Is Sugar Ray Robinson overrated?

[bballchump11]

It's an opinion. Consensus is always BS anyway. It's basically saying you have a group of people who all say the same thing and if you dispute that, well, you must be an idiot. It's elitist crap and they alienate themselves and eventually become the minority due to their terrible attitudes. For me, Roberto Duran is the pound-for-pound best of all time and I don't care what any one else thinks. It's my opinion and they have theirs, but by you questioning Robinson or saying that he's not your number one, you'll catch no flack from me.

When it comes down to it, Robinson was a lot of fun to watch, with excellent speed and power in both hands. He also stayed very busy and had a very high tally of wins. It's hard to knock the guy either way you look at it and I certainly believe he's one of the best in the sport's history.

However, he did fight plenty of soft touches as anyone with 200 fights did. it couldn't be helped. I think those fights kept him sharp and there's nothing wrong with that. I wish more modern fighters would do the same. He also fought the best of his era and beat most of them. But his style was like anybody else's. It had certain flaws.

Robinson was an outside fighter for the most part. His best work came from a distance. When Basilio, LaMotta and Fullmer crowded him, they had a lot of success in the losses and of course their victories over the sugar man. I think most good inside fighters would give him plenty of trouble and the great inside fighters would beat him more often than not. I'm not sold that Hopkins would beat him as I think he would be too busy and sharp for Hopkins. And a younger Hopkins would run into his shots more which would give him the advantage. Hagler would have a shot but only if he got to land like he wanted to. Personally, I think Robinson would be too quick and would frustrate Hagler way too much. You have to ask yourself 'If Sugar Ray Leonard could beat him, could not Sugar Ray Robinson?' I can't answer that question any other way than Robinson would win. Hagler was bigger and stronger, but he could be outboxed as he was against Leonard and in my opinion, Duran as well.

I'm not sure how Robinson-Monzon would play out. I think it would be a close, chess match that wouldn't be much fun with Monzon possibly edging him on points but it could really go either way. I do see Julian Jackson getting a knockdown over him. Mike McCallum might be too much for him as well, but I don't know. McCallum often got frustrated too. James Toney would lose I believe. Roy Jones would bring all kinds of athleticism in for a fun scrap, but Robinson threw a lot and had accuracy. If he managed to clip Roy, it could be all over. I think he's too much for Pavlik and Taylor. From what I've seen of GGG, I have to give the edge to Robinson due to opposition, but this is too early IMO. When GGG does get big fights, we will see.

Robinson will always be highly regarded and rightly so. But never be afraid to say he was not the best. And I don't believe Ali was the best heavyweight either. I definitely favor Joe Louis if they ever met. However, I think Joe Louis-Joe Frazier would be so much more fun.

Yeah I actually think Duran is more skilled than Robinson. When I look back at tape, there are fighters who just blow me away with their skill. Duran is one, Napoles is another, as well as fighters like Archie Moore, George Benton, etc. Robinson isn't one of those fighters though. To me Robinson was obviously skilled and smart, but he was more of an athletic freak and physical specimen.

He was a 5'11 welterweight, iron chin, atg power, great speed and very light feet. He was the perfect fighter from a physical standpoint. When I watch him, I don't marvel at his technique similar to Muhammad Ali. I am in awe of his God given gifts.

[ADP02]

While I don't agree that he's overrated, I do get your point about people calling him TBE without any real knowledge, simply because it's the "fashionable" answer.

Same goes for those who call other fighters TBE without having real knowledge of the ones who already have been called that or who are in that ball park ....

[Tony Trick-Pony]

One of the best reads in this entire thread. Thank you

Thank you very much, sir!

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Yeah I actually think Duran is more skilled than Robinson. When I look back at tape, there are fighters who just blow me away with their skill. Duran is one, Napoles is another, as well as fighters like Archie Moore, George Benton, etc. Robinson isn't one of those fighters though. To me Robinson was obviously skilled and smart, but he was more of an athletic freak and physical specimen.

He was a 5'11 welterweight, iron chin, atg power, great speed and very light feet. He was the perfect fighter from a physical standpoint. When I watch him, I don't marvel at his technique similar to Muhammad Ali. I am in awe of his God given gifts.

That's a great assessment. I have never thought about it that way, but I see your point and must say that I agree. Physically, he was unreal, but skill wise, was not the best.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Outstanding post.

