How fast was Sugar Ray Robinson in 1950? Find out here.

[McGoorty]

Look buddy I ain't gonna get into some sort of debate about how good Robinson was...u mention the gene fulmer fight but that's one fight...there are countless fights on YouTube where you can see Robinson miss wildly and a lazy and then get countered, Robinson also fought a lot of duds and guys he should have beat easy but he lost to, Leonard, Robinson would have been a close fight and making somebody that is head shoulders above everybody else does not really exist my friend, it's a called evolution and progression and to think somebody from 50 years prior walks over any other person that enters that sport is biased and ****** , sugar ray Robinson was an all time great in his era and to make him some kind of demigod who Beats anybody he meets in all of history is ridiculous , Leonard had as much ability as Robinson and i have boxed all my life, I stand by what I said Robinson is the greatest p4p because of his record not because he beats every boxer in history, next thing your be saying is Joe Louis beats Lennox Lewis

Well there we do differ I do think the fighters from 50, 60 and 70 years ago were far tougher and just as skillful as anyone today or in Leonards day, boxing as I am sure you know and understand is nothing like other non combative sports, the American fighters back then came from a tougher era and grew up in far worse and desperate circumstances, they fought ALL THE TIME because they had to and there were far more boxers therefore a far bigger talent pool. I am not criticizing anything you say, I am just pointing out what i think.

[McGoorty]

Look buddy I ain't gonna get into some sort of debate about how good Robinson was...u mention the gene fulmer fight but that's one fight...there are countless fights on YouTube where you can see Robinson miss wildly and a lazy and then get countered, Robinson also fought a lot of duds and guys he should have beat easy but he lost to, Leonard, Robinson would have been a close fight and making somebody that is head shoulders above everybody else does not really exist my friend, it's a called evolution and progression and to think somebody from 50 years prior walks over any other person that enters that sport is biased and ****** , sugar ray Robinson was an all time great in his era and to make him some kind of demigod who Beats anybody he meets in all of history is ridiculous , Leonard had as much ability as Robinson and i have boxed all my life, I stand by what I said Robinson is the greatest p4p because of his record not because he beats every boxer in history, next thing your be saying is Joe Louis beats Lennox Lewis

I do agree with some of what you say, yes I also think Robinson could be beaten by other fighters from the 80's or even from earlier times, who is to say that Les Darcy can't beat him ?.... if anyone comes out and says no way in hell would Darcy beat Robinson we can justly ask why and even have a chuckle at the guy who is so adamant. A guy like Darcy who has all the qualities you could ask for is tough enough, i.e. has a chin that can take probably any shot from Robbo and still stand, is quick enough to cause problems, hits hard enough to knock Robinson out if Ray doesn't see it coming and is very surely far stronger and bigger at middleweight than Ray so in close Darcy has a big edge. I am sure there are many who can give him trouble but on the other side is there anyone Ray is not capable of beating ??? NO would be my response, we just can never know, because it is impossible to know, I know there are many Harry Greb fans who would say Harry beats Ray for sure but that is silly isn't it when nobody today has ever seen Greb fight. Leonard vs Robinson I back Robinson but it would be a great fight and it would be very spiteful and worth watching

[The plunger man]

Hell since when did any "poor" fighter ever beat Robinson ?... every one of them had some great qualities. Sure Ray Leonard matched him in some departments but not in power but seriously Robinson fought nearly as many great fighters as Leonard had total fights. Their careers simply cannot be compared, the resume's are vastly different. How can you say Robinson wasn't accurate ? his left hook that dropped Fullmer was as accurate as any ever, maybe you been watching different films. The most important thing about Robinson's record is that of when he was a welterweight, not when he was old and fighting past his best against middles, his record as a welter is incredible. The only department Leonard was superior in was his business sense and his great entrepeneurial skills, Leonard was onbe of the smartest cookies boxing ever saw.

