Why do certain "fans" here overrate old time boxers?

[Make U Cry]

Some "fans" will wiki people like Sam Langford and use them as proof of why a modern great like Pacquiao couldn't be a top ATG.

Langford barely has any film footage available...... of his "300 fights" only a small% are recorded on paper as legitimate fights......

Fighters from that era also often fought the same person 10+ times, Langford has 12+ losses to a guy named Harry Willis.......

Ray Robinson had like 19 losses 8 draws and they're all ignored, yet they hold on to Pacquiao's 7.

Many of SRR “fans” who call him goat can’t name 5 guys he beat without google.

Guys like Armstrong fought hundreds of no-name bums, his "fans" could not name 3 guys he beat without wiki search.....

Most of the guys from 100+ years ago have little to 0 film footage available yet some fans rave about them being absolutely better than any modern fighter.

If you disagree, then YDKSAB. Lol really?


I guarantee you most of the so called fans of old time fighters have never sat through a single one of their fights in entirety.

IMO most of these "fans" of ancient fighters are just pretending to sound knowledgable/superior and using these old guys names to further their own Agenda.

[JakeTheBoxer]

I agree. Everybody can see many fights of Ali, Foreman, Hagler, Ray Sugar Leonard, Monzon, Napoles...but it is really to be a fan of a fighter that fought in 20`s or 30´s even 40´s.

[IronDanHamza]

Harry Willis was pretty good though.

50 years from now Mayweather and Pacquiao will be massively overrated by some too.

Just how it goes.

[TheFrog]

I agree with a lot of this. Especially the part about footage of old fighters.

However in regards to Ray Robinson and his 19 losses. They largely came later in his career. The man was 121-1-2 when he won the middleweight title. I think of a lot of those losses the same way I do later Roy Jones losses.

[ShaneMosleySr]

There was one champion and eight divisions, so it was almost impossible to become a world boxing champion. There were eight champions total at a time instead of 68.

So every champion was awesome instead of today when people can win titles in four divisions without fighting anyone, or make 13 consecutive title defenses without fighting anyone, etc.

[Gate keeper]

Some "fans" will wiki people like Sam Langford and use them as proof of why a modern great like Pacquiao couldn't be a top ATG.

Langford barely has any fight footage available...... of his "300 fights" only a small% are recorded on paper as legitimate fights......

Fighters from that era also often fought the same person 10+ times, Langford has 12+ losses to a guy named Harry Willis.......

Ray Robinson had like 19 losses 8 draws and they're all ignored, yet they hold on to Pacquiao's 7

Guys like Armstrong fought hundreds of bums, his "fans" could not name 3 guys he beat without using Wiki search.....

Most of these guys have little to 0 film footage available yet some fans rave about them being absolutely better than any modern fighter.

If you disagree, then YDKSAB. Lol really?


I guarantee you most of the so called fans of old time fighters have never sat through a single one of their fights in entirety.


IMO most of these "fans" of ancient fighters are just pretending to sound knowledgable/superior and using these old guys names for their own Agenda.....

Pretty sure Ray Robinson fought way more than the average pro fighter does today and was susceptible to way more damage. He only lasted as long as he did because of his skill. And he received multiple records and accolades from that time as well. By comparing his losses to Pacquiao, you're comparing two radically different eras and circumstances. Not to mention your summation of losses and draws conveniently leaves out how much it occurred before or after his prime.

And you will always have boxing fans criticizing any little thing to tear down a fighter they don't like. But real objective fans don't care that much about losses or draws, that's just a gimmick that came out from Mayweather's run. Guarantee you there's no objective fan that says Pacquiao is not an ATG solely because of 7 losses but then says Ray Robinson is. It's a silly argument.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Lol... Learn your history kid.

[_Rexy_]

Sugar Ray was 132-2-2 when he fought for the Light Heavyweight Championship of the world (giving up twenty pounds on the scales too)

The weigh ins were same day of the fight, 15 rounds, and fighting 20 times a year. The guys today won't even get in the ring unless they're the exact weight to the ****ing pound.


but let's say he's trash because he took losses in his forties.

[Make U Cry]

Lol... Learn your history kid.

Ur a fake ass boxing historian.

Using wiki search to look up old fighters and then pretending ur an expert LOL.

Pathetic.

[Boxing_1013]

Overall you make a great point and one I wholeheartedly agree with...great thread/point to bring up