Let's Be Real, Floyd Mayweather Would've Beaten Sugar Ray Robinson If They Fought

[studentofthegam]

The motivation is irrelivant from a BOXING standpoint.....which is what we're talking about here. Both call into question the integrity of the sport.

Socially, yes there's a difference but that's for another forum.....

Poet

Forget about the race part since it makes you a bit uncomfortable. Thats not why I'm here. Lets say everyone's purple. Does the fact that we can see it hold a lot more weight than hearsay?

[Check_hooks]

SRR would win by 1st round KO and anyone who says otherwise doesn't know **** about boxing.

[Canelo Phresh]

SRR would win by 1st round KO and anyone who says otherwise doesn't know **** about boxing.

damage control for *******s lol. you guys tried to make this **** serious lol. then you realized it aint happenin lol.

[StarshipTrooper]

I dont know what your list consists of totally. Personally Ive never made a steadfast list for any category or weight class. What fighters do you speak of when you say that fighters are being mislabeled as great?

I'll give you a couple of examples.

Do you know who Duane Bobick is? Bobick was a Heavyweight back in the 1970s. He racked up a 34-0 record and started to generate a buzz.....then he beat Scott LeDoux, who was a solid if unspectacular contender in the mid-70s, and people started talking about him being the next great. Eventually he fought Ken Norton and was KOed in one and mercifully faded into obscurity. Ten years later hardly anyone even remembered he existed.

Now fast-forward to 2011. Victor Ortiz just won a fight over Berto and people in NSB are touting him as the next great again. Now maybe Ortiz WILL pound himself out a decent career from here on out.....or maybe he won't. Regardless, despite how people are touting him the odds are he is NOT going to go down as one of the greats and people won't remember he existed ten years from now.

The point is, in EVERY era, there are people who get proclaimed "great" simply because they are active and are ranked contenders. Most aren't, and most will fade from memory in short order. EVERY era. Today, tomorrow, 50 years ago, doesn't matter. The true greats will stand out. They always do. It's not a matter of "Old Dudes" downing active fighters, it's a matter of hard won experience knowing how things work: To put it bluntly, most of us have "seen this movie before and we know how it ends". The eras may change, but ultimately it's the same 'ol same 'ol. The eras may change but nothing really changes but the date.

I look at the current era and yeah, I've seen this movie before. GJC is many years my elder but I guantee you he saw this movie too.....long before I was born. And eventually you'll look at an era and realize you've seen that movie yourself.

Poet

[IronDanHamza]

I'll give you a couple of examples.

Do you know who Duane Bobick is? Bobick was a Heavyweight back in the 1970s. He racked up a 34-0 record and started to generate a buzz.....then he beat Scott LeDoux, who was a solid if unspectacular contender in the mid-70s, and people started talking about him being the next great. Eventually he fought Ken Norton and was KOed in one and mercifully faded into obscurity. Ten years later hardly anyone even remembered he existed.

Now fast-forward to 2011. Victor Ortiz just won a fight over Berto and people in NSB are touting as the next great again. Now maybe Ortiz WILL pound himself out a decent career from here on out.....or maybe he won't. Regardless, despite how people are touting him the odds are he is NOT going to go down as one of the greats and people won't remember he existed ten years from now.

The point is, in EVERY era, there are people who get proclaimed "great" simply because they are active and are ranked contenders. Most aren't, and most will fade from memory in short order. EVERY era. Today, tomorrow, 50 years ago, doesn't matter. The true greats will stand out. They always do. It's not a matter of "Old Dudes" downing active fighters, it's a matter of hard won experience knowing how things work: To put it bluntly, most of us have "seen this movie before and we know how it ends". The eras may change, but ultimately it's the same 'ol same 'ol. The eras may change but nothing really changes but the date.

I look at the current era and yeah, I've seen this movie before. GJC is many years my elder but I guantee you he saw this movie too.....long before I was born. And eventually you'll look at an era and realize you've seen that movie too.

Poet

Good post and good examples.

As astonishing as it is, he isn't a young kid. I'm not sure how long he has been following boxing, but he is 30 years old.

He should know better.

[StarshipTrooper]

Forget about the race part since it makes you a bit uncomfortable. Thats not why I'm here. Lets say everyone's purple.

I'm not uncomfortable with race I simply consider boxing and the social to be two separate topics.

Does the fact that we can see it hold a lot more weight than hearsay?

Do you consider the theory of relativity to be hearsay? Do haven't seen it work yourself have you? You only have some physicist's word for it afterall.

