Could Roy Jones upset Ray Robinson?

Robinson mostly fought mediocre fighters at 160lb limit, what you talking about "better fighters"? LaMotta, Olson, Turpin, Graziano, Castellani, Fullmer, Basilio, Pender, all mediocre boxers skill-wise, cleverness-wise and talent-wise. And he lost to half of them, yet he's gonna beat Jones. Gimme a break. Giardello was the best opponent Robinson had after Gavilan, but the fight was above 160lb limit. I'm pretty sure Robinson would have lost to Giardello even if we took 1951 version of Robinson.

 

LaMotta and Turpin were far from mediocre. Maybe they look like that to you because they actually fought other top fighters. They didn't need half of the boxing media to shame them into taking fights.

 

I don`t have the time right now to dissect this little tidbit of yours, but believe you me I`ll be here later this evening to take you to task on those comments. Your attempt at portraying the fighters you mentioned as being nothing but mindless, mediocre brutes is so far off base it isn`t funny. The fact that you have to resort to thrashing those fighters in order to elevate Jones and advance your argument is rather pathetic... idolatry is a dangerous thing and your idolatry of Jones is getting quite tiresome.

 

Raging Bull, dpw, and Meta posted gems on this thread.

...And I for one thoroughly enjoyed JT's debate with Senya and the impending rebuttal Raging Bull.

 

I have seen all fighters I listed on film, and I'm fully aware of how limited they were skill-wise, cleverness-wise and talent-wise, so I stand by my words, and have made the above comment not to elevate Jones, but to express my opinion about how much overated that supposed "Golden age of middleweights" from the 1950s is.

 

Not at all true.

 

Lets examine Gene Fullmer now.

Gene wasn`t a classy looking boxer, but he sure was tricky and awkward to figure out in the ring. He would break his movements and move in opposite directions to break patterns, and he was also very versatile as he could either box, brawl or do a mixture of both.

In the first Robinson fight Gene constantly feinted Ray in their bout by slightly bending his knee as if he were about to throw a punch, and Ray would fall for it almost each time and lunge in with right hands or uppercuts that would miss by a foot, then when Ray was off balance Gene would tear into him before taking a step back and re-setting himself. I dunno about you, but it takes a skilled fighter to feint Ray into knots the way he did.

Unfortunately the idiot commentator kept commentating on how Gene's battle-plan was "simple", that he just flared in with two fists. The reason for this misconception(by so-called "experts") is because Gene LOOKED like a slugger. He had a flat-nose and rough composure and a round hard head. He admitted rabbit-punching Robinson repeatedly and I forget his EXACT words, but it was something like this, "If he wanted to put his head down so the only place I could hit him was the back of the head, I really didn't mind".

I'd also like to mention the Basilio fights where Fullmer boxed beautifully mainly in reverse all night picking Carmen apart. Amazing fights, by two very proud warriors. Fullmer fought in an odd cross arm defense (with his right hand below his left unlike most cross arm defenses) and it worked great for him. Gene's skilled use of elbows, laces, shoulders and headbutts should also be mentioned as they were a part of his arsenal and he used them effectively.

In summation, while his style might not have been pleasing to the eye (personally I enjoy watching him a great deal), there was a lot more to this tough Mormon from Utah then meets the eye if one looks closely. His defense was better than his awkward, plodding style suggested at first glance and if you have seen as much of Gene as I have (I have ALL his fights) it becomes clear that he was very versatile, cagey and intelligent in the ring.

To be continued...

 

I can give you a hundred modern fighters who show skills and cleverness as good as either Olson or Fullmer, and they are considered, at best, good, but nothing special, mediocre boxers, some are contenders or even titlists.
I've seen highlights of Olson's fights with Moore and Torres and 3 fights with Robinson, he was very unimpressive on film, a very limited fighter.
Same for Gene Fullmer, whom I've seen vs Tiger, Lausse, Robinson (4 fights), Miceli, Basilio (2 fights), Fernandez, Paret, Giardello. Mediocre skills and little talent, sorry but I don't buy this exaggeration/overemphasis you have written above.

 

You are belittling fighters whose credentials are considered Hall of Fame worthy by boxing historians. I'd safely say your viewpoint is very much in the minority and lacks any substantiative reasoning re the assessment of these fighters.

 

I'm not debating credentials / achievements, I'm saying they weren't very skillful, clever or talented. People like to belittle RJJ's run at 175lb, well, the 1950's middleweight division was no better than 175lb opposition Jones met and beat, both consisted of mostly medicore fighters (but Jones didn't struggle with his opponents, unlike Robinson, and they both were above their natural/best weight and advanced in years, so it can't be used an excuse for Robinson).

 

Well, one of the guys you mentioned was Gene Fullmer, and I can tell you that he was no mindless oaf. He was a clever fighter who could have troubled even the greatest of middleweights.

 

This **** about Robinson fighting mediocre opponents isn't really being backed up here. It also hasn't seemed to phase anyone that Robinson not only fought top fighters who were talented but fought them often. In 1951 for example, he fought 11 times which included some 3 or 4 title fights. I can't think of any champions today who can claim that.