He should have lost to Henry brimm but received a draw, Tommy bell dropped him and should have at least got a draw, he lost to joey maxim and he was only 31,, they say exhaustion well both fighter had to deal with the heat that night not just ray Robinson , you have not seen the man live in the ring so all you go on is what you read and hear from old timers , it's like Bert Randolph sugar for the ring he never had any modern day boxers in his greatest p4p list except a Roberto Duran, I have watched all fights from yesteryear to the current day and if your special in the ring your special...certain fighters when u look at you know could compete in any era and be successful, Robinson Armstrong greb, monzon, pep Leonard x 2 Ali and a few more.....I'm sorry but in my opinion Leonard could above held his own with Robinson and that's that

[The plunger man]

Well there we do differ I do think the fighters from 50, 60 and 70 years ago were far tougher and just as skillful as anyone today or in Leonards day, boxing as I am sure you know and understand is nothing like other non combative sports, the American fighters back then came from a tougher era and grew up in far worse and desperate circumstances, they fought ALL THE TIME because they had to and there were far more boxers therefore a far bigger talent pool. I am not criticizing anything you say, I am just pointing out what i think.

Poverty is poverty whether it's 60 years ago or now....I'm saying talent is talent and no fighter in history has been granted a superior set of skills to everybody else that has set foot in the ring, I do agree they were tougher and boxed more times , Jesus it's crazy to think they boxed every 2 or 3 weeks.....but it was the times they were in, boxing is boxing and the boxer f he is special would have adapted to what every era they was in, Now I think boxing has gone downhill slightly from 30 years ago, but I could counter back saying there are a lot more people in the world so there more competition now, u have the Eastern Europeans, Asians and different genres and you can't say that old school Americans had it any worse than manny pacquaio for instance growing up in the streets in the Phillilpines , don't get me wrong I'm not insulting the old school era at all,,, it's like my nan when she use to talk about the god old days and the Russians fighting the Germans with wooden tanks, in reality they were just wooden shaped tanks in a hay field diverting the German bombers lol

[McGoorty]

Poverty is poverty whether it's 60 years ago or now....I'm saying talent is talent and no fighter in history has been granted a superior set of skills to everybody else that has set foot in the ring, I do agree they were tougher and boxed more times , Jesus it's crazy to think they boxed every 2 or 3 weeks.....but it was the times they were in, boxing is boxing and the boxer f he is special would have adapted to what every era they was in, Now I think boxing has gone downhill slightly from 30 years ago, but I could counter back saying there are a lot more people in the world so there more competition now, u have the Eastern Europeans, Asians and different genres and you can't say that old school Americans had it any worse than manny pacquaio for instance growing up in the streets in the Phillilpines , don't get me wrong I'm not insulting the old school era at all,,, it's like my nan when she use to talk about the god old days and the Russians fighting the Germans with wooden tanks, in reality they were just wooden shaped tanks in a hay field diverting the German bombers lol

No I know poor Americans didn't have it worse than guys like Pac Man, hell Les Darcy came the most extreme poverty but I think there was so much expertise in America back in those days and today there is nothing like the poverty like those of the slums in the major American cities. Compared to the poor countries today it was similar but I don't think most of these places have anywhere near the expertise of old America or Australia for that matter where back in Darcy's day was the biggest sport in the land and lots of expertise as well BUT a tiny tiny population back then. As a result I think there were far more fighters with access to the very best trainers and gyms. Sure more people today but if you are a fighter you don't have to chooses boxing, there's mma and kickboxing and I am sure there are many thousands doing those sports so boxing has a lot of competition, in the old days if two guys got in a ring and started kicking the spectators would have invaded the ring and rioted as back then it was looked down upon.... I suppose it was Bruce Lee who changed all that... anyway that was how it was. Now I can tell from reading your posts that you certainly know what you are about. I never said any fighter ever had far more than every other fighter, and yes as you say special is special is special and there have been at least two hundred boxers from Fitzsimmons till now that I think of as great fighters, but none of them were unbeatable, any boxer with a unbeaten record simply means they retired early or dodged some fighters or at least picked who they fought. The very fact that guys like Robinson, Pep, Benny Leonard, Greb, Langford lost fights to some guys they shouldn't have lies in this business of fighting every two to three weeks for long periods, it's liuke being a rugby league professional playing in the NRL week after week after week, it is NOT possible to perform at your best every time.... but in boxing today there is no such excuse unless you are a bottom feeder...... a journeyman with meagre talent. .................................................. .................................................. ................... I use Les Darcy as an example a lot because I know his career better than I know any other fighter in history, he nearly always won, in fact from the second half of his career he never lost but that does not mean he was always at his very best, he fought so often he carried lots of injuries into fights and went the full 20 rounds instead of blowing away guys like he could when he was at a hundred per cent. Boxing then was very different, I am pretty sure Australia will never ever produce a guy anywhere near as good as Darcy was again, the sport has diminished here so much since then and our pool of fighters tiny compared to what it was like in my grandfather's day back in the 40's when every second bloke was a boxer, in fact my grandfather had a pro fight yet he preferred cricket, back then boxing was huge and an Australian title really meant something and the champions were very very good, can't say that about too many downunder these days.

