Tweet
Who is #1 at WW?
-
62Ray Robinson77.42%48Henry Armstrong4.84%3Ray Leonard8.06%5Jose Napoles0.00%0Other9.68%6 -
I have to say SJR -
SRR at his best weight, not many could compete with him at welter.Comment
-
Is there ever a point to this question? he had over 90 fights at the weight and never lost to a welterweight until fighting Basilio at middleweight.
That said, Ray Leonard's trifecta of wins at the weight (Benitez, Duran, Hearns) is as Robinson-esque as it gets in the limited schedule era.Comment
-
-
paul williams. naw j/k even i am not that much of a nutt hugger.Comment
-
What about LaMotta?!Originally posted by crold1 View Post
And i dont even think theres any footage of Robinson at Welterweight, and considering how good he looked at middleweight on films and past his prime, u can only dream how good he was at welterweightComment
-
What about Lamotta? laMotta was a middleweight and Ray a welter for the first five fights. Robinson at 147 just blows everyone away; I don't have to see it to know it. Like you said, if that's how he good he was at 160...DAMNComment
-
I'm not entirely sure who is the best, but considering after about 30 votes, Henry Armstrong had 0 votes, I had to pitch that one in... he defended the welterweight title 19 ****ing times.
He also held the welterweight, lightweight and featherweight titles at the same time... pretty much means he wasn't a huge welterweight, and he was probably beating much bigger guys for those defenses.Comment
-
none of those guys, thomas hearns is the best welterweight, im so sick of idiots posting guys saying their the "greatest" from primitive era's of boxing.
ray robinson fought against people who didnt have his speed or reflexes, hearns and leoanard would beat himComment
Comment