The truth is film can all to frequently be misleading. Remember when Roy Jones fought Trinidad? He looked spectacular and people were making asinine posts in NSB about how "the old Roy is back!". Roy looked spectacular because he was fighting an opponent who was more washed up then he was. He didn't look so awesome against Calzaghe did he? THE old Roy turned into Old Roy in a hurry when faced with someone with a pulse.
The point being, the video of Roy against Trinidad was misleading and painted a picture that had little bearing on reality.

Poet

[studentofthegam]

damage control for *******s lol. you guys tried to make this **** serious lol. then you realized it aint happenin lol.

its funny, Me and Checks dont agree on a whole bunch but it does seem that when someone says anyone could even compete with SRR no matter what the conversation is about they're considered an idiot.

I'll give you a couple of examples.

Do you know who Duane Bobick is? Bobick was a Heavyweight back in the 1970s. He racked up a 34-0 record and started to generate a buzz.....then he beat Scott LeDoux, who was a solid if unspectacular contender in the mid-70s, and people started talking about him being the next great. Eventually he fought Ken Norton and was KOed in one and mercifully faded into obscurity. Ten years later hardly anyone even remembered he existed.

Now fast-forward to 2011. Victor Ortiz just won a fight over Berto and people in NSB are touting as the next great again. Now maybe Ortiz WILL pound himself out a decent career from here on out.....or maybe he won't. Regardless, despite how people are touting him the odds are he is NOT going to go down as one of the greats and people won't remember he existed ten years from now.

The point is, in EVERY era, there are people who get proclaimed "great" simply because they are active and are ranked contenders. Most aren't, and most will fade from memory in short order. EVERY era. Today, tomorrow, 50 years ago, doesn't matter. The true greats will stand out. They always do. It's not a matter of "Old Dudes" downing active fighters, it's a matter of hard won experience knowing how things work: To put it bluntly, most of us have "seen this movie before and we know how it ends". The eras may change, but ultimately it's the same 'ol same 'ol. The eras may change but nothing really changes but the date.

I look at the current era and yeah, I've seen this movie before. GJC is many years my elder but I guantee you he saw this movie too.....long before I was born. And eventually you'll look at an era and realize you've seen that movie too.

Poet

I've seen the movie play out in recent history with the Jermaine Taylor's and Fernando Vargas's. Not saying they werent good fighters but great was used prematurely. Its not the hypes that are being compared that gets the immediate disrespect. It's mostly when sure fire greats are compared to old greats that the debates become somewhat hostile. Anybody who says Ortiz is great right now is to be mocked. He's got a lot of career left to change that though. I just cant take a man's word for it on anything.

[studentofthegam]

Good post and good examples.

As astonishing as it is, he isn't a young kid. I'm not sure how long he has been following boxing, but he is 30 years old.

He should know better.

Damn Dan you gonna give me a spankin now? Rub it in good because Im sure it wont be our last difference in opinion.

I'm not uncomfortable with race I simply consider boxing and the social to be two separate topic.I think they go hand in hand depending on the conversation IMO.




Do you consider the theory of relativity to be hearsay? Do haven't seen it work yourself have you? You only have some physicist's word for it afterall.

The truth is film can all to frequently be misleading. Remember when Roy Jones fought Trinidad? He looked spectacular and people were making asinine posts in NSB about how "the old Roy is back!". Roy looked spectacular because he was fighting an opponent who was more washed up then he was. He didn't look so awesome against Calzaghe did he? THE old Roy turned into Old Roy in a hurry when faced with someone with a pulse.
The point being, the video of Roy against Trinidad was misleading and painted a picture that had little bearing on reality.

Poet

The theory of relativity is hearsay. Thats why they call it the "theory" and not the "rule". Science is always subject to change. But if we cant discuss social issues I'm sure science and physics should be considered off base.LOL.

The thing with Roy Jones is that I can go back chronologically and look at both fighters step by step. I agree that it was shot vs less shot.

[krazyn8tive]

Listen all you idiots..."sugar" ray Robinson won over 120 professional fights before he finally lost one...let me translate into ***** using ***** math...he's at least 3 times the fighter of Floyd mayweather junior. Science.

[StarshipTrooper]

The theory of relativity is hearsay. Thats why they call it the "theory" and not the "rule". Science is always subject to change. But if we cant discuss social issues I'm sure science and physics should be considered off base.LOL.

It's an example to illustrate the point. Here's another, I've never been to Russia but I have no doubt it exists.....and any video evidence it exist could, in fact, be hearsay as you don't know if that video's been doctored or shot in Antartica for that matter.

The point being, ANY evidence can be written off.....lawyers do that in court all the time: One of the reasons I have contempt for lawyers.

The thing with Roy Jones is that I can go back chronologically and look at both fighters step by step. I agree that it was shot vs less shot.

In the kingdom of the blind a one-eyed man is king.

Poet