[Ray Corso]

.........who is to say that Les Darcy can't beat him ?(Robinson).... if anyone comes out and says no ...well chuckle all you want, chucklehead!


Darcey a lean away backfoot weighted style from the bare knuckle profiled era would be destroyed by Robinson. Darcey barely 5'6" against a 5'11" master boxer and hard hitting KO artists from the "modern era"!
Darcey never left Australia and fought nobodies his Middleweight career was barely 3 years!
Robinson fought for 25 years, he was a Middleweight contender & champion for 15 years. He fought over 300 times as an amateur and pro and was stopped ONCE! That was against the lightheavy champ and from attrision and he was beating the champ! They used two refes and 4 judges, ringside seats were fainting. Tell me Darcey beats Maxim too!!!!
If you think the heavier man wears out before the lighter weight man you don't know much about boxing!
Comparing these two talents is ridiculous, I don't mean to knock your hero but he's not in the same class as Robinson and thats NOT a knock, because no one is!

The only size differences are in the heavies. From Forman to Bowe to Lennox to Wlad. Other than the 6'4"+ 235--245lbs at the unlimited class the other classes show NO larger men on average.
The welters in the 70's ---90's Curry, Leonard, Hearns, McCrory, Breland, Forest etc...were much bigger than the Mayweather era. Floyd Pac, Cotto, Shane etc.. were barely 5'7".
Height hasn't changed much for the Modern Era (1930's) to the Current Era (1995). Talents are simular except there are fewer great fighters now and the skill level on the men above 175 isn't as high as it once was. Alot of that stems from the competition level being weak. The better skilled fighters can achieve their potential without quality opponents.
When the so-called top contenders fight the champs you never seem them again, or they didsappear for 2 to 3 years! They got their pay day and their gone, that tells you what the competition level is all about. Once your in shape this is a "mind game" and the weak minded disappear!
Ray

[billeau2]

Just a quick note, you talked about Rugby, I presume you mean the game called Rugby Union, but in the other rugby code, Rugby League it is highly professional and we have some incredible athletes, in fact Billy Slater is maybe the greatest all round athlete I have ever seen, the bloke is a freak, unfortunately he is now on the back end of his awesome career and injuries are taking their inevitable toll. Rugby Union has also turned professional but it did that relatively recently but League has been a pro sport since 1895 in fact that was why league broke away from the Union. The two games require different things of an athlete, rugby league players have to be faster, stronger and have far better stamina as it is a faster more explosive and tougher sport. To see the Wallabies against the Kangaroos (the latter are the Australian rugby league team, the Wallabies the union version), you see a big difference, in union you still see many varied body types but the Kangaroos or any of the great club teams you see massively muscled athletes, one and all, their training regimes are positively Spartan.

No doubt. I don't have chauvanistic views towards professional endevours, ie I think there were times when the great olympic teams of the Cubans were the equal of professional fighters, I also assumed there was some professional activity in Rugby, however I do think it would be naive not to think that if Rugby had the presence of Soccer and Football, you would have more athletes involved and that this might cause an upsurge in talent...maybe not for every club, but as the norm.

[Mr.MojoRisin']

Pick any point in Robinsons game. There is no weak point! His ring IQ alone would demolish fighters of today. He proved himself time and time again against fighters who had 15+ pounds on him. How many times did he fight Jake Lamotta? Enough to give him diabetes! How many other fighters had a 25 year long career?

[The Old LefHook]

If middleweights from later eras had to make weight on the day of the fight the way it should be, many could be eliminated from consideration as middleweights who could've or might have beaten Robinson. This is consistently overlooked, minimized or passed over with a forgetful nod of acknowledgement. That is not a little deal it is a big deal. Weight is significant in boxing. Jones, McClellan, Toney, never could have made middleweight for long, not long enough to beat the Robinson who beat LaMotta for the middleweight championship IMO. They would always have a chance, but I see them losing more to Robby than they win. They have to fight him as middleweights, not the super middle or light heavyweights they went on to become.

