Did Shane Mosley deserve the 'Sugar' label?

While he was devastating at lightweight and on par with the historical greats at lightweight (and a handful for many welterweights), his dominance didn't stretch over multiple divisions quite the same way that SRR and SRL did. He wasn't KTFOing middleweight champions like Robinson was, nor did he have the sheer volume of big victories that exist on Leonard's resume.

Stylistically, he wasn't really a "Sugar" either. He wasn't a smooth boxer-puncher with well-rounded skills. He was more like a fast brawler with incredible speed and athleticism to go with excellent power, chin, and stamina. His combinations in his prime were something to behold, and he could certainly find the mark consistently with good timing and accuracy with his overhand rights, but he didn't have the same technical skills SRL and SRR possessed in my opinion.

He was certainly fun to watch at his peak, but I can't say he deserved to be mentioned in the same breath as SRL or SRR. Neither of those guys had a real stylistic nightmare; Mosley did. Boxers who could use lateral movement and keep him on the outside always left him looking confused, discouraged, and befuddled, even in his prime (Wright x2, Forrest x2, DLH in the second fight.) I have trouble mentioning him in the same breath as the sugars because of such an obvious, common weakness.

In terms of resumes, Leonard and Robinson both far exceed anything Mosley has done. His lightweight run was great, but in terms of fellow greats he's beaten, it's really just DLH in the first fight, when he brawled with Mosley and paid for it. When DLH boxed him the second time, even a roided Mosley wasn't able to do much about it. Mosley has a variety of good wins (especially the Margarito thrashing), but nothing great aside from the first DLH fight.

Finally, Leonard and Robinson both had great resumes, and more than that, great heart. Leonard or Robinson never wanted to quit in a fight, as Mosley has a number of times, nor did they tarnish their name or accomplishments like Mosley has to some degree with his juicing.

I loved watching Mosley fight. I think he's a good guy and a H2H problem for many greats. But I don't think he quite deserved the "Sugar" moniker.

 

To answer the thread question.....HELL NO!!!! What standards do we had here anyway? Do we equate anything Mosley has done with the ledger or SRR??? Even SRL??? It's self-explanatory. The Margarito fight was his high water mark...just that fight however..

 

Of course he did. He was one of the quickest lightweights we've seen and carried power in both hands. An exceptional athlete, however he's no match to Ray Leonard too more of an extent in that Ray Leonard is no match for Ray Robinson

 

I have never filled my old man diaper over a nickname. I certainly wouldn't start with Shane Mosley's. Of course he's no SRR or SRL. BFD. :conf

 

it's a crap nickname anyway


nearly as bad as "kid"

 

This. If you watch all of his earlier fights, he was quick and slick as hell. He carried power aswell.

 

what about "iceman"

or even better, attach "o" to the end of said boxers name. shano, floydo, osco, migo, wlado, pedro....o, yuriorkiso

 

I agree with everything except i think that Mosley had a great heart

 

Even...http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=481337&cat=boxer

 

da **** !!

 

Yep...Mosely did the name proud...excellent fighter. Hell yes!

 

Yes and no.

Yes because Leonard said he deserved it after seeing DLH-Mosley I and Robinson actually met him and saw him training at the gym and said the same.

No because he isn't in the same ballpark let alone league as them.

This has been beaten to death though Mosley did not give himself that nickname it was handed to him. All three great fighters and I'm a fan of all with their fights.

 

That sealed it for me. His win over Oscar was sensational and he was a special fighter in his early days.

 

I like "Roid" much better.