There are probably guys like Hearns or Hagler who could have beaten Robinson, but as far as number of fights and the iconic legend he is, it will be hard for anyone to ever beat him. The way guys like Roy Jones and Mayweather duck guys now, how can they be a Robinson
I'm pretty sure i read it in 'Sweet Thunder; The Life and Times of Sugar Ray Robinson' by Wil Haygood Good book on what was happening in the world during each of his big fights.
When I was growing up Benny Leonard was the one most mentioned as the best ever also. Robinson was unbelievable though and would have ko'd both Mayweather and Leonard. That time is so long ago now. Boxing was different. Rougher.
Some really good and informative posts here guys. While I am not as versed in boxing history as many of you, I believe Ray Robinson is an excellent choice for the p4p no1 of all time, as subjective as this pick may be. The depth of his resume and the number of quality opponents he beat - often by KO - in his career was exceptional. I also respect the fact that other guys may have pulled off outstanding feats in terms of jumping weight classes and notching up spectacular wins - Fitzsimmons, Langford, Greb, Armstrong, etc. - but Robinson's overall achievements in the sport have him a whisker ahead in my book. But to answer the question... I too believe that Robinson will probably never be surpassed in greatness in terms of his accomplishments in the ring. Few fighters take on all the best matches in their divisions nowadays and even they don't fight often enough. Yes some of the modern fighters like Roy Jones and Pacquiao would have fared very well in terms of mythical match-ups with the best fighters of yesterday but they are unlikely to surpass their achievements.
It seems as unlikely as that 49-0 of Marciano's being overtaken...there ain't any SSR's on the horizon now, but Manny Pac is coming perillously close.
You are wrong . James Toney reached pro 83 fights already and is still not retired officially , although he should be. MW to HW > WW to MW + a miserably failed stint at LHW. And Robinson never achieved the greatness of Sam Langford whom would have also beaten him H2H if there was a time machine. Langford avoided no one and fought everyone plenty of times , Robinson avoided Burley and probably more.
Chavez also had over twice the amount of fights as Whitaker, and given that Whitaker was supposed to have had nothing to hurt him with, I'd say he did fairly well, wouldn't you? Not comparing Whitaker to Robinson, mind you, but your statement was just as absurd in dismissing a fighter based solely on his number of fights. Actually watching those fights would yield a more accurate depiction of the man.
BUT, if you are NOT comparing Whitaker to Robinson as you state, than what is the question ?You stated 'Whitaker is not to be compared to Ray Robinson", and I agree with you... Yes Whitaker did well with Chavez..Agreed, but Chavez also was not Ray Robinson...Whitaker did very well with his limited amount of fights in his era, but Robinson had three times amount of fights, in a golden era where the top notchers fought over 100 fights, and met fighters of every style often...It is one thing to go through 50 or so fights without suffering bad defeats, but it is another ball game to go through 150 more bouts or so, against a vaster,more seasoned pool of great fighters that Robinson contended with...Whitaker was good in his time ,but would he go through Ray Robinson's opponents that Ray did ? I think not..Practice makes perfect, it is said...
P.S. Also.it is not solely the amount of fights Ray Robinson had.Of course not...There were fighters that had100s oif bouts that Whitaker would have beaten...I am talking about Robby who had height ,and explosive hand speed,that would overwhelm Whitaker,without question...And Perenell had nothing that would hold the bigger and vicious Robinson off for long...