[McGoorty]

.........who is to say that Les Darcy can't beat him ?(Robinson).... if anyone comes out and says no ...well chuckle all you want, chucklehead!


Darcey a lean away backfoot weighted style from the bare knuckle profiled era would be destroyed by Robinson. Darcey barely 5'6" against a 5'11" master boxer and hard hitting KO artists from the "modern era"!
Darcey never left Australia and fought nobodies his Middleweight career was barely 3 years!
Robinson fought for 25 years, he was a Middleweight contender & champion for 15 years. He fought over 300 times as an amateur and pro and was stopped ONCE! That was against the lightheavy champ and from attrision and he was beating the champ! They used two refes and 4 judges, ringside seats were fainting. Tell me Darcey beats Maxim too!!!!
If you think the heavier man wears out before the lighter weight man you don't know much about boxing!
Comparing these two talents is ridiculous, I don't mean to knock your hero but he's not in the same class as Robinson and thats NOT a knock, because no one is!

The only size differences are in the heavies. From Forman to Bowe to Lennox to Wlad. Other than the 6'4"+ 235--245lbs at the unlimited class the other classes show NO larger men on average.
The welters in the 70's ---90's Curry, Leonard, Hearns, McCrory, Breland, Forest etc...were much bigger than the Mayweather era. Floyd Pac, Cotto, Shane etc.. were barely 5'7".
Height hasn't changed much for the Modern Era (1930's) to the Current Era (1995). Talents are simular except there are fewer great fighters now and the skill level on the men above 175 isn't as high as it once was. Alot of that stems from the competition level being weak. The better skilled fighters can achieve their potential without quality opponents.
When the so-called top contenders fight the champs you never seem them again, or they didsappear for 2 to 3 years! They got their pay day and their gone, that tells you what the competition level is all about. Once your in shape this is a "mind game" and the weak minded disappear!
Ray

What are you talking about Ray, I never got past your opening statement where you were wrong TWICE before your first full stop, did you get all your mental image of Darcy's style by staring at a still pose which shows him posing for a camera where he has to stay still for at least a few seconds and they had huge big flashes attached ? Darcy was not a lean back fighter at all he was dynamic, he would leap in and out outboxing everybody or getting inside and destroying guys with one of the best infighting styles in history and he was not from the bare knuckle era, the bare knuckle days had been over for over 15 years before Darcy had a fight at age 14. He was never EVER a backfoot fighter, watch films, read fight reports... all show a guy always on the front foot. You have some big critics here and I am starting to see why, this is your worst post ever. You go on about Darcy being shorter but in fact he has a bigger reach, you overlooked that and the fact that he was stronger and far more solidly built and a true and BIG middleweight, Fulmer was of a similar build and he beat Robinson. I AM NOT SAY HE WAS BETTER OR EVEN AS GOOD AS ROBINSON but I defy anyone to prove that Darcy couldn't have pulled off a win over Robinson,... if basilio and Fulmer and LaMotta and f**k me dead, bloody Randy Turpin ? what would Darcy do to Turpin, probably massacre him.... if those guys can beat Robbo then why not Darcy, Greb, Walker, Ryan, Hagler, Monzon ?????... fact is ray you do not know because no one f**king knows........................ You are welcome to an opinion but please get your facts right and your head out of that damp, dank smelly place it is at atm................................... .................................................. ......................... .......................... PS for your information the 5 foot seven Les Darcy had a reach of SIX feet and 2 and a half inches so not only does ray have to punch down all the time and really has to work hard to land a body punch there is ray's body at perfect height for Darcy to hit away at. Ray is fast no doubt and I am a massive Robinson fan but Darcy was also very fast and his footwork was really fast, ray isn't bad at infighting but film of Darcy shows that he was an incredible infighter and you totally discount Darcy's power. You should know that it's all about styles and nobody is perfect.... NOBODY not even Ray... or Les, and you never really know what happens until two guys actually fight.............. once again I will say it, I am a big fan of Robinson and yes if I make lists I always rank Ray higher than Les...... but I was using Darcy as an example....... you underrate him at an incredible rate....... do you think he is a bum or something ?????