Was Sugar Ray Robinson really the perfect fighter?

This is something I meant to note. There was nothing ghetto/buffoonish about him. Most fighters and athletes in general comported themselves that way back then. Hell yeah, he was the

This content is protected

all right.

 

Well it is pretty hard to talk flaws when I look up to the guy and think "oh sh*t"
He is almost painful for me to watch, its just so good, haha

But no I don't think he is perfect
I think of him as an original
Or a classic

He wasn't perfect, but he has the comportment or style of it
The closest approximation


His flaws were that the image didn't always remain untarnished
In certain fights he was roughed up, bruised, pushed, a lil staggered
He might come into a guy a bit overconfident or a bit lazy, and get clipped, but just overwhelm the other guy with skill AFTER getting "woken up"

He had a reservoir of ability that other guys did not have
He... was a bit lazy around it
But when I say lazy I don't mean lazy compared to others, I mean lazy compared to perfect
That is VERY different

And when I say at times he was overconfident, same thing, its overconfident compared to perfect, not to others
Cuz in most fights every other guy had a bigger chip on their shoulder, or a delusion about themselves vs him that would be cleared up

His guard is kind of low... His slips and weaving is effective only on the fringes... his clinching was great... his footwork fantastic.
So he used his feet to control distance superbly, and as a result closed distance to hit and expanded it to avoid getting hit, or he would continue to close and clinch and it works VERY well.
He gets clipped on the transitions though. But you have to be very alert and bold to hit sugar on the transitions because, if you miss he lands fluid combos on you, and the odds are in his favor.

IF I had to fight him, I would think of a strategy like, take his legs away, corner him to a point of annoyance. EXPECT him to punch as he goes back, and vigorously so. Hes going to chop n chop at your guard.
But the strategy would be to get hard enough shots onto him that he might get outta rhythm, but look, his rhythm doesnt get upset easily.
It would be maddening to come up with a way to truly beat him.

 

No fighter in history didn't have a " flaw". But according to some of the greatest trainers, greatest sports writers, and greatest boxers, R.Robinson at welter was as close to perfect as one could be. And their is a great amount of film on him,though most of it was when he was past prime. I for one won't argue with reputable boxing personnel who actually witnessed his greatness. And though past prime, and not at his best weight he was still a awesome fighting machine at middleweight were their is plenty of film on him. He was the best in a time their was greatness from fly to heavyweight. Their were very few "soft touches" in the top ten in any division during that time. If their was anyone close to perfection in boxing it was R. Robinson.

 

Where's the indication that the second fight against Gavilan was a questionable decision?

That a prime Gavilan, one of the all-time great welterweights himself, was competitive with Robinson is not really a surprise but the accounts of the fight show Robinson controlling the second half of the fight. There doesn't seem to have been any question that Robinson won that fight and clearly.

The Pender fights were at middleweight and right at the very end of Robinson's championship career so not really relevant when discussing his welterweight resume and when Robinson was in his prime.

As for the LaMotta fights, fabricating a potential 3-3 scoreline from a 5-1 official tally is blatantly ridiculous. Where are you getting your information from?

-The first fight: can you point me to the report that says the first fight was in any way controversial? There was never any debate about that. From the official scoring or in the press reports it was a lopsided win for Robinson: http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Sugar_Ray_Robinson_vs._Jake_LaMotta_(1st_meeting)
-The second fight: LaMotta won, no dispute there from me.
-The third fight: Robinson got knocked down but controlled the fight so let's not overblow this.
-The fourth fight: An easy win for Robinson
-The fifth fight: This was the only fight that you can really point to for a debatable decision. Robinson admitted at the time that it was his hardest fight against LaMotta but although it was close, the judges gave him a unanimous decision.
-The sixth fight: not really relevant as it was for the middleweight title but we all know who won that one anyway, so zero dispute there.

 

Do you not think that part of the reason that Jake did so well against Robbie is that he had more than a stone in weight over Robbie for the most part - combined with his bullish strength, is it case of he vastly improved or that Robbie didn't have the frame or natural punching power to keep the iron-chinned LaMotta at bay in the same manner that he did with natural welterweights?

 

5th fight was a split decision.

 

He could out box the boxers...and out punch the punchers...

 

I disagree - just 2 - 3 Kg is a massive difference when we are talking about a lean, natural WW such as SRR, who at the most could fight at 154 lbs versus a natural 168 - 175 lbs fighter in Jake LaMotta. That Jake struggled to make 160 lbs is no secret and I believe that he could have easily competed in the 90s at SMW. Jake's strength and natural size advantage is all wrong for a SRR and yet, when all was said and done, SRR dominated their series, despite having some close fights.

 

Yep, quite right - my bad.

 

I liked Charles better, but its a shame we only have one fight at his prime and in bad quality

 

Especially at the lighter weights the best , most complete fighter won't mean that fighter will automatically win a fight. Sometimes strength, weight, aggressiveness and style will factor in especially when like in this situation a natural very strong middle is facing a natural welter even though the skill level may be miles apart in favour of natural welter.

 

He was a great great fighter, he was also in deep with fighters that would or could have been champion in other era's & acually did fight many champions in the decades that he fought. He fought all styles and while he was a greatly skilled boxer, he would not always be content to box and move he would battle and battle hard. SRR could KO a opponent moving backwards & he could hit with either hand. He got off the floor to win on numerous occasions, solid chin, great reflexes and power & great ring intellegence. I think off the top of my head he was like 129-2-2 after the 2nd Turpin fight and 132-2-2 after he KO'd Rocky Graziano For a fighter to have that kind of record against that type of opposition is truly remarkable. SRR, Harry Greb, and a few others fit into that small group

 

Kudos! After his loss to Jake, as you said giving up a stones-plus, he fought him against TWENTY FRIGGING DAYS LATER and won with same, said, stone weight disadvantage.

 

Those would be worth something if they were filmed.

 

LaMotta probably won that 3rd fight as well. From the accounts I’ve read. He dropped Ray and I believe that decision was hotly disputed. It’s the only bout Jake had a problem with. He had big respect for Sugar Ray but he felt that one was taken from him.