Ali is greater than Robinson

[TheGreatA]

One good lightweight win. Next..

One very, very good lightweight win over a reigning champion and two wins over top ranked contenders.

Should we choose to ignore the reality in which Zivic and Armstrong were past their best? Or do we give the likes of Joe Calzaghe full credit for beating Roy Jones and any of the club fighters Robinson lost to at the end of his career full credit?

I'll give you Gavilan and LaMotta (who's also slightly overrated).

Zivic was not past his best, he had recently been the welterweight champion and only lost the title due to an unjust decision against 'Red' Cochrane, who also chose not to fight Ray Robinson. Robinson was one of the few men to ever stop Zivic. If not for the decision against Cochrane going against Fritzie, Robinson would have won the title from Zivic during his first year as a pro. Incredible.

http://www.thesweetscience.com/boxin...-ray-robinson/

Armstrong, while past his peak, was still the number 1 ranked welterweight contender with recent wins over Zivic, Angott, Zurita, Joyce, Larkin, Shapiro. Clearly this man was no push-over.

Neither Zivic or Armstrong were 40+ years old as Roy Jones and Robinson were. Armstrong was 30, Zivic was 28.

Robinson also faced plenty of other top welterweights such as Marty Servo (undefeated, future WW champ who didn't give Robinson a title shot), top ranked California Jackie Wilson, the talented "Sugar" George Costner, the tough Tommy Bell, the game Bernard Docusen which makes for a great welterweight resume. I'd argue that all of these men were every bit as good the likes of Quarry, Lyle, Shavers, maybe even better although less heralded.

When you're an elite fighter fighting average opposition, I'm sure you can gather up a lot of wins. How about we point to the important fights of his career, instead of men who only fought to put food onto the table?

Also, only one of them are considered to be great, and that's LaMotta. You know? The same LaMotta that was known for ballooning up in weight in between every fight.

What you're ignoring that many of those men were top ranked contenders, in Olson's case a world champion, and not tomato cans but the majority likely haven't heard of most of the names because it takes time to get into an era of which we do not have a lot of film about. I can say that Belloise, Basora, Villemain, Levine, Abrams out of the lot were very good, notable fighters. There were a couple of others who were top 10 ranked in the division.

Again.. we're looking for the important fights. Graziano, Olson, Fullmer, Basilio and Turpin.

Plenty of important fights there for a 30+ year old fighter.

Okay.. now let us do the important math. Which elite prime fighters did Robinson beat?

Gavilan
LaMotta
Graziano
Fullmer
Basilio
Turpin
Olson
Angott

Now compare those 7 with the 7 most prime elite fighters on Ali's resume:

Foreman
Frazier
Liston
Patterson
Norton
Terrell
Ellis
Quarry

I think it's safe to say that, overall, the majority of the people on Ali's resume are better than the ones on Robinson's resume.

I'd say that Gavilan is pound for pound the best fighter of either list. Zivic and Armstrong should be added to Robinson's list. Terrell, Ellis, Quarry were not elite in my opinion, neither were Olson, Turpin or Graziano although they were legitimate world champions unlike the former of whom Terrell and Ellis held partial titles.

Ali's opposition gets a boost simply for having fought Ali.

Foreman, Frazier, Liston are legitimately top 10 among all-time great heavyweights. Patterson and Norton are maybe top 25 at heavyweight.

Gavilan is a top 10 welterweight, Basilio arguably top 10 at welterweight, had middleweight accomplishments as well, LaMotta top 10 at middle, Fullmer top 20, Angott top 15 at lightweight. Robinson beat top ranked all-time fighters in their division across lightweight, welterweight and middleweight. That's quite an accomplishment.

Also, quick question: did Robinson ever beat 2 of the hardest punchers in the history of his division, while being past his prime?

