was also great. Honestly, I think the Graziano fight itself it the best Robinson we have on film.

Power - Was the one I disagreed with the most. 109KO's. He was KO'ing guys in the first rounds throughout his career. Saying he is not Foreman or Hearns or Shavers tells me that although he may not crack as hard as them p4p (very debatable) he is definately in the same league as them which is not debatable. Who else pumelled Lamotta, destroyed Fulmer, and put a lemon on Basillio's eye?

Yes Robinson set up that left hook on Fulmer but if anyone else, not named Lamotta or Hagler, had run into that they would have been on the floor longer.

Speed is the one that I am tempted to agree with but, I need to reread a few times. I feel pretty sure that Robinson had faster hands then the heavyweights mentioned although probably not that much faster. Still we don't have much in the way of his prime to view. I think if we did we might feel different. What we have is mostly a just out-of-prime still amazingly great fighter. If we did not have footage of Leonard's best days and only his latter career it would change our oppinion of how fast he was.

Still he was dead on when he said that Robinson was throwing to end the fight, not look pretty. Leonard was throwing to be flashy until he was angry or desparate and then he was firing rounds. When that was the case Leonard did not look nearly as fast.

Thanks for posting this. At the end of the day this writer attempts to shed the Robinson legend and bring us into reality. The thing is, for me, based on his writing here, Robinson ends up seeming more invincible, no? Considering all of his natural gifts for boxing and high IQ he did exactly what he should have done. Dominate every fighter he ever fought regardless of how big they were or great.

 

RJJ easily combined them better than Robinson.

 

Did he?

 

It's on film.

 

:think

 

:yep

This has to be one of the fastest 1-2 Combination I've ever seen:

This content is protected

 

Two words sum-up SRR: STONE KILLER!

 

A great analysis by Lee Wylie on the greatest all around fighter I ever saw...
There is one point I don't understand : When mention is made of the fact
[debatable] that Ray Robinson did not hit as hard as some other MWs of the past
with one punch...But his blurring combinations more than offset this possible fact.
As in major league baseball ,there were some ballplayers I've seen such as a Dave Kingman, who hit balls out of the ballpark as far as ANYONE, but hit 220 BA, whilst a
Ted Williams or Hank Aaron, never hit tape measure homers but were infinitely better hitters...My analogy is that Ray Robinson's offense, based on blurring combinations
was a greater punching offense than the 1 punch [harder] hitters as a Julian Jackson etc.
Robinson was beautiful to behold as a welterweight...For sure...

 

lot of you tube videos of SRR. greatest fighter ever. lightening fast first punch, left hook was a flash, great jab, power, footwork, iron jaw, heart hand speed from hell. GOAT

 

This was my take on SRR:

The first time I saw Robinson in the ring, my dad took me to the old Garden in ‘46 to see him against Tommy Bell for the vacant welter title.

Bell was no slouch, in his own right . . . not the least cowed by Robinson's reputation.

Robinson glistened in his corner waiting for the bell. He was sleek and lean, with dancer's legs and long supple arms that looked even longer because of his sloping shoulders. While the introductions were being given, he windmilled his right arm, like David readying to smite Goliath with a sling.

Robinson and Bell were mirror images style-wise - both stand-up boxer-punchers - though Robinson enjoyed a few inches in height.

Bell fought with hands high and with a tighter stance. Robinson's guard was lower and he was turned slightly to the side, in concession to defense, but his stance was wider and gave him more leverage.

They dueled on pretty even terms for 15 rounds, but to me, Robinson's punches had more authority and his combinations were the repeated crack of a bullwhip.

Some thought Robinson lost that night - it was that closely contested - and Bell dropped Robinson in the second round with left hooks. Bell hit the canvas in the 11th, and was almost stopped in the 12th.

I think like most people there, though, it was almost impossible not to watch Robinson exclusively: Every movement was as classic for a fighter as Fred Astaire on a dance floor. Robinson glided over the canvas. And, even in the bitterest exchanges, he had the baring of royalty. His combinations were flashes of fire to the head and body; you could hear the THWACKS! echo through the arena.

 

Yeah, Robinson, about that...there was a little known fighter in the 1800's known as 'Dutch' Sam....the idea of pound-for-pound was spawned by him.

A.J. Liebling...the sweet science...no, Pierce Egan coined the phrase.

Would Robinson have survived ten rounds with 'Dutch' Sam. Possibly. Would he have been ready for another ten? No.

For every nostalgic reference there is twenty more for all the forgotten heroes who saw more blood than Robinson could stomach.

Robinson was a beast, but lets be serious gentlemen.

There was a little known white boy called Harry Greb who would've stared a hole through Robbie.

P4P #1...nope.

The consensus is crumbling as we speak, and rightly so.

On another note, Sugar Ray Robinson was a fantastic fighter.

 

Alcohol ^