Who Here Doesn't Have SRR P4P#1, & Why?

McGrain, with all due respect, your observation is Totally inane!
85-0 as an amatuer, 131-1-1 after the Valentine's Day massacre.
Avengened the loss (out weighed by 16 pounds, what?, 3 weeks later outweighed again?) Averaged a fight a month for 12-13 years? Retired and came back as a Middle (late 30's in them days is a lot older then late 30's now) Look at the friggin' number of fights!
I'm done, Ray Robinson is THE greatest bar NONE! And don't get me started on a later born Robinson (eras) that would have hit prime in the 90's-2000's.
No argument, THE GREATEST.

 

Using the mercenary gambler part of my brainnot ignoring their good points, we all know what they were)

robinson and langford both turned up to fight in poor condition.

armstrongs most effective shot was the upward headbutt, he should have had a point deducted in basically every round ive ever seen him fight.

I was planning to conclude that charles is #1, but I got halfway and I now see I can't deduct anything from greb. I said false to the question in the true/false thread but maybe the lack of film has enhanced his standing? Either way I'm betting on greb before the other 3 and putting him at #1.

 

Because Harry Greb was better. Better resume/opposition among other things.

 

Props to SRR, but Harry Greb fought and beat guys that SRR would never have fought. He gave away weight to fight LaMotta, but he wouldn't think of fighting some of the other past black greats and given away that much weight. Maybe Greb didn't have a pretty style and SRR has it all over Greb, in that department but for sheer fighting ability Greb wins hands down, Greb fought everybody black, white, heavyweights. It really is no contest and with one eye and no real power, he wasn't fancy, or pretty, just don't get in the ring with him. Even the great SRR, would have had his hands full with Greb.

 

I have Greb at an uneasy No 1.

Based on resume alone.... but .. no film really hurts ...

 

No one thinks Duran?

He is the best I have ever seen, that includes SRR. I actually have him in my top 5...

 

Sugar Ray probably was the greatest p4p ever during his reign and for quite a few years after.As for Greb there's no film evidence to suggests he's better than Robinson.
As he was in his prime 90 years or so ago I'd give Toney, Roy Jones and Mike McCallum a great chance of beating him.
Ezzard Charles is better than Greb imo

 

ERA'S Win the day out and on that note alone Ray Robinson's Era was better than those that proceeded him and a few periods since.

SRR's LONGEVIETY among TOP men & Greats for 25 years says more than any fighter in history... was he the 'absolute' best will always be a question. BUT Most would says Yes or State with very little reservation he was certainly ONE of perhaps the Best 3 - 5 in history.

Greb's Era was CRUDE by comparison, and though they were Great & Tough & Durable men, the stylish Athleticism wasn't there for most of them... ALL the fighters from that period would for the most part be beaten by the Greats that followed them 20 - 50 years later.

their crudeness can be best compared to some of the laborious clinching matches we see in Heavyweights today...

Were some of them great fighters, OF COURSE they were, but also relative to that Style & Period of fighting. After the evolution of Athletic Stylish Boxing, they fall back!

 

Yeah, at first I couldn't work out whether McGrain was referring to Ray Leonard or Ray Robinson in that sentence., in the context of the reply to a Ray Leonard advocate. But the other poster seemed to be conceding it to Robinson, and McGrain's following sentence ..

clarifies that it's Robinson.

Of course these posts are YEARS old, but I think the issue at hand is what people mean when they talk about quality of "resume".
If it's just the list of names, with the biggest names trumping, then maybe the statement makes more sense. I guess Tunney beat Greb 2 or 3 times, and beater Dempsey x2 for the HW title - and Greb's greater than Gavilan, LaMotta, so ... (but then, Robinson has a win over Armstrong, so I don't know.)

In my view of "resume", I feel Robinson's is far stronger than Tunney's.
I'm pretty sure Robinson has one of the absolute best resume's of all-time, and his ranking IS largely based on that.
If it was about skills and head-to-head we'd have a lot of other guys in the running, and Roy Jones Jr, would/should be ranked much much higher. Since RJJ is a head-to-head MONSTER.

 

For the record, that's BENNY, not Ray.