Did Ali beat 3 hall of famers while in his late 30's? Did Ali have 200 fights? Did Ali have 4 more losses in 60 fights than Robinson did in 130? Did Ali go to the body and possess one punch KO power in both hands? Did or did not Ali say that Ray Robinson was the greatest pound for pound fighter of all time?

[ILLuminato]

I completely agree that Ali is greater than Robinson. Ali beat Geroge Foreman and those other GREAT fighters. Jake Lamotta was not a GREAT ifghter.

[Schmerzen]

Did Ali beat 3 hall of famers while in his late 30's? Did Ali have 200 fights? Did Ali have 4 more losses in 60 fights than Robinson did in 130? Did Ali go to the body and possess one punch KO power in both hands? Did or did not Ali say that Ray Robinson was the greatest pound for pound fighter of all time?

just because u have tons of fights - most of them not even on film - doesnt mean u r that much better.
also getting hit by killer punchers like sonny liston and foreman doesnt allow u to have a successfully career with tons of fights like robinson.

i really think if they were in the same weight class, head 2 head ali could beat him.
ali could have accomplish as much as ray did had he fought at the ww div. the same guys robinson did, maybe with a better record than 173-19.

u have to admit its harder for a heavyweight to be p4p best, u cant move up and down to face fighters in other weight classes as a heavyweight.
look at wladimir, dominating since years any1 he faced, but still is not even recognized as a top 5 p4p of today by some idiots.
they even question if he is a HOFer or not.

[Fiasco]

Zivic was not past his best, he had recently been the welterweight champion and only lost the title due to an unjust decision against 'Red' Cochrane, who also chose not to fight Ray Robinson. Robinson was one of the few men to ever stop Zivic. If not for the decision against Cochrane going against Fritzie, Robinson would have won the title from Zivic during his first year as a pro. Incredible.

Zivic's career downfall, not long after, suggests that your theory is wrong.

Armstrong, while past his peak, was still the number 1 ranked welterweight contender with recent wins over Zivic, Angott, Zurita, Joyce, Larkin, Shapiro. Clearly this man was no push-over.

Neither Zivic or Armstrong were 40+ years old as Roy Jones and Robinson were. Armstrong was 30, Zivic was 28.

I thought a boxing historian would know that age has nothing to do with how good a fighter is. Fighters age differently.

Robinson also faced plenty of other top welterweights such as Marty Servo (undefeated, future WW champ who didn't give Robinson a title shot), top ranked California Jackie Wilson, the talented "Sugar" George Costner, the tough Tommy Bell, the game Bernard Docusen which makes for a great welterweight resume. I'd argue that all of these men were every bit as good the likes of Quarry, Lyle, Shavers, maybe even better although less heralded.

Go ahead and ask some other historians if they agree with you.

What you're ignoring that many of those men were top ranked contenders, in Olson's case a world champion, and not tomato cans but the majority likely haven't heard of most of the names because it takes time to get into an era of which we do not have a lot of film about. I can say that Belloise, Basora, Villemain, Levine, Abrams out of the lot were very good, notable fighters. There were a couple of others who were top 10 ranked in the division.

That fact is that they were contenders and/or journeymen and not in any elite position. You may think they're good second-rate fighters, but their accomplishments and records clearly suggest that they don't belong with the elites.

Plenty of important fights there for a 30+ year old fighter.

Yes, and Ali being over 30 and winning against the likes of Frazier, Norton and two of the hardest punchers in heavyweight history history in Foreman and Shavers is not a big deal, right?

I'd say that Gavilan is pound for pound the best fighter of either list. Zivic and Armstrong should be added to Robinson's list. Terrell, Ellis, Quarry were not elite in my opinion, neither were Olson, Turpin or Graziano although they were legitimate world champions unlike the former of whom Terrell and Ellis held partial titles.

Ali's opposition gets a boost simply for having fought Ali.

Foreman, Frazier, Liston are legitimately top 10 among all-time great heavyweights. Patterson and Norton are maybe top 25 at heavyweight.

Sorry, but as great a fighter as Gavilan was, he's not the best of either list. I think most people would agree with me.

