Who had a greater resume, Ali or Robinson?

Robinson beat at least two top 10 all time welterweights.
Armstrong and Gavilan are generally always in all time top 10s of welters. Often both make the top 5 actually.
He never lost to a welterweight either.

 

Hi mate Armstrong was a lot further last his peak than Liston, Frazier and Foreman were. He was basically shot when he fought Robinson.

Gavilan on the other hand was pretty much prime if mebbe a tad green.

Cheers.

 

Armstrong was still highly ranked though.
He had a couple of good wins shortly before the Robinson fight.
He was nowhere near his best but he was still way above average.

A lot of people said Frazier was "shot" after Foreman destroyed him, in 1974 and '75 when Ali beat him. It's only really because Ali struggled with him that he's regarded as not shot. (and to be fair, Ali was past it too, of course).

If Robinson had struggled a bit more with Armstrong, I suspect he'd be given more credit for the win. But he dominated Armstrong so thoroughly, it's easy for us to write Armstrong off as a shell.

 

Hello there, JC. How are you doing? Is all well in Oz?

Good to see you posting. You're still holder of best post of the year for your tribute to Hector Thompson in my book.

 

Interesting and fair points, although I side with JC40 on how highly I'd rate the win over Armstrong. Then again, I have just mentioned Leonard beating three ATGs of their division and I am clearly including Hagler there who was well past peak - so double standards on my part.

Out of interest, and this is a question rather than a challenge, you say Sugar Ray beat at least two top 10 welters, suggesting that there are more. Who would be your third? Basilio?

 

Harry Greb.

 

Ali's resume has more impressive top names - his top 5 or thereabouts are better than Robinson's top 5.
But the depth in Robinson's resume takes it IMO

Fritzie Zivic x2, Marty Servo x2, Jake Lamotta x2, Henry Armstrong, Sammy Angott, Max Shapiro, California Jackie Wilson... all within three years of his debut is ridiculous.

 

I'm not claiming they'd make my top 10, but if I saw someone squeezing Basilio or Zivic into a top 10 of all time welters, I certainly wouldn't have much of a problem with that.

 

Thank you. Interesting food for thought. Might need to have a bit of a read/watch up. They've gone under my radar a bit.

 

If not for his fight with Robinson, I feel like Armstrong’s comeback (after a year and a half retirement recovering from one of the most damaging title fight losses in history) would be seen as another of his great achievements. It should be, as far as I believe. People just really don’t want to give Robinson credit, it seems.

If that’s your take, I’ll just say that if Hank was shot after his retirement and pre-Robinson, then he was hands down the GOAT in his prime. Not even close.

Directly after his long layoff, he was rusty, no doubt. He fought 3 times in his first month back and lost the last of them after failing to stop the second. Had he fought Robinson then, I wouldn’t argue with your stance. Instead he revitalized his career and went on a 21-2 tear against the quality of opponents you’d expect him to be matched up with while he still held the belt.

He bested his conqueror Fritzie Zivic. He beat Sammy Angott fresh off his world renowned win over Willie Pep. He scored second round KOs over Tippy Larkin and Juan Zurita. He became the second man in Leo Rodak’s 100+ fight career to stop him. He split a pair of close fights with one of the best Lightweight contenders and pure boxers of the era in Willie Joyce. His only other loss came against the current Lightweight champion Beau Jack.

But yeah, you go insisting he was “shot”.

 

Who, that were in his weight class, are you thinking of?

 

It's also worth noting that Armstrong went on another winning streak AFTER the Robinson loss, moving back up to #1 contender status in RING magazine while Robinson was in the army.

People might want to say he was "more past it" than Liston in '64 or Frazier in '75 but I don't really see a lot of strong evidence for that.

 

Ali beat Frazier in 1974 which was still very much Frazier's prime. How many guys in 1974 beat Frazier other than Ali or Foreman? Only Lyle would have a chance and even then, i favour Frazier. So Ali did beat prime Frazier even if peak Frazier was 1971.

Anyway, to answer the question, both guys have a lot of depth. I may give the edge to Robinson in depth. However, Ali's 5-1 record vs 3 all time top 10 heavyweights (Foreman, Frazier, Liston) means i give him a slight edge when it comes to best wins.

 

Robinson for me. Simply due to its depth.

I love Ali's résumé, he has some of the best ever HWs on it, and beat some of my all-time favourite fighters too. If we assume Ali is the GOAT HW, or at least top 10, then that would mean there's nine places left, right? Ali beat three guys who should be there IMO, and he did it a total of 5 times over 10+ years.... That's ****ing insane, and without checking or racking my brain, I'm fairly certain that's unprecedented access the other weights. Except for Charles? Anyway, the point is that Ali has some of the best high-level wins ever, and then he has wins over Patterson, Chuvalo, Quarry, Norton, Young, Shavers, Folley, Terrell, Bonavena, Lyle, Mathis, Spinks, Foster (both) and even more. It's quality and quantity with arguably the greatest win ever at HW thrown in for good measure.

But like I said, Robinson's just has depth man. The guy has elite wins coming out of his arse across two incredibly stacked divisions. Just look at this:

Sammy Angott, 3 times
Marty Servo, twice
Fritzie Zivic, twice
Maxie Berger
Jake LaMotta, 5 times
Izzy Jannazzo, 4 times
Henry Armstrong
Kid Gavilan, twice
Bobo Olson, 4 times
Randy Turpin
Rocky Graziano
Gene Fullmer
Carmen Basilio
Denny Moyer
Ralph Dupas
Holly Mims
Jose Basora
Aaron Wade

And there's a **** tonne of others which I can't be arsed to name, but they're there. And what's mental is that it could actually be a lot better if he'd have fought the majority of the Murderer's Row. Or even some more middleweights in the early 40s. The fact I've just typed that and meant it shows how great Robinson is, as I'm literally holding him to a standard where I want him to fight Tony Zale whilst barely being a welterweight.

It hasn't been said in this thread, but I've definitely read it before, that Ali's win over Moore is worth the same as Robi's over Armstrong. Which is just bull****. Armstrong was still much higher level than Moore was at that point.

 

Frazier wasn't at his peak anymore when Ali beat him, but Ali was older and more shopworn himself. In the case of SRR/Armstrong, Robinson was younger and fresher.