Would his resume be considered on par with the likes of Langford and Greb? I rate SRR #3 P4P behind only Langford and Greb. Remember only half 1 lb stopped SRR from being the LW champion when he beat Angott, and if he had paced himself better against Maxim, (which I beleive if he would have, he would have won that fight.) He would have retired in 1952 as LH, WW, MW, LHW champ, then makes his comeback and wins the MW title 3 more times. Would this be enough to secure a place with the likes on Langford and Greb resume wise. These two are considered on an even higher place than other fighters because of their CV's, their depth and quantity of resume is so good its ridiculous. Its generally accpeted that as great a fighter SRR was, his resume (not skillset) is not as top as Sam Langford and Harry Greb. But if he were to become champ of these two extra divisions, which he came very close to doing, would his resume match the likes of Greb and Langford? Thoughts?
Maybe, But he needed to also knock out the world heavyweight champion (and no 1, 2 and 3 contender) for arguments sake Louis, charles and Walcott! before we could start comparing him to Fitzsimmons:good
You answer your own question don't you. As you said it is only a half pound and a heatwave stopping this achievement. His career wouldn't have gone much different in my eyes.
A heatwave? The pesky heatwave. The same pesky heatwave that KOd Jack Johnson, Bob Fitzsimmons, Jim Jeffries and others. Are you sure that the light hitting Joey Maxim didnt have something to do with it or did they put an air conditioner in his corner. By the way, is the answer no, it wouldnt have made his resume equal to Greb or Langford's?
I'm sticking with heat. Robinson was comfortably ahead at the time of the retirement. You are quite right, I didn't give an answer. I haven't made my own mind up as to whose resume I put more stock in. I was pointing out to the ts that these two events happening slightly differently should not have a real bearing on resume.
so was vitali against byrd, johnson against willard, lyle against ali, etc. whether they were knocked out, referree stopped the fight or they couldn't make it to the last round they lost i hate to say it but it really is a disservice to maxim to solely credit the heat and a large part of it is done, i think, because it's robinson we're talking about. i don't think if that were any other fighter people would be so passionate about the heat being the cause. if that were dick tiger for instance, you'd likely hear "well, he should have paced himself better"
Robby ran away with the latest GOAT poll as if he actually did dethrone Angott and Maxim. On an even playing field in title competition, he would have clearly been the master of both. It seems as though he is indeed recognized as having come from amateur championships at 126 in 1939 to within two rounds of the crown at 175 in 1952. That's a formidable jump of about 50 pounds in divisional weight limit in just over a dozen years. But to surpass most substantial debate between himself and Greb, Fitz and Langford, he had to somehow proceed beyond a defeat of Maxim to snag heavyweight honors as well, too much to ask of a skinny former featherweight like him. Fitz won the heavyweight title by knockout while never truly outgrowing 160. (He weighed 159 for Lang in 1909.) He took out Tom Sharkey, Gus Ruhlin and Peter Maher conclusively. With or without the HW crown, he was clearly elite among the big boys. So was Greb. Harry began professionally around 140 when aged 18 and also never outgrew 160. (Langford was a LW in 1903 and 1904, but grew into a solid 200 pounder by 1914.) Taking Maxim would have been comparable to Armstrong getting the official decision in his MW Title rematch with Ceferino.
I agree. What i'm saying is, considering the circumstances, I wouldn's dramatically rate him higher had he stayed till the end. Same with those you mention, vitali and johnson. Would view be remembered significantly more if weren't for injury or exhaustion? I doubt it. I don't thin i'm making myself clear so apologise. I wasn't offering my own opinion, more a reply to the ts's question. My opinion is that it is a legitimate loss, but due to the nature of his performance and subsequent retirement, I don't believe his stock significantly improves if he wins a decision. I still have not decided on how I compare him against greb and langford
:thumbsupno apologies needed and you did clarify. the question is more: with those extra rounds and a nearly guaranteed robinson victory, would he be looked at differently? i personally think so and having won the legit light heavyweight title, along with the welter and middleweight and having beaten the lightweight champ in angott would have put him in the rarified air of fitz in terms of weight jumping. that being one of the only possible knocks against him in all time rankings (which i personally don't believe in but there is a point to it)
That is the question indeed. For me the answer is no. However had he rematched maxim and won I would view him more favourably. Not much more however. I think his legacy is set. I wouldn't suddenly view him as much greater had he outlasted maxim. Obviously it improves his legacy, we can all agree on that. The question is to what degree. You would have to only give greb or langford a razor thin advantage for a maxim victory to jump robinson above them two imo. Obviously statistically it makes much better reading had he been a four weight champ, more so had he retired after regaining the mw belt for the last time. Ofcourse none of that happened and he is still greatly revered, would two more rounds have made a difference to his legacy, ofcourse. Would that difference be huge? I wouldn't say so.
Given resume, I think he is already the greatest of all time. Adding these titles to his resume would merely enhance him somewhat. Not alot, as he showed he was totally capable of winning the LHW title, and while he fell short, I think proving he was right there and able does almost as much for him as actually pulling off the feat.
