I UNDERSTAND why people think Sugar Ray was the GOAT

[SouthpawRight]

sugar ray robinson lost 19 times...floyd didnt lose 19 rounds his entire career! not sure he lost any but a couple debatable ones i guess

Floyd was perfect, but Sugar Robinson was STRIKING

the best attacker and defender

[djtmal]

yes the best defense ever seen in boxing Floyd Patterson

They don't say he cherrypicked

[SouthpawRight]

Sugar Robinson vs Henry Armstrong. the GOAT pitted against one of his heroes top 3 all time in boxing

[daggum]

Floyd was perfect, but Sugar Robinson was STRIKING

the best attacker and defender

people got mad at floyd for figthing a bum like baldomir because he had 8 losses, even though baldomir probably ko's robinson

[DeeMoney]

If you were born on or after 2010, most folks will disagree with you. For them either Jake Paul is the GOAT who ran into some snags or Ryan Garcia.

I've been a teacher for the past two decades, and you are way off on this. But thats the same type of 'get off my lawn' or 'back in my day' mentality that every generation has complained about since Aristotle. Kids today are the same as they were 20 years ago, 40 years ago, etc. We just need to take off the rose tinted glasses and remember how many punks were around when we were youths.

How many kids in your HS were extolling the skills of Benny Leonard or Sam Langford? Probably not many, thats just how it is, most kids don't really look into historically relevant athletes who had their prime prior to the explosion of televised sports.

FWIW, I imagine most teens now, those that follow sports, would say either Ali, Manny, Floyd, or Tyson if given the question.

[SouthpawRight]

I've been a teacher for the past two decades, and you are way off on this. But thats the same type of 'get off my lawn' or 'back in my day' mentality that every generation has complained about since Aristotle. Kids today are the same as they were 20 years ago, 40 years ago, etc. We just need to take off the rose tinted glasses and remember how many punks were around when we were youths.

How many kids in your HS were extolling the skills of Benny Leonard or Sam Langford? Probably not many, thats just how it is, most kids don't really look into historically relevant athletes who had their prime prior to the explosion of televised sports.

FWIW, I imagine most teens now, those that follow sports, would say either Ali, Manny, Floyd, or Tyson if given the question.

no

teenie boppers truly think Oleksandr or TBud are the goat

each having beat a grand total of ONE all time great opponent Saul and Fury

[DeeMoney]

sugar ray robinson lost 19 times...floyd didnt lose 19 rounds his entire career! not sure he lost any but a couple debatable ones i guess

SRR Also fought 199 fights, with a number of them after he turned 40. Floy has just over 1/4 of that amount with only a fight against McGreggor after turning 40. Fighting more fights, increased sample size, and fights post prime increase the odds for a loss.

SRR won 91 consecutive fights, nearly double the amount of fights Floyd had

After becoming a champion Floyd, at most fought 3 times a year, that was only twice still early in his career. After becoming a champion SRR had multiple calendar years where he fought more than 10 times in that year. Increasing the amount of fights you take withini that year increases the likelihood of a given fighter losing, even to a worse opponent.

I think we all accept that sometimes the fighter who is consistently not as good as their opponent still wins the fight (unless you want to argue that Buster Douglas was historically greater than Tyson). Upsets do happen and their is somewhat of a randomness to outcomes. You seem like a smart enough man to understand this, so I assume you were just being disingenuous with this post here.
Thats not to write that you have to accept that SRR was better than Floyd, rather that your stated evidence for such is cherry picked and not consistent enough to prove that point. Otherwise we could argue that 1-0 Felix Baumgartner (you can look him up) is greater than Mike Tyson

[DeeMoney]

no

teenie boppers truly think Oleksandr or TBud are the goat

each having beat a grand total of ONE all time great opponent Saul and Fury

Im sure some adult do too, just like I'm sure some teenager in the early 1960s thought Floyd Patterson was the greatest ever. Kids will be kids.

[SouthpawRight]

SRR Also fought 199 fights, with a number of them after he turned 40. Floy has just over 1/4 of that amount with only a fight against McGreggor after turning 40. Fighting more fights, increased sample size, and fights post prime increase the odds for a loss.

SRR won 91 consecutive fights, nearly double the amount of fights Floyd had

After becoming a champion Floyd, at most fought 3 times a year, that was only twice still early in his career. After becoming a champion SRR had multiple calendar years where he fought more than 10 times in that year. Increasing the amount of fights you take withini that year increases the likelihood of a given fighter losing, even to a worse opponent.

I think we all accept that sometimes the fighter who is consistently not as good as their opponent still wins the fight (unless you want to argue that Buster Douglas was historically greater than Tyson). Upsets do happen and their is somewhat of a randomness to outcomes. You seem like a smart enough man to understand this, so I assume you were just being disingenuous with this post here.
Thats not to write that you have to accept that SRR was better than Floyd, rather that your stated evidence for such is cherry picked and not consistent enough to prove that point. Otherwise we could argue that 1-0 Felix Baumgartner (you can look him up) is greater than Mike Tyson

fans were forgiving of losses in that fight twice a month era

fighters didn't have 3 month long training camps only to be beat

[djtmal]

people got mad at floyd for figthing a bum like baldomir because he had 8 losses, even though baldomir probably ko's robinson

Pathofleastresistanceweather