Is Ray Robinson the G.O.A.T why or why not?

[Tatabanya]

As of today, and in consideration of factors such as longevity at top level and consistently good quality of opposition, I'd say that the GOAT is Manny Pacquiao.

[sunny31]

He is certainly a trailblazer - I think hes got as much claim as anybody.

To me he is what Fangio is to F1, like the Godfather...the original GOAT. But the sport has evolved a lot, you cant compare a time when you could be fighting once every few weeks to what we've got now.

[Marchegiano]

What’s your criteria?

I think Floyd is definitely in the conversation but the resume doesn’t stack up for me.

I think he played the game the best if you get what I mean- always lived the life, never bothered with drink or drugs, retired in good health with unprecedented earnings.

He lacks a win over an ATG fighter in his prime, I look at SRL he has Hearns, Duran, Benítez. I don’t feel Floyd ever reached those same sort of heights. Canelo was probably the closest he came, which was a great win.

If it’s largely based on his talent, and the eye test, that’s cool. I rate Roy very high for similar reasons.

Sometimes you try to drive a point home and it gets lost by the effort rather than being obvious.


Sorry bud, I meant to say I think in all time convos one who stands alone ranks above those who are repeating a forgotten era's awards.


resume is honestly little concern to me for all time. It is, in my eye, a bias per era. I use it for direct comparisons of careers but not so much their awards because to me it is a form of time based bias. Who am I to say LaMotta is way better than Ikkos? Who are any of us?


Like I said before, you give no ****s about Klieto, but, you give even less ****s about who he beat, right?

I don't mean that as a criticism, ancient boxing history isn't for everyone, but, the point is your lack of caring about him ought to cue you into your own time based biases.

Names on a record exist far longer than film, most fans don't care about them.

Names on a record go back far longer than newspapers, no one gives any ****s about any names or records though.

Awards in time, not all time awards like they are presented, are what we tend to argue about when talking all time greats.


Floyd's resume, SRR's resume, those are time based awards that one can argue over forever....on a personal level, I'd never get an answer out of myself. I'd just flip flop due to perspectives. If you say this sort of timing matters to you most then you're good to go, but, the day you wake up and think meh, this sort of performance matters more, now you've a whole new **** show to work out.

I wash my hands of the in-time awards by granting all time to those who hold all time accolades.


----------------------------------


If I misunderstood and you meant more how to I award Floyd for having an array of techniques, that's clearly not something captured by records bud.

Yes, by eye, we all saw his evolution. His record is proof he did well with it, not that he did it. The proof that he changed from forward, aggressive, punching with boxing as a control measure to laid back boxing with snappy punches as a control measure can only be seen, I think, I mean you could read articles about it I guess but you get what I'm saying. Yes, there is eye test to it, no, I'm not saying that alone. What he did against who.


In both regards, I try to take away my personal feelings toward all time. Not really to be beyond bias, I'd be fine with saying this is my bias and this is my list, but rather because I can never pin down one set bias, or, criteria.


If they fought top ranked opposition I'll give it to them, names and timing are secondary. Like Wlad, you don't often see my caveat his run with timing. Because that is my bias. I don't like his timing, but, in all time, does my bias of his timing exclude his record? I think not. I think the fact that the ancients let dead dudes reign for way longer than ten years breaks his all time record though. Should I show bias against the ancients and tell them having a dead champion is ******?

That is a time based bias isn't it?

[The plunger man]

Robinson along with Armstrong , greb , Ali , Duran , Pacquiao and ray leonard all have a fair shout out as number 1.
Then you have the eye test and sheer ability and we have Ali , Sugar ray leonard , Roy Jones jnr , Floyd Mayweather so on.
For sheer ability and skill I would say ray leonard.....I am not swayed about fight records with 100’s of bouts on it because they can be padded with cans and multiple fights against the same fighter.
This is probably controversial but if you really had to pick a fighter has anybody ever achieved what manny Pacquiao has achieved....I doubt we will ever see that record be beaten.....so it’s hard to actually say who is and who isn’t.
Ray leonard moved up to to win a world light heavyweight title and Ray Robinson was stopped fighting for the light heavyweight titles so again we have different views on it .
When I watch ray Robinson fighting video I don’t see the greatest of all time....I just don’t see it and that’s my opinion.
Put it this way boxing is the only sport I know when people say the old school was better than the modern school.
I don’t agree