Roberto Duran is the best fighter we have extensive footage of. He's the most complete fighter/boxer on film. His skill levels were phenomenal. It's the reason he could fight way past prime and even out of shape against much bigger greats like Hagler. Yes he had a great chin, yes he had hands of stone, but the reason he could compete way past prime against much bigger men was because of his offensive and especially defensive skills, and also the way he blended them both together seamlessly .

A technical marvel if there ever was one

He started out with a great chin and hands of stone. That he got naturally.

However, the skills he developed over the years was unreal. I doubt he ever worried about getting hurt in the ring since he was so hard to land clean on and even in his 40s, he had enough reflexes left to compete, even if not against the best opposition.

He's my number one since I've never seen anyone combine so many attributes. Unreal.

[Reloaded]

Please. most of the time when talking about boxing history 'bum' just means 'fighter i havent heard of'.

In 50 years time how many names will people recognise off of Klitschko or Mayweathers resumes?

Before making answers go look at his resume and look at the record of the guys he beat and count the loses in the last 10 fights before they fought Ray , Ray fought so many bums its not funny in todays boxing at top level you could not get away with it , look at GGG only a small number of fights by comparison and people are screaming he hasnt fought anyone which is true by todays standards placed on great fighters but they way better than 90% of Robinsons opponents .

The old days are full of romantic heroes villains and stories , time makes them larger than life , thing is we have videos to watch and nothing in Rays videos tells me he is GOAT , no way !

Mayweathers resume will hold up for eternity its full of best of this era , full of HOF fighters and WCs.

[E-Thug]

Well you obviously didn't understand the whole posts. Hagler and Robinson were good in the context of their era.

Hagler looked skills because boxers then were less skilled. It's like when you watch lower league soccer/football, it looks absolutely fine because the opponents and other players are not that good either, so in the context of the game, they look good and look skilled. Take them out of that game and drop them in a game higher skilled game and they would be like a fish out of water. That would be Hagler in todays middleweight division.

Robinson wouldn't have a chance against any current top 10 147/154/160 guy. He wouldn't even lay a glove on them. He'd be out for the count by the end of the second round and that's being generous.

Disagree. The likes of Cruyff, Platini, Maradona, Beckenbauer would be amongst the elite of this football era.

Dear Lord. Just no. Hagler had mad skills. I can watch tape and see that. You're acting like we've made some huge evolutionary jump in 30 years, which is hysterical. Outside of nutrition and training methods, not much has changed in boxing in the last 80 years. Boxers are still honing the same skills today that they were in 1935. Guys today are certainly a bit bigger, stronger and faster, but that does'nt equate to better skills. That does'nt magicly give you better footwork, balance, timing, ring IQ, defense or insert about any skill "here". Size, power and speed can all be overcome with a better skill set. If you can honestly look at tape and think that Lemieux is even in the same galaxy as Hagler, skillwise, I don't even know what to say.

Completely agree

You mean other than the multiple contenders, HOFers and ATGs that he fought many times each? Across 4 divisions (7 modern day divisions)?

He fought nearly 200 fights, there are bound to be some weaker fighters in there, but to claim he has a 'padded record' is ridiculous and completely untrue

He's a genuine ******. He claimed Lewis is the greatest heavyweight ever and has poisoned these boards with his nonsense

[SweetPbfAli]

Even thought Floyd was probably behind against Maidana but I always felt homeboy was in control. Judah fight I feel showed more greatness. Even in the Mosley fight how he took that right hand away after eating it twice flush

One of my favorite Floyd fights! He went to a style people never saw from him and likely felt he was incapable of up until that point. The adjustments he made in the first 5 rounds were beautiful to watch.

[SweetPbfAli]

Like someone else mentioned, considering his sheer amount of fights, he is bound to have some soft touches in there as most fighters from the earlier eras. However, if you go from the eye test, he has to have a place near the top of the all time list. Personally for me, he's not slick enough as I prefer defensive fighters but his skill and power were scary. From what I recall, much of his "prime" years aren't on tape contrary to what people in this thread have been saying so most of what we see is him slightly past his prime and based on those descriptions of people who actually saw him live which could be also subjected to nostalgic bias. With that being said, there's no perfect fighter and there is always a style that troubles another. SRR didn't seem like the greatest inside fighter but then you have Duran who was a monster inside fighter but could be outboxed by a ring technician. It's the nature of the beast.

[CodeBreaker]

He won't beat Leonard at welterweight, and a peak Roy Jones or Hagler at middleweight imo. His resume isn't as great as Ali. The level of competition should be very well considered. He is a great all-around fighter, but I don't think he has the boxing IQ of guys like Ali or Mayweather.