:cheers What's truly frightening to me is that the film footage and fights that are available of Robinson is not even him at his personal best. :blood
If technology ever gets to the point of turning my memories into YouTubes, you'd see SRR at his best from ringside.
Burt and John Garfield certainly agree on that. Would be interesting to have a poster join who saw Holman, Charley and Robby all live in the 1940s dissent from their view. (And Burt barely missed out on joining his father to see Burley take out Phil McQuillan at Saint Nick's just one month after Charley's legendary stoppage of 6'3" 219 pound HW Jay D. Turner in Minneapolis.atsch)
Incredibly priviledged, those guys. Top of the line contributors to the forum too, regardless of whether you agree with their opinions or not (Hello, Jack Dempsey). The stories and experiences are rich.
Can only contemplate the type of colossus resume he'd have on top of what is already known. I like to factor the ratings into it for whichever fighters it can feasibly done. For a lot of people, a fighter being in the top ten at one point or another will usually suffice. For the most part, it does. I prefer to take it just a step further beyond that to find which fighters were rated in the immediate time frame of which a bout took place -- timing can mean the world when assessing the value of wins. With the activity level of fighters past so mind boggling, there is simply too much going on within 12 months to peg down exactly ratings, although you get a good sense. In the case of someone like SRR, he has a Surplus of fighters on his record who werent 'at one point or another' - They just WERE. Right then.
Greb has the greatest resume. Fitz has the greatest achievement. Robinson looks the greatest. Regarding rankings. It's good to know who was top 5 around the time of the fight. At the time doesn't always tell the picture imo. Take one example here, wlad beat peter who was about 8th or something and in the shape of his life. Vitali beat peter who was 2nd and overweight. I give wlad more credit there.
True D, fate is funny. My dad went to the St.Nicks Arena to see a prelim bout he was interested in...I,as a youngster refused his offer to take me, as I had something else to do...So dad came home raving about an out of town fighter named Charley Burley who left a great impression on him, and I muffed a chance to see today's legend Charley Burley who never fought again in New York...Such is life ...:hi:
Did the Police Gazette offer rankings prior to Fleischer and The Ring undertaking the practice? I know Rickard published his ratings list for 1924 at Fleischer's urging in January 1925, and Dempsey initially undertook that role for Nat's magazine when Tex died. It seems a little startling to think the National Boxing Association wasn't doing this from their inception (although they didn't begin sanctioning MW Title bouts until 1932).
Perchance, did he ever express any opinion on Robinson versus Burley, or Greb against Charley? (I realize this may be an extremely remote possibility, but the question is too tempting not to be broached at all.)
True enough, luf. I guess the difference is that we're much more privy to the details surrounding fights that have taken place in the last few decades than we are to say, the 1940s or 50s. In many instances, the fights were not even filmed, were ruined or are in the possession of private collectors (and that's within their right, before anything comes out of that). To me, it isn't enough of a credit to say: Ray Robinson beat Sammy Angott. Robinson beat Angott (the first time) when he was the No. 1 rated lightweight in a world of no junior or super divisions, when there was only eight and ONE title to fight for and defend. And he beat him at Lightweight (OK, so they both came in at a dead even 136.5). Not but five months later, Angott dethrones Lew Jenkins to win the title.
D, I can't recall him expressing an opinion of who would have won between Robinson and Burley...Burley came, he saw, he conquered, in New York and left, never to return... I recall reading the next day sport's page, in which a writer wrote something to the effect," that after watching Burley's performance last night it explains why he is so avoided ". And as we all know now, he WAS avoided by most everyone, not including a tough forgotten pug named Jimmy Leto...Leto ,was a terrific fighter who fought everyone including the aformentioned Charley Burley,and Holman Williams, whom Leto kod...Cheers D...
Ironically enough, in that specific example, the lightweight division was quite fractured in that timeframe.
Definitely, I agree there. The reason I settle for top 5 within timeframe or ranked at some point is because of diminishing returns. That being for the effort it takes to discover individual rankings per fight, I don't feel justification for the knowledge it imparts.
Oh for sure, it's nearly impossible to pin-point to the exact time of a fight unless you've got every monthly issue or access to a database I've yet to discover. It's good enough for me that a fighter was rated either entering a year or at the year end of the time it took place. Ray's profile took maybe 15-20 mins, and I'm sure there were actually a bunch that I missed going through it quickly. Here is the complete list (from Manassa): Joe Ghnouly Pete Lello Maxie Shapiro Maxie Berger Norman Rubio x2 Tony Motisi Reuben Shank Izzy Jannazzo x4 Ralph Zannelli Sheik Rangel Tommy Bell x2 George Costner x2 Jose Basora x2 Jimmy McDaniels Cecil Hudson x2 Georgie Abrams Jimmy Doyle Bernard Docusen Vic Dellicurti Steve Belloise Aaron Wade Ray Barnes Robert Villemain x2 Charley Fusari Bobby Dykes Holly Mims Artie Levine Cyrille Delanoit Rocky Castellani Denny Moyer Hans Stretz Ralph Dupas Sammy Angott x3 Fritzie Zivic x2 Jake LaMotta x5 Henry Armstrong Kid Gavilan x2 Carl Olson x4 Randolph Turpin Rocky Graziano Gene Fullmer Carmen Basilio Note: all fighters listed were rated in the RING's top ten at one point or another. Fighters in bold are Hall of Famers.