[SplitSecond]

Considering head-to-head, plus skills, plus resume.
Ray Leonard is the P4P GOAT.
Followed by:
Roberto Duran
Ray Robinson
Ezzard Charles
Manny Pacquiao
Henry Armstrong
Joe Louis
Roy Jones Jnr
Muhammad Ali
Willie Pep

[SplitSecond]

Robinson along with Armstrong , greb , Ali , Duran , Pacquiao and ray leonard all have a fair shout out as number 1.
Then you have the eye test and sheer ability and we have Ali , Sugar ray leonard , Roy Jones jnr , Floyd Mayweather so on.
For sheer ability and skill I would say ray leonard.....I am not swayed about fight records with 100’s of bouts on it because they can be padded with cans and multiple fights against the same fighter.
This is probably controversial but if you really had to pick a fighter has anybody ever achieved what manny Pacquiao has achieved....I doubt we will ever see that record be beaten.....so it’s hard to actually say who is and who isn’t.
Ray leonard moved up to to win a world light heavyweight title and Ray Robinson was stopped fighting for the light heavyweight titles so again we have different views on it .
When I watch ray Robinson fighting video I don’t see the greatest of all time....I just don’t see it and that’s my opinion.
Put it this way boxing is the only sport I know when people say the old school was better than the modern school.
I don’t agree

Solid post. Good to see there are others that can view Ray Leonard as the GOAT.

Mayweather I’m not sure is even greater than James Toney, Marvin Hagler, Wladimir Klitschko, George Foreman etc. Not sure where he’d end up if I kept going.

[hugh grant]

Sr r is best of his time. In his time people fought 100s of times, he has the best resume of his time of everyone fighting that much. Everyone with 100 of wins back then but Sr r stands out, and back then the journeymen had 100 losses
Pac is the GOTT. Greatest of this time

[Beercules]

Michael Jordan is.

[NORMNEALON]

I'd say he is in the top3 for sure no matter how you slice it . Ray fought 18 current/former world champions ( in a time where there was 1 champion per weight class), he fought 12 HOF fighters , beating 10 of them . He went on an undefeated run as welterweight champion from 1946-1951 and prior to that had only lost once to Jake lamotta who outweighed him by 16 lbs ( he also went on to avenge that loss 5 times) and he went on a 91 bout win streak after his first said loss . He won the middleweight championship 5 times , and was only stopped once over his whole career of 200 plus fights , which we all know was due to exhaustion fighting the lightheavyweight champion in sweltering heat . If he isn't the best p4p fighter all time he is right up there in the running . That is one hell of a resume. Not many fighrers came close to accomplishing this . He was also undefeated as an amateur . Pretty stellar career if you ask me.

I know he fought alot of guys multiple times and also fought alot of stay busy exhibition type fights but his best accomplishments are hard to stack up against .

[TonyGe]

I'd say he is in the top3 for sure no matter how you slice it . Ray fought 18 current/former world champions ( in a time where there was 1 champion per weight class), he fought 12 HOF fighters , beating 10 of them . He went on an undefeated run as welterweight champion from 1946-1951 and prior to that had only lost once to Jake lamotta who outweighed him by 16 lbs ( he also went on to avenge that loss 5 times) and he went on a 91 bout win streak after his first said loss . He won the middleweight championship 5 times , and was only stopped once over his whole career of 200 plus fights , which we all know was due to exhaustion fighting the lightheavyweight champion in sweltering heat . If he isn't the best p4p fighter all time he is right up there in the running . That is one hell of a resume. Not many fighrers came close to accomplishing this . He was also undefeated as an amateur . Pretty stellar career if you ask me.

I know he fought alot of guys multiple times and also fought alot of stay busy exhibition type fights but his best accomplishments are hard to stack up against .

I agree. His record speaks for itself. No other fighter in that period had such a dominating career. He was head and shoulders above his peers. Trying to compare him to modern fighters doesn't work because of advances in sports science not to mention chemistry. Competing in his era he was the best by a long shot.