Sugar Ray Robinson- A Great. But THE GREATEST????

I can live with that. It's a shame that Cocoa Kid ended up a bum at Times Square, fiending for money because he was fiending for drugs.

Here's a little tidbit no one knows: Cocoa Kid dropped Robinson in sparring with an overhand right. Robinson brought him in to help him prepare for Steve Belloise in 1949. Before anyone gets excited, the Kid had retired the previous year. Bellioise had wins over Abrams and Tommy Bell among others, and was stopped twice before -in his second pro fight and then by Tami Mauriello (you can see him in "On the Waterfront" as a thug beside Two Ton). Robinson got him out of there in round 7.

 

What fighter ON FILM impresses you the most Stonehands?

Duran at his LW best is right up there for me(and even at higher weights as long as he was fully motivated). He's become one of my favorites in the past few weeks.

 

Robinson fought middleweights in 1942, he fought above the Welter limit in 1943. Yes I do realise he was outweighed by Lamotta it was still a MW contest

 

That's a tough question. What clips we have of Pep at his near-best makes boxing look objectively beautiful... he patterned a style off of feinting. McCallum taking apart Jackson is what boxing is. Benny Leonard, Barney Ross. Again... the best fighter I've seen on film is a fighter who is usually not even at his best in his filmed bouts. We have only clips of that. But here he is:

[YT]DQClNVCJIwQ[/YT]

Duran is Duran. Duran vs. DeJesus III is pugilistic excellence. Leonard I is 'backalley baroque'. Duran-Barkley is miraculous for many reasons. I'll tell you, I've studied that fight for years and never tire of watching it. The man was a bad ass. How anyone can watch that fight, knowing the history behind it and how unprecedented it is, and not become an instant fan is beyond me.

He looks great on film as well, and has the advantage of appearing in color and in close-ups. This is why Tyson gets the nod so much. Imagine how devestating Louis would look on today's film!

 

I'd make the following cases:

Duran>Armstrong - started at Bantamweight (lower than Armstrong), beat a future feather champ at feather (marcial), beat better lightweights than Armstrong (Dejesus and buchanon), beat better Welterweights than Armstrong (LEonard, Cuevas) and beat better Middleweights (Barkley, Moore). On film he looks better than Armstrong with superior boxing ability, a better defense, jab, better punching technique, countering ability while equaling the workrate/intensity/speed Armstrong brought to the table.

Now if some rate Armstrong above Robinson then why not Duran? Duran fought better fighters than Robinson above his prime weights. Fighting Leonard at 147 would be the equivilent of Robinson fighting Monzon at middleweight. Fighting Hearns at 154 would be the equivilent of Robinson fighting Moore at 175. Fighting Hagler at 160 is the equivilent of Robinson fighting Ezzard Charles at 175 or higher.

Ali: simply fought the best of the best in the best era ever in the toughest of divisions for nearly 20years. Technically he is not the P4P best

Jones: best P4P Athletic Physical specimen ever without a doubt. Resume a little lacking but underrated

Whitaker - literally untouchable in his prime, again resume a little lacking but dominance of the highest nature

 

Nice one Stonehands. Robinson was excellent on film. His combinations were accurate, fluid, and at times devastating. I just wish someone out there does have undiscovered film somewhere in their attic of him in his prime. Probably highly unlikely, but you never know.

Duran-Barkely. One of my favourite Duran fights. His defense in that fight was great at times. I can mind about halfway through the first round he slips under many of Barkley's jabs. Lovely countering right that staggers Barkley towards the end of the round. I have a framed potrait from the fight which I put up on my wall. Different action shots. At the moment just behind me is a framed photo of Duran sitting on his stool between rounds of the first Leonard fight.

 

Aside from Duran, you practically acknowledge the inherent silliness in putting Jones, Ali, or Whitaker at the top spot. Especially Jones, which is utterly sophomoric. Jones did look utterly magnificent... against Vinnie Paz and mailmen. The man made a career out of avoiding real challenges. In that critically important measure, he wasn't worthy of cleaning the spit out of Ray Leonard's bucket. The greatest fighter who ever lived would never, ever say something so idiotic as "I feel as though I am a champion because I didnt get knocked out" (after Tarver III).

The greatest fighter who ever lived would never say "I won't fight this clown any more, no more, no more." Duran quit in the middle of a title fight. That bars him from the top spot forevermore. He was also inconsistent, which although only apparant after he had 70 fights and dominated his natural division, still costs him. Go watch the Laing and Lawlor I bouts and you'll see the light. I put Duran at 4 or 5 and consider that fair.

 

There is no real greatest...

How can you comprehensively validate that Jimmy Wilde, Benny Leonard, Sam Langford or Harry Greb are any lesser than 'Sugar'?

Where Robinson trumps are fellow P4P'ders and grabs the consensus #1 spot is in the material. He is both well chronicled and well-filmed.

He is, simply, more tangible.

 

Please take note gentlemen.

 

True then. Less true now. Thank you God. Although the vast majority of boxers are still treated like $2 whores. It makes me sick. I've gotten to despise promoters and managers. Generally speaking, they're pimps trading in flesh.

Ray had much to say and his take on the Cocoa Kid stunt those promoters in Texas pulled makes all the difference in the world.

 

Alot of interesting reading on this thread...I have to comment on this match-up of Burley/Gavilan. This for me is one of the hardest fights to put a finger on and come up with a conclusion. As Stonehands stated Burley's style was 'complicated and shocking'...Complicated as in facing a superior defensive conundrum...shocking as in having the power to make you pay dearly for mistakes or unwise transgressions.
In attempting to break this down, I can come up with two feasible conclusions with both men taking the fight. Burley getting respect with his power, providing a extremely difficult target, and being mobile enough to keep Gavilan at the end of his punches.
Gavilan pressing the action relying on his speed, explosiveness, and chin to take Burley out of his comfort zone, by forcing Burley into fast paced exchanges
I can't truly make a pick because of the limited film on Burley...what it boils down to... IMO is Burley's activity level...Does the film against Oakland Billy Smith demonstrate the pace Burley would prefer against an equal sized opponent? I have no doubt that Gavilan's chin will see him through a fire fight with anyone at 147lbs. The winner is predicated on Burley's activity level when pressed hard by the 'Cuban Hawk'...Two of my favorites.
Addendum: McGrain, worst avatar of all time!!!...Well, second worst anyway. I remember seeing one with a pink pig saying 'eat pork' or something...that was the worst. You're a solid second place though.

 

Ture, but for all intensive purposes, his loss to Frazier in the FOTC would have been the same as losing the title in the ring.

 

Good read.

Too bad for Ray, he ended up with financial troubles like all those other fighters.