Zivic and Armstrong weren't in their primes. If you wish to count past-prime fighters as full credited wins, you can leave me out of that.

Robinson beat top ranked all-time fighters in their division across lightweight, welterweight and middleweight. That's quite an accomplishment.

In case you didn't know, it's kind of hard for a natural heavyweight to win titles in more than one division.

Did Ali beat 3 hall of famers while in his late 30's? Did Ali have 200 fights? Did Ali have 4 more losses in 60 fights than Robinson did in 130?

Ali didn't have 200 hundred fights, because he didn't need to, in his time. Elite fighters in Ali's era and eras after made enough money by just fighting 2 or 3 times a year. And in those 2 or 3 fights a year, they face top opposition, rather than lightly regarded journeymen or club fighters.

And don't act like all of Robinson's 200 fights were against champions, hall of famers and top contenders.

Did Ali go to the body and possess one punch KO power in both hands?

Since when does a fighter's style make him better than another fighter? Tyson and Frazier went to the body. Are they greater than Ali?

Did or did not Ali say that Ray Robinson was the greatest pound for pound fighter of all time?

Robinson was Ali's idol. It's understandable that he would say that. And since when is everything Ali says 100% fact? It's an opinion.

[TheGreatA]

Zivic's career downfall, not long after, suggests that your theory is wrong.

His real downfall was in 1945, 4 years after the Robinson fights when he was 32-33, the age when many fighters start declining. Before that he was only losing to top fighters, always giving them hard fights and beating some good fighters. Also it's very possible that the beatings Robinson gave to him may have taken something away from him as he was coming straight from being a world champion (losing the title on an unjust decision) to the two Sugar Ray fights. I just don't think that a solid case can be made for Zivic being washed up against Robinson.

Sonny Liston got knocked out cold by Leotis Martin 4 years after the second Ali fight. Terrell was no good after Ali beat him and lost to inferior fighters. Ellis soon turned into a journeyman after Ali beat him. Were they washed up?

I thought a boxing historian would know that age has nothing to do with how good a fighter is. Fighters age differently.

I think a boxing historian would also know that Armstrong and Zivic were competing against and beating great fighters at the time while Jones was KO'd in one by a nobody and Robinson was losing to clubfighters at the very end.

Go ahead and ask some other historians if they agree with you.

What kind of a response is that? Are you waiting for someone else to prove me wrong for you?

Go ahead and ask other historians if they agree with you on Ali being better than Robinson. Do you now see the flaws in that statement?

This is a discussion between me and you, if you want to prove my statements wrong or feel you disagree then make your case.

That fact is that they were contenders and/or journeymen and not in any elite position. You may think they're good second-rate fighters, but their accomplishments and records clearly suggest that they don't belong with the elites.

Steve Belloise had wins over 33-0 Robert Villemain, stopped the ultra-durable Georgie Abrams, KO'd future light heavyweight title holder Anton Christoforidis, KO'd former middleweight title holder Al Hostak, beat former middleweight champion Ceferino Garcia, KO'd Coley Welch, beat Tommy Bell was top 5 ranked in the division for 10 years. He must have been pretty good.

That's only one example. I advise you to look into the records of these fighters a little more. They were excellent fighters. I don't care to do all your homework here.

Yes, and Ali being over 30 and winning against the likes of Frazier, Norton and two of the hardest punchers in heavyweight history history in Foreman and Shavers is not a big deal, right?

Where did I claim it wasn't a big deal? It was a big deal for both fighters.

Sorry, but as great a fighter as Gavilan was, he's not the best of either list. I think most people would agree with me.

Who is then? Who can match the sheer amount of contenders that Gavilan beat?

