I am all for a fresh eye. Sugar is to be regarded, in my opinion, as the #1 WW in history head to head. His standing is vastly enhanced by his two wins over Kid Gavilan. I haven't seen either of these fights, but I have seen a lot of Kid G in other fights. In my opinion, he's the #2 head to head at WW based upon that footage. Mayweather, on the other hand, is yet to meet an eliter WW. In ATG terms, that makes them incomparable. In head to head terms that means all intangibles favour Robinson. I also happen to think that Robinson is superior on film. For the record, I rank him all time #3 rather than #1, but it is rareified are, as you say.
If you're 18 you don't know **** and to say a result between two optimum performers is OBVIOUS proves it. I was watching boxing when your mother was wiping the remains of babyfood off your spotty little ass. I've watched hours of material on Robinson and to say he OBVIOUSLY beats Mayweather is complete and utter BULL****! It's obvious that Tuesday follows Monday. Just so you know how to put that word in context next time! Back to bed!
Sugar Ray Robinson did't have the benifit of pound for pound match ups so why should Floyd if he's better :huh, Robinson had to fight real middleweights.:deal
Why? This thread is about how Mayweather would get on against Robinson's opposition, right? Robinson weighed about the same for Turpin I as Mayweather did against Oscar. So why can't we make a direct comparison? If Mayweather needs to be handicapped in a way that Robinson did not, surely the point is moot? I think that head to head is very, very difficult to discern. I have absolutley no interest in picking winners in your pound for pound fantasy land.
Now this guys knows his ****! HOF wise there's no comparison. SRR is a God and Mayweather will never be given that level of acclaim. One thing. Why do you think Robinson looks superior on film? In terms of combination punching I agree but he was much more available to be hit than Mayweather has ever been. I realise Floyd is more safety first but do you admit that?
That Robinson is easier to hit? On the outside, most definitely. But then he's coming with a very different style.
This isn't a logical comparison. One only has to look at Floyd's current resume to see the obvious flaws! I could make an argument that Floyd HAS to be able to defeat Shane Mosley convincingly to be considered a better P4P fighter than Mosley let alone SRR. If you look at Floyd's level of competition I think it's pretty fair to say that Mosley would absolutely be 40-0 as well if he fought Floyd's level of competition to this point of his career. This is a VERY important fight for Floyd if he wants to be considered the best. All the comparisons to SRR and Ali are absurd. He's still got work to do to be considered a better P4P fighter Roy Jones IMO.
Okay if you take Floyd at 150 against Turpin at 160 I think Floyd kicks his ass! Regarding my initial post, which was matching Floyd against fighters from the 130's to 175, then it's obvious these need to be pound for pound match ups is it not? If pound for pound is fantasy that should never be taken seriously then why does Ring have a top ten pound for pound list? Why is the term pound for pound taken so seriously? Why ar Mayweather and Pacquiao competing for that position? Why was it coined for Ray Robinson in the first place! If all fighters fight at one weight with all their skills and intangibles intact then who wins? That's a subject for debate and has been for years! Sorry if it throws you off!
who gives a **** about age, and it is pretty obvious that Robinson would win, superior punching power, combination punching, reach, height, whats floyd going to do to beat him, the only advantage Floyds got is defense, so yeah it is obvious Robinson wins, Floyds cute enough to make things tricky but he's losing this fight clearly, Floyd was flustered by De La Hoya's combo's :deal
well then your an idiot, Turpin knocked out light heavys, and besides power and strength, he's got reach, height advantage's and great ring control,
Okay then. By your logic every fighter OBVIOUSLY wins a fight because he's taller, has longer arms and can hit harder? Go watch Pernell Whitaker and get back to me! Schooled!
Nah. An excellent jab coming form unpredicatble angles and establishing range and rhythm whilst throwing a variety of punches out of an awkward stance sounds like a Floydian nightmare. He's also much bigger, much stronger, hits hard enough to have stopped Don Cockell (who later gave Marciano an arugment) and has the craft to out-point Robinson. On the other hand, Floyd struggled with the smaller, weaker, more predictable and by that stage, slower, Oscar. There is basically nothing on film to support your position. You're becoming confused. Ring's rankings don't represent the winners of some fantasy head to head pound for pound tournie. It's based upon the achievments of the very best fighters in the world, and an attempt to describe them in order. You will neve, ever, ever, see fighters who have achieved nothing but look amazing ahead of the game's biggest success stories. Even Marquez and Vasquez were on there for 15 months without fighting until they were finally dropped for inactivity. It has almost nothing to do with a comparison of attributes. Well i've never ever seen it discussed on this forum in 3 plus years.
You forgot better combination's punching :deal Pernell Whitaker would school Floyd aswell :deal , you obviously did'nt know that I rate Whitaker in my top 5 all time :hi:
Floydian nightmare? He's never lost to anyone with a jab or awkwardness? Why did Oscar stop throwing the jab? Because he was getting banjo'd with right hands! Don "****in" Cockell! Are you kidding me? I don't care if my Dad stopped him outside my local. Why not give me Tony Galento for God Sake! These guys were bruisers who were good to watch at a time when athletes didn't know 1% off what they do now! So Ring's pound for pound list is based on acheivements? Well Holyfield is now the recognised pound for pound champion in that case, bro!