I was having this argument with a guy on youtube some time ago over a fantasy match-up between Ray Robinson and Sugar Ray Leonard. He claimed that Robinson had " no defense, a poor jab, throws terrible punches that are too wide, and leaves himself off-balance." He claimed that Leonard would be able to easily beat Robinson, because of his superior hand speed and better "form" even once claimng that Robinson defense consisted of "blocking punches with his head"
When I made my rebuttal and asking what he meant by "form" he said
" By form, I'm referring to Leonard's textbook punches, instead of the wide, off-balance, amateurish shots Robinson takes. Robinson could never hit Leonard with those shots, and would get killed with counter punches".
oh btw he also claimed that Lamotta was a lousy fighter and would be easily beaten by Leonard and get "killed in the 70's"
So are we all deluded? cause the Robinson he was talking about didn't seem to be the same Robinson I know. I thought he was overblowing Robinsons faults and exaggerating Leonards skills, but it did get me thinking.
Any thoughts?
When I made my rebuttal and asking what he meant by "form" he said
" By form, I'm referring to Leonard's textbook punches, instead of the wide, off-balance, amateurish shots Robinson takes. Robinson could never hit Leonard with those shots, and would get killed with counter punches".
oh btw he also claimed that Lamotta was a lousy fighter and would be easily beaten by Leonard and get "killed in the 70's"
So are we all deluded? cause the Robinson he was talking about didn't seem to be the same Robinson I know. I thought he was overblowing Robinsons faults and exaggerating Leonards skills, but it did get me thinking.
Any thoughts?
Comment