Walter Cartier (Middleweight)
Gene Burton (Middleweight)
Tommy Bell
Ike Williams
Rocky Castellani (Middleweight)
Beau Jack
Laurent Dauthille (Middleweight)
Billy Graham x 2
Robert Villemain (Middleweight)
Gene Hairstone (Middleweight)
Tony Janiro x 2 1KO (Middleweight)
Paddy Young (Middleweight)
Johnny Bratton x 2
Fitzie Pruden x 2
Bobby Dykes
Gil Turner
Chuck Davey
Tiger Jones
Carmen Basilio
Gaspar Ortega
Chico Vejar
Eduardo Lausse

Contenders that Foreman beat:

Frazier
Norton
Moorer
Lyle
Chuvalo
Peralta
Kirkman
Old Cooney?
Blown up Qawi?

Contenders that Frazier beat:

Ali
Quarry
Bonavena
Ellis
Bugner
Chuvalo
Machen
Mathis
D. Jones

Contenders that Liston beat:

Patterson
Folley
Machen
Harris
Williams
DeJohn
Clark
Wepner?

Zivic and Armstrong weren't in their primes. If you wish to count past-prime fighters as full credited wins, you can leave me out of that.

Who is to say that Patterson was "in his prime"? Was Liston in his prime because he was never the same after? Ellis? All I know is that none of these fighters were as great as Armstrong.

In case you didn't know, it's kind of hard for a natural heavyweight to win titles in more than one division.

In case you didn't know, it's kind of hard for a someone starting at lightweight to win titles at welterweight and middleweight too. I'm not criticizing Ali for not having won more titles, I'm giving credit to Robinson for doing it. It's an accomplishment no matter how you spin it.

Ali didn't have 200 hundred fights, because he didn't need to, in his time. Elite fighters in Ali's era and eras after made enough money by just fighting 2 or 3 times a year. And in those 2 or 3 fights a year, they face top opposition, rather than lightly regarded journeymen or club fighters.


And don't act like all of Robinson's 200 fights were against champions, hall of famers and top contenders.

He still didn't face as many ranked opponents as Robinson did.

Since when does a fighter's style make him better than another fighter? Tyson and Frazier went to the body. Are they greater than Ali?

Robinson could do a lot of what Ali did but he could also do more. It's not a fighter's style to go to the body or to have punching power, it's simply a part of their ability and skill. It's like saying that Carlos Baldomir having no speed or a jab is a part of his style. Ali disregarded going to the body and it cost him somewhat against fighters who could be vulnerable to the body such as Ken Norton. His lack of one punch KO power is why he had troubles with Norton and Frazier, he couldn't hurt them like Foreman.

Robinson was Ali's idol. It's understandable that he would say that. And since when is everything Ali says 100% fact? It's an opinion.

No but along with all the other evidence I've brought up, it indicates that Robinson was in fact the better fighter.

[TheGreatA]

just because u have tons of fights - most of them not even on film - doesnt mean u r that much better.
also getting hit by killer punchers like sonny liston and foreman doesnt allow u to have a successfully career with tons of fights like robinson.

i really think if they were in the same weight class, head 2 head ali could beat him.
ali could have accomplish as much as ray did had he fought at the ww div. the same guys robinson did, maybe with a better record than 173-19.

u have to admit its harder for a heavyweight to be p4p best, u cant move up and down to face fighters in other weight classes as a heavyweight.
look at wladimir, dominating since years any1 he faced, but still is not even recognized as a top 5 p4p of today by some idiots.
they even question if he is a HOFer or not.

There are probably more fights of Robinson than Ali on film. I'm not saying that his sheer amount of fights make him better than Ali, I'm saying that what he accomplished during all of those fights is what makes him better than Ali. If my only argument was that Robinson had more fights and thus is better than Ali then you would have a point. Len Wickwar had more fights than anybody, but no one rates him, because he beat nobody of note.

It may be difficult for a heavyweight to be rated pound for pound but I look at all factors, not just weight jumping. I don't degrade Ali for not doing what's not possible. I rate his career next to Robinson's and see Robinson's as simply better. Both were dominant, both had longevity, both had great opposition, both had great ability, Robinson just slightly more in all categories in my opinion. It's fine if you disagree.

