How many world title fights was he involved in? How many did he win? How many successful defences? Take a large dose of your own advice.
No ****in way, Robinson was a good fighter, there have been way worse fighters to hold belts. Don't let the Naseem fight be your sole judge of him as a fighter, his bodyshots were first class as for Bentt, everyone says that, but what does that say about Morrison? at least Bent won that fight legit and earned the strap
Long answer: Aiken is usually near the top of my list. Luis Santana tops mine though - won the lineal title on a DQ from faking a low blow vs Terry Norris, defended it on another DQ, then finally lost the third fight. Here's a full article I wrote on this topic a ways back: http://www.badlefthook.com/2009/7/31/970430/who-were-the-worst-titlists-of-all Isidro Garcia - http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=7725&cat=boxer Won a title because the champ's opponent got sick and they literally pulled him out of his seat two hours before the fight while he was eating a donut, wore borrowed gear for the fight and somehow won. Since then, he's only been a trial horse for prospects, but was able to pull off a big win with the help of the element of surprise. I'm so bad with names, but there was also a Thai guy in the 80's who won a title in his 4th or 5th pro fight, lost it right away, and then ended up retiring with a losing record overall. The guy he beat for the title was legit, but it was the epitome of a 'lucky knockout' type of win. His record doesn't look as bad, but Likar Ramos, who JMM beat with one punch, was awful. Was basically gifted a vacant title in a fight against someone with like a 18-7 record coming into the fight. He's 24-4, so his record doesn't look awful, but he's never beaten anyone who's even a decent journeyman. That was an interim title though, so I don't know if it counts. I don't count these, but if you look at the first set of WBO titlists, some of those guys were downright horrible. Like, not even journeyman level. Maybe not the absolute worst, but a couple of SMWs in the last decade were pretty bad. Maselino Masoe - http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=15483&cat=boxer and Manny Siaca Jr - http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=14602&cat=boxer (who has never won a decent fight other than Anthony Mundine)
He's still not even close to being the worst. Certainly not one of the best, but he's not even in the top 5 worst HW titlists much less one of the worst ever, if you look at his overall record. He's undeniably better than, say, Olev Maskaev or Sergei Liakhovich or Bonecrusher Smith, and much more so than Bentt. Definitely not as good as some make him out to be, but calling him the worst is a bit of hyperbole. Let's say bottom 25%. Edit: and yes I realize Bonecrusher narrowly beat Bruno when they were both prospects. But overall Bruno had better wins and a lot fewer bad losses.
Acquilies Guzman As a second choice to Quiroz. Guzman was listed as 13-14-1, but apparently, the archive found another win on his record. In fairness, Guzman did beat a pretty good fighter in Yong Kang Kim to win the belt, and held an underrated Saen Sor Ploenchit to a MD in hostile territory in an effort to reclaim his belt. So he wasn't that bad. Think the same could be said of Quiroz, tbh. At least he was able to defend his title, and the guy he beat, Madera, was a pretty useful 108lb fighter in the mid-80's. There's a difference btx. having an awful record, and being an awful fighter. Would probabaly say Santana tops my list, tbh. Had he not won the belt via DQ against Norris, he would have been known as a useful journeyman/fringe contender at absolute best.+ Edit: Oh yeah..You can click on Guzman's name at the top to get his record. :good