The only other guy from the 40s who was a welter who I thought would have been mentioned is Sammy Angott. Servo, Berger, Janazzo, Levine, Abrams, and Brimm were all legit wins, but I don't think they qualify.
Tell me more. Also, what do you know about the scoring system used for that fight? Cards like 85-65 are hard to figure.
Well, Angott was a lightweight and Robinson fought him there - pretty fantastic win, particularly considering it came in his first year as a pro.
I agree and said it before that his place as no 1 welterweight should not be beyond contention, based on his resume. Leonard's is better despite his loss to Duran.
Gavilan and Zivic are the two that stand out to me. Convincing wins over two very different, elite opponents.
Even though the LaMotta wins were close affairs, I feel like a few of them had to be some of Robbie's greatest moments. After all, this was the Bronx Bull, and those fights were probably some of the greatest testimonies to Robbie's durability. From the sounds of things, his best LaMotta victories in the 40s were the 3rd and 4th fights.
Leonard's record better than Robinson's at Welterweight? Not a chance. Sugar Ray's record has too much depth. Not to mention he beat his toughest foes more than once. Gavilan 2x, Costner 2x, Bell 2x, Zivac 2x, Servo 2x. Robinson never lost to a welterweight.
Gavilian is the 'greatest' fighter. But Tommy Bell isn't far off. He earned his shot at Robinson winning 34 fights in a row before a few close losses, he had 2 close fights with Robinson, went to an SD against Gavilian after his title shot, fought 3 close fights with the bigger Lamotta, beat Zivic and had a great victorious series against Jackie Wilson who himself fought Robinson to a majority decision. Gavilian was younger, would have more longevity and win a title. But Bell would of likely won a title if he wasn't wading his way through a murderer's row of contenders