[Fiasco]

His real downfall was in 1945, 4 years after the Robinson fights when he was 32-33, the age when many fighters start declining. Before that he was only losing to top fighters, always giving them hard fights and beating some good fighters. Also it's very possible that the beatings Robinson gave to him may have taken something away from him as he was coming straight from being a world champion (losing the title on an unjust decision) to the two Sugar Ray fights. I just don't think that a solid case can be made for Zivic being washed up against Robinson.

Just to move on with the topic, which isn't about Zivic, I'll say that he was in his absolute physical prime. No man or machine could've possibly beaten him.

Sonny Liston got knocked out cold by Leotis Martin 4 years after the second Ali fight. Terrell was no good after Ali beat him and lost to inferior fighters. Ellis soon turned into a journeyman after Ali beat him. Were they washed up?

If you believe Liston wasn't in his prime against Ali, tell me what he didn't do as good as he did before. I'll await your answer, which I suspect to be ridiculous.

As for Terrell, I think it's safe to say that the "what's my name?" fight with Ali had a big mental effect on his career. Wouldn't you be effected if you were beaten in an absolutely one-sided fight, while your opponent is shouting at you and embarrassing you, in a huge stadium and on national TV?

I think a real boxing historian would also know that Armstrong and Zivic were competing against and beating great fighters at the time while Jones was KO'd in one by a nobody and Robinson was losing to clubfighters at the very end.

A real boxing historian would know that Armstrong was retired by the age of 32, while Jones at 32 was dominating in his division and had yet to go on and win a heavyweight title two years later.

But like I said, only real boxing historians would know that.

What kind of a response is that? Are you waiting for someone else to prove me wrong for you?

Go ahead and ask other historians if they agree with you on Ali being better than Robinson? Do you now see the flaws in that statement?

You see the funny thing is, I did ask historians whether or not Ali is better than Robinson. That was the meaning of this thread. I aim to get opinions on the matter in order to discuss it with them.

I asked you to do the same for your little theory, but you got very defensive about it. Which leads me to believe that you're not so confident others will agree with you.

Steve Belloise had wins over 33-0 Robert Villemain, stopped the ultra-durable Georgie Abrams, KO'd future light heavyweight title holder Anton Christoforidis, KO'd former middleweight title holder Al Hostak, KO'd Coley Welch, was top 5 ranked in the division for 10 years. He must have been pretty good.

That's only one example. I advise you to look into the records of these fighters a little more. They were excellent fighters. I don't care to do all your homework here.

Good, but not elite-worthy.

Where did I claim it wasn't a big deal? It was a big deal for both fighters.

So then don't only concentrate on one fighter and try to make it seem like he was the only one who did it. If you knew it was a big deal for both fighters, you would've mentioned the other fighter, as well.

Who is then? Who can match the sheer amount of contenders that Gavilan beat?

Walter Cartier (Middleweight)
Gene Burton (Middleweight)
Tommy Bell
Ike Williams
Rocky Castellani (Middleweight)
Beau Jack
Laurent Dauthille (Middleweight)
Billy Graham x 2
Robert Villemain (Middleweight)
Gene Hairstone (Middleweight)
Tony Janiro x 2 1KO (Middleweight)
Paddy Young (Middleweight)
Johnny Bratton x 2
Fitzie Pruden x 2
Bobby Dykes
Gil Turner
Chuck Davey
Tiger Jones
Carmen Basilio
Gaspar Ortega

Contenders that Foreman beat:

Frazier
Norton
Moorer
Lyle
Chuvalo
Peralta
Kirkman
Old Cooney?
Blown up Qawi?

Contenders that Frazier beat:

Ali
Quarry
Bonavena
Ellis
Bugner
Chuvalo
Machen
Mathis
D. Jones

Contenders that Liston beat:

Patterson
Folley
Machen
Harris
Williams
DeJohn
Clark
Wepner?

