Originally posted by goldenglove2
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Honestly, is there anyone in here who doesn't see SRR as the GOAT?
Collapse
-
-
how sad is this ****...
Originally posted by JACK D. RIPPER View PostSeriously, how is this even a question?
*******s?
Got anything?Originally posted by JACK D. RIPPER View PostGTFO here Drew.
I'm sure there was his share of David Diazes and Ricky Hattons in there, but come on, you think he fought 130 scrubs?Originally posted by JACK D. RIPPER View PostHonestly, pink. You were the last person I'd expect to pop in here with *******ation.Originally posted by JACK D. RIPPER View PostThe man's resume speaks for itself.
The real question would be, what makes you feel that he isn't the Goat?
And don't say because Packy is or I swear to god....
Originally posted by JACK D. RIPPER View Post
You criticized Manny Packy???
Oh no you didnt...Originally posted by JACK D. RIPPER View Post
I'm still waiting for you to uncontrollably declare Packy the GOAT.
Come on *******, you know you want to...
Comment
-
Originally posted by goldenglove2 View Postso its better to fight one Michael Jenning before a good fighter or ten Michael Jennings before a good fighter? What's more impressive?... and how can you be sure they were worse then Michael Jennings?
And i cant its just speculation and my opinion
Comment
-
Originally posted by The_Executioner View PostOnly Henry Armstrong comes close really from wat I know...and Robinson beat Armstrong
I've already read a few times in this thread where posters have said "Im sure he fought 10 or 20 tomato cans before fighting a good fighter". That is a joke. People who don't know about his competition should either not post about him, or they should expect their opinions to be ridiculed. Im no boxing historian, but I've read enough about him and his comtemporaries, and have seen enough of his fights to know that any conversation on this subject that doesn't include him is a joke.
Comment
-
i also have ray robinson 1#. but boxing historians definitely have a incredible bias for oldschool boxers. Every single athletic sport had their greatest player continuously come in modern times.
Yet only boxing is immune to this athletic & physical evolution according to the old school farts & that its hearsay to even consider a modern fighter better or even being competitive vs old school greats.
The bert sugars of the world love to say competition was sooo great during the old times, less divisions, more fights blah blah. Just looking at ray robinson's record before his 1st & 2nd losses, you see him face guys with records of;
3-15
1-14
67-36
41-53
4-6
0-0
13-17
47-19
39-39
74-27
20-29
15-11
25-24
111-26
46-26 (Jannazzo)
30-19
45-18
6-23 (jean wanes)
22-22
29-21
86-13(luc van dam (jean claude van dam's great grandfather)
53-29
15-15
24-24
I can go on. i think u get the point. can u imagine a modern superstar fighting someone who was 6-23 after he was established? pac & fraud jr. get crap for fighting david diaz & baldomir.
Its not so golden back then. yet old timers are so blind & biased of the fact & modern & current greats get the short end of the stick. i know duran, leondar, & hearns would never lose some plodder like jake lamotta.
Comment
Comment