Sugar Ray Robinson's chances of winning in a mithycal match-up against Spike O'Sullivan are estimated as 7% to Spike's 93% according to BoxRec "What If..." section - http://boxrec.com/en/what_if?wi[id]...i[boxerBId]=434752&wi[orderBy]=&wi[orderDir]=
I think they're facturing in that SRR has been dead for about 3 decades now, and still has a 7% chance to beat current Spike.
Everyone knows that new boxers are better than old boxers. I haven't even attentively watched the televised bouts of shopworn middleweight Robinson, much less the audience recordings that exist of the welterweight version, but can you imagine any boxers from the crusty 40's and 50's possessing, for example, punch arsenals as comprehensive as we've seen displayed by our current crop of bobby-dazzlers at 160? Robinson could only have been a straight up and down with no special effects type fighter compared to today's talents. Now, let's stop pining for the 'good old days' and move on. Outside of the heavyweight division, this sport is healthier than it's ever been. Facts.
Hagler vs Spike. The same 7% chances of winning for Marvelous Marvin - http://boxrec.com/en/what_if?wi[id]...i[boxerBId]=434752&wi[orderBy]=&wi[orderDir]=
I know Boxrec have their own mathematical formulae and algorithms, but I would best describe Spike O'Sullivan as the living embodiment of Basilio and Fullmer squared. Collectively Robinson was 3-4-1 against Basilio and Fullmer. If we square these numbers it gives 9-16-1, which obviously gives Spike a 61.54% chance of victory.
Thought I saw a thread posing the question who would win Sugar Ray Robinson vs Spike O'Sullivan, but on reading the title again it actually says: 'Missed my medication this morning, please ignore'
This is a joke right,one of the reasons Ray Robinson is considered the greatest is because imo he transcends eras,you can see his speed and skill was off the charts,think about it he was so much better than his peers that if anyone could hang now it would’ve been him.