robinson is not the best at 160

[brownpimp88]

1. His record in middleweight title fights is 8-6-1.
2. He lost to turpin and a no name in 1955.
3. Hagler losing to leonard is better than robinson losing to basilio.
4. Robinson at middleweight gets highly overrated due to his success at 147.
5. his overall record at middleweight is 65-17-5.

The 1950's and 1940's was not the golden era for middleweights.

Pender, Zale, Graziano,Turpin and Olson arent that great. Gene fullmer was the only REAL middleweight from that era that will go down as ATG.

The 1970's and 1980's had monzon and hagler. On top of that, you had more REAL middleweights, not a bunch of blown up welterweights.

Monzong and hagler are the best at 160, i guess you can include greb due to his resume, even though we never saw him fight.

Look at it objectively folks, monzon, hagler and even greb accomplished more at 160.

[The Surgeon]

1. His record in middleweight title fights is 8-6-1.
2. He lost to turpin and a no name in 1955.
3. Hagler losing to leonard is better than robinson losing to basilio.
4. Robinson at middleweight gets highly overrated due to his success at 147.
5. his overall record at middleweight is 65-17-5.

The 1950's and 1940's was not the golden era for middleweights.

Pender, Zale, Graziano,Turpin and Olson arent that great. Gene fullmer was the only REAL middleweight from that era that will go down as ATG.

The 1970's and 1980's had monzon and hagler. On top of that, you had more REAL middleweights, not a bunch of blown up welterweights.

Monzong and hagler are the best at 160, i guess you can include greb due to his resume, even though we never saw him fight.

Look at it objectively folks, monzon, hagler and even greb accomplished more at 160.

Id agree, at middle he's beatable. He is still a hell of a middle tho as well as pound for pound #1 and welter bad ass too! I wouldnt include Greb for what its worth

[brownpimp88]

Robinson is prolly pound for pound king, but at 160 he showed he was human. He did duck burley and this will haunt him forever.

[Easy-E]

Well I dont really take what people who think Robinson was the best at 160 say seriously anyways.

[The Surgeon]

Robinson is prolly pound for pound king, but at 160 he showed he was human. He did duck burley and this will haunt him forever.

U ever see Burley fight? He's one guy thats slipped under my radar! I hear he was Unbelievable tho

[K-DOGG]

Monzon, IMO, was the best at 160, not Robinson. Ray, however, was great enough to be ranked in the top 5....I have him at #2, just ahead of Greb, Hagler, and Ketchel.

[LondonRingRules]

1. His record in middleweight title fights is 8-6-1.

** So? No dummy save you has ever suggested he was the best at 160. You are in select dummy company!

[brownpimp88]

** So? No dummy save you has ever suggested he was the best at 160. You are in select dummy company!

many people do say that he is, get a life.

Hagler was never convincingly beat during his career, while robinson was. From what i heard, hagler's early losses were "hometown decisions". He avenged both losses anyways.

[LondonRingRules]

Hagler was never convincingly beat during his career, while robinson was. From what i heard, hagler's early losses were "hometown decisions". He avenged both losses anyways.

** You were never convincing, PERIOD, unless coming up with dummy premises counts for anything.

What's next for you, "Ali was not the best cruiserweight ever?" How's about, "Duran was not the best middleweight." Perhaps, "SRL weren't the best light heavy," or "Barney ain't even the biggest dinosaur!"

[BigCol]

I've always thought Monzon was the best middleweight of all time.