Sugar Ray Robinson made his debut in 1940 and lost once during the 40's (he finished the decade 100-1) and five times in the 50's (he was 142-6 as the 60's began). The rest of his losses came in the 60's when he was an old man (he retired in 1965)
In other words, the Sugar Ray Robinson of the 40's was undefeated at welterweight and it took a tremendous effort from an all-time great middleweight in Jake LaMotta to put a single loss on his record in 10 years.
Sugar Ray Robinson made his debut in 1940 and lost once during the 40's (he finished the decade 100-1) and five times in the 50's (he was 142-6 as the 60's began). The rest of his losses came in the 60's when he was an old man (he retired in 1965)
In other words, the Sugar Ray Robinson of the 40's was undefeated at welterweight and it took a tremendous effort from an all-time great middleweight in Jake LaMotta to put a single loss on his record in 10 years.
were all those opponents credible?
put SRR in today's era. how many of those opponents would be called bums?
Old school welterweights are around the in ring size of 135lbers today. Welterweights today are around the in ring size of old school middleweights. The guys today are bigger weight wise during fights. Stop this nonsense of acting like Hearns and Leonard would be big welterweights by today's non same day weigh in standards because it is completely false.
Old school welterweights are around the in ring size of 135lbers today. Welterweights today are around the in ring size of old school middleweights. The guys today are bigger weight wise during fights. Stop this nonsense of acting like Hearns and Leonard would be big welterweights by today's non same day weigh in standards because it is completely false.
I had that same debate with someone on here months ago who was trying to tell me that Hearns at 147 was significantly bigger than Errol Spence. Tommy weighed in at 147 before going to the damn ring. Meanwhile Spence was a WW in the olympics which is a 152 weight limit.
I had that same debate with someone on here months ago who was trying to tell me that Hearns at 147 was significantly bigger than Errol Spence. Tommy weighed in at 147 before going to the damn ring. Meanwhile Spence was a WW in the olympics which is a 152 weight limit.
Tons lack common sense. Boxing goes by weight classes. Height means nothing. The older eras were same day weigh in. Fighters barely gained weight before getting in the ring. Nowadays fighters weigh in a day before and rehydrate. Tons gain 10-20lbs. before they get in the ring. Tons even used IV fluids to rehydrate.
Tons lack common sense. Boxing goes by weight classes. Height means nothing. The older eras were same day weigh in. Fighters barely gained weight before getting in the ring. Nowadays fighters weigh in a day before and rehydrate. Tons gain 10-20lbs. before they get in the ring. Tons even used IV fluids to rehydrate.
Yup. People think they're ****ing height classes. Blows my mind. They always go silent when I point out that GGG and Mike Tyson are the same height.
The new crop of welterweights can certainly be compared to the old legends but they just don't compare favorably. No shame in that though because the Sugars were absolutely legendary. Very difficult to shine as hard as they did. Some day a fighter will emerge and be on the same plateau or perhaps even greater but that day is not today.
Comment