Why is Sugar Ray Robinson considered the GOAT ?

Maidana arguably won the first fight. He gave Floyd kittens in there.

He also lost to Castillo.

I think Floyd is very talented. His PBF days were a joy to be a part of. But Ray is on another level, and big Floyd and Roger would agree. Kellerman said it best when he said that NOBODY thought Floyd was the best when he was in his prime alongside RJJ in his prime, at the same time!

Do you actually have Floyd as the GOAT, considering how many Boxers there has been?

 

Believe it or not, I follow modern boxing, and I know a damn sight more about boxing technique than a lot of the bigger is better crew.

Look at it this way.

There have been boxing outcomes in our lifetime, that we would have considered pretty darn close to impossible.

That is why we can't assume a win of fighter A over fighter B, without either of them stepping into the ring.

We can say that it is overwhelmingly probably that Sugar Ray would have beaten Joe Grim, but we cant take it as an article of faith, as if we were dealing with a fight that has actually happened.

 

The way I see it- is you think you know more then you do in regards to boxing in the ring and hide behind “you cannot prove anything” and make 1-1 connections between things- If X was rated in Z he must be equal to W because he was rated 1 also ignoring how times have changed again hiding behind more clever tricks like “You cannot prove an era is superior to the other” ignoring the fact of course film exists and there were MUCH better boxers in some eras to others.

 

Perhaps the problem is more that you think you know more than you do about the nature of proof.

 

So Jose Luis Castillo is better than PBF?

 

That is a cop out of a thing to say Jan. Please tell me in what form does Burns stand a chance against Vitali if it is no fact he would win or lose?
I will be waiting- no digging your way out back your words without essentially saying "Who knows- no proof"

 

Couldn't beat him despite FMJ's bad shoulder. The rematch showed the truth.

You could give Maidana a draw if you are being generous.

 

Unless @Kamikaze is claiming that Vitali beating Tommy Burns is as certain as 1+1 being 2, I don't think the counterargument above even comes into play.

When somebody says, "Vitali beats Burns," or whomever, it usually doesn't mean "Vitali beating Burns is an article of faith for me that would resist all counterevidence whatsoever." Rather, it usually means that they happen to think Vitali beats Burns.

EDIT: Also, if you encountered someone who sincerely believed Joe Grim would beat Robinson, you would reasonably begin to question how much they know about boxing. Now, I admit that @Kamikaze maligning your boxing knowledge was harsh (and a sentiment I don't share), but I don't think that the correct response is a retreat into skepticism and burdens of proof surrounding a Robinson/Grim fight. If the overwhelming consensus that Robinson beats Grim is incorrect, it would suggest that nobody here understands boxing at all, and that the entire forum has misunderstood the sport on such a fundamental level that all of our conversations here are pointless.

 

It's too bad he drew the color line and avoided the murderers row. Would have been interesting to see him vs Lytell, Burley, etc

In any case his rating depends on the criteria you use. He was clearly the best welterweight of his era by a good margin.

 

Great post, George

 

I agree. It would be like claiming a D league team could compete with the golden state warriors that had Durant. If someone honestly believed that you'd have to question their basketball knowledge.

It's a cop out to say you never know. Obviously resume and on screen footage is the most important thing overall, but some matchups are common sense outside of that 1% chance of a fluke. If someone made a time machine, not one person on the face of the Earth would bet one cent on Paulie Malignaggi beating Robinson, not even Paulie's family. The odds in h2h tend to overlap with odds in matchmaking. It requires basic understanding of the sport, the abilities of both fighters, and some common sense.

 

Ouch lol

 

It would be interesting to compile the methods used by the most successful boxing match/odds makers, and see whether those could be applied systematically to fantasy fights.

 

Can't see how facing Armstrong, Gavilan and Turpin etc is drawing the colour line just because he didn't go up a weight class (two today) to face high risk/low reward fighters. Has Loma drawn the colour line when not facing Spence and Crawford? Fights that would be a hell lot more profitable than Robinson facing Burley and Williams in the 40's.

 

Hypothetically?

Vitally might have a brain hemorrhage in the ring.

He might throw both his rotator cuffs.

It might simply be that we have both badly misjudged what he or Burns were.

Then we might be more or less right about everything, but we might end up seeing something that was unprecedented in the history of the sport.