It doesn't only have to do with records. Accomplishments and skills add into a fighter's greatness, as well.

I'll use Foreman, as an example:

Foreman is considered to be not only one of the greatest punchers in heavyweight history, but on a P4P basis, as well. Is Gavilan one of the best punchers in the history of his division?

Foreman retired and came back to win a heavyweight world title at 45 years old. The oldest to do so. Did Gavilan do something similar to that?

Who is to say that Patterson was "in his prime"? Was Liston in his prime because he was never the same after? Ellis? All I know is that none of these fighters were as great as Armstrong.

Except they were considered by many to have been in their primes (or very close to it), while Armstrong wasn't.

In case you didn't know, it's kind of hard for a someone starting at lightweight to win titles at welterweight and middleweight too. I'm not criticizing Ali for not having won more titles, I'm giving credit to Robinson for doing it. It's an accomplishment no matter how you spin it.

If it can't physically be done by both fighters, then don't try to bring it up in hopes to make a comparison.

He still didn't face as many ranked opponents as Robinson did.

Like I said, fighters had to fight to make a decent living, in those days. They fought more than any of the more modern generations of fighters.

Robinson could do a lot of what Ali did but he could also do more. It's not a fighter's style to go to the body or to have punching power, it's simply a part of their ability and skill. It's like saying that Carlos Baldomir having no speed or a jab is a part of his style. Ali disregarded going to the body and it cost him somewhat against fighters who could be vulnerable to the body such as Ken Norton. His lack of one punch KO power is why he had troubles with Norton and Frazier.

He was a head hunter and that was part of his strategy. Not every fighter is the same. So I'm sorry that Ali doesn't match up to your perfect idea of how a fighter should be. We just have to accept them as they are.

No but along with all the other evidence I've brought up, it indicates that Robinson was in fact the better fighter.

Evidence? Not everything you state is evidence. A lot of it is just opinion and not fact. Don't confuse them.

You're very far from winning this debate.

[KILLA RIGHT]

Srr and honestly i don't think it's that close

[rskumm21]

1) Ali beat the better fighters, when those fighters were in their primes.

2) You can pick more fighters to beat Robinson than you can for Ali, in fantasy fights.

3) Ali's speed is one of, if not the, best of all-time, on a P4P basis.

4) Ali's title reign was much better than that of Robinson's. He had a better world title record and (in my opinion) beat the better fighters.

The numbers in red are the ranking of the fighter in the "50 Greatest Fighters of All-Time" list by The Ring magazine.

The numbers in blue are the ranking of the fighter in the "The 80 Best Fighters of the Last 80 Years" by The Ring magazine.

Robinson's record in world title fights: 14-7-1

Robinson's world title wins

Tommy Bell
Jimmy Doyle
Chuck Taylor
Bernard Docusen
Kid Gavilan
Charley Fusari
Jake LaMotta (#52 and #28)
Randy Turpin
Bobo Olson
Rocky Graziano
Gene Fullmer
Carmen Basilio (#40)

Ali's record in world title fights: 22-3

Ali's world title wins

Sonny Liston
Floyd Patterson
George Chuvalo
Henry Cooper
Brian London
Karl Mildenberger
Cleveland Williams
Ernie Terrell
Zora Folley
George Foreman (#25 and #20)
Chuck Wepner
Jean-Pierre Coopman
Jimmy Young
Richard Dunn
Ken Norton
Ron Lyle
Joe Bugner
Joe Frazier (#42 and #26)
Alfredo Evangelista
Earnie Shavers
Leon Spinks

After reading #2 I really couldn't take anything else you said serious.

[The Beatles]

interesting discussion.....i liked Fiasco's points, although some knocking Robinson's achievements i dont agree with......

and to those who claim 'Sugar Ray, its not even close', you guys are just idiots who dont know ****e...

Ali's resume alone goes up against any fighter in history, FACT