Are we all deluded about Sugar Ray Robinson?

[NChristo]

My thought is too never take what people say on Youtube seriously, used to try and 'debate' with people on there but got nothing except insult and bias rebuttals, then I found BoxingScene.

[F l i c k e r]

In short, yes.

It's been a custom to over glorify the history of the sport because it is indeed so rich. However, yes, people get blinded by it and will refuse to admit that they had flaws and could be beaten by people who came after them.

[JAB5239]

The guy is obviously a bit of a moron.

I was surprised by just how skilful LaMotta looks on film.

LaMotta gets a bad rap as a face first fighter because of the movie "Raging bull". Truth be told he had excellent skills.

[them_apples]

Robinson changed boxing. I'll give him that. He had good hand speed and the heart of a champion as well as formidable punching power. He also had a LOT of experience in the ring.

I'll agree though that Leonard's technique is superior to Robinsons, as is his skill.

Robinson probably hit a little harder, he looked like he had heavy hands - but at the end of the day I'm picking SRL to win - no bias here.

[them_apples]

LaMotta gets a bad rap as a face first fighter because of the movie "Raging bull". Truth be told he had excellent skills.

he did have some skill, but not a whole lot. Be real here Jab. Lamotta had a cast iron chin and the heart of a lion, a combination of genetics (look at the size of his dome) and the era he grew up in (tough as **** and not as educated). However, Lamotta was limited skillwise.

[BennyST]

lol. dude makes it seem as if that's how ray would start his attack. and for the record, dude needs to go check out ray in his prime. there are quite a few little clips of him. the man would have been owning WW and MW for the past decade that's how ahead of his time he was.

all i need is Leonard hearns I as a reference. what happened when hearns boxed? he outboxed Leonard. it was only when Leonard made it a dogfight that he started winning. ray would have outboxed him, and outlasted him in a brawl. that's not to take anything away from Leonard , as i think he's the second greatest ww. i just think SRR would have beaten the breaks off of him.

Hearns would outbox Robinson too. There isn't a 147 pound fighter in the history of the sport that could outbox Hearns to a decision. Not Robinson, Leonard, Naploes, Griffith, Rodriguez, no one.

Hearns is taller than Robinson; 2-3 inches at least.
Hearns is as fast as Robinson.
Hearns has 6 inch reach advantage over Robinson.
Hearns has a better jab, boxes at range better, uses his height and full reach better.
Hearns is also more powerful than Robinson.

All saying, just because Leonard got outboxed by Hearns means utterly zero, nil, nadda, nothing, zip when it comes to facing Robinson. Leonard and Robinson fight very, very, very similar. They have the same height, same reach, but Leonard has the advantage in speed, jab, footwork....ie. he's the better boxer and would be the one outboxing Robinson, not the other way around. Robinsons would have the power, inside advantage and would be landing the harder punches. What Robinson would need to do is fight fire with fire and try to win in the exchanges as Leonard is punching, much like Duran did, but obviously Robinson is much taller, greater reach etc than Duran.

However, all that aside, if there was someone that would beat Robinson at 147 it would definitely be Leonard for my liking. In fact I would easily put up the fight as even odds. I can just as easily see Leonard winning it as I can Robinson. I do believe that Leonard may have been the perfect foil to Robinson and would probably be one of the few to say that Leonard has a couple of advantages over Robinson that would put the fight in his favour just a little bit.

Robinson is the GOAT. No, he's not invincible, but he's shown by the fighters he's beat that he's got everything needed to beat any style. However, Leonard has all the same qualities, plus IMO he's just a little bit faster with a little bit better jab and his defence is better. I think he could outpoint Robinson.

[IronDanHamza]

I think it just boils down to the fact that the uneducated try and talk about things they know nothing about.

That's a big problem on this site and especially youtube.

If you're uneducated about something, why comment?

[GJC]

The perfect fighter hasn't been born yet but I've never seen anyone better than SRR. Thing is you can break down a fighters skill and pick out parts that some fighters are stronger in. Did Hagler have a better chin? Quite possibly but Robinson had a hell of a chin. Did Hearns have a better jab was Leonard faster? Again probably but Robinson scores high. Pep was a better boxer but SRR was no mug. Thing is SRR did pretty much everything well and didn't have many weaknesses so for me he was the best. Might not be top of any category but gets considered in most. Y

[JAB5239]

he did have some skill, but not a whole lot. Be real here Jab. Lamotta had a cast iron chin and the heart of a lion, a combination of genetics (look at the size of his dome) and the era he grew up in (tough as **** and not as educated). However, Lamotta was limited skillwise.

Gotta disagree bro. He had a very well balanced attack to the head and body, was good at mixing up his punches, used feints, had an OK jab which he seemed to use to set up his body attack and was good at slipping punches. Check out some of his other fights besides Robinson.

[PAC-BOY]

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?

you shouldnt have had this conversation with this moron to begin with. If any one thinks SRR wasnt the best of all time is smoking crack mixed with Meth and a dab of ****. Of course everyone has their opinion. His was just way out there.