- - No middle dominated his era like Golovkin did.
U can put the blame on run and stink Americans, and while I'd give all your guys a fair chance to upset him save Ketchel, there's also a chance they'd be like the others just looking to survive after eating a few punches.
I don't see why SRR gets ranked over Gene Fullmer at MW since they went head to head four times with Fullmer coming out 2-1-1.
SRR's only win comes from a onepunchsave in a fight he was losing on the score cards.
Normally SRR is unimpeachable because of his resume - but we have four H2H fights at MW that suggest Fullmer had Robinson's number.
In sum of four fights Fullmer won more rounds; more fights.
Why is SRR one of the five great MWs and not Fullmer?
Gotta take age into account. Fullmer was in his absolute prime for those fights, Robinson was old. In fact none of the other Big 4 MWs were still fighting by the time they were the age Robinson was for any of the Fullmer fights. For the most part, people don't hold late career losses against a fighter when evaluating them; save for specific type of discussions (ie who was the greatest fighter post 40?)
Gotta take age into account. Fullmer was in his absolute prime for those fights, Robinson was old. In fact none of the other Big 4 MWs were still fighting by the time they were the age Robinson was for any of the Fullmer fights. For the most part, people don't hold late career losses against a fighter when evaluating them; save for specific type of discussions (ie who was the greatest fighter post 40?)
Yes, I agree. I recognize your point.
Not sure if this mitigates my point but . . . the topic at hand is 'great MWs' - SRR is 'old' for a good portion of the time he is a MW (including that premature retirement). His tenure at MW is filled with loses (and great comebacks) to various fighters, not just Fullmer.
Ar some level, if we judge SRR at MW, we are judging the "old" period of his career. Does that part of his career place him in the top MW five?
P.S. Hell who wants to argue against SRR? That's tough.
Comment