Well now thats a silly comment if I ever heard one! But I guess your entitled to your opinion. Watching Robinson fights, because there in black and white (Not to mention bad quality) it's not easy to stay concentrated to realize the ability. But just watch some of his fights and try to imagine your tvs playing up and the fight happened last weekend.
You'll see he had everything leanard had and more. Leanard spent so much time planning his next move, while through Robinsons career he just did his thing all the while. No posing there then
Don't say that are Bozo will attack you for this quote!
Robinsons record is rather padded, I mean.. how many fights did he have with Lamotta? Not that Lamotta was a joke, but it was pretty clear SRR was the better fighter.
He fought Young Joe Walcott 3 times from what I can remember, that man was just a bum, SRR won every single time.
Many fans are too intimidated by the boxing communities thoughts of SRR to challenge his record, I don't think he is this P4P god that everybody talks of, no doubt he is #1 P4P and one of the most skilled athletes the sport has ever seen, but his accomplishments can be surpassed, and IMO have been.
The reason I rank Robinson #1 of all time is the reason he lost only 1 time in his first 130 fights. I respect that, but I know in my heart if Robinson fought in era of Leonard, he would've not been the same Robinson.
In my opinion Leonard was better in skills and having the biggest wins of all time, but I still rank Robinson #1, go figure!
Robinsons record is rather padded, I mean.. how many fights did he have with Lamotta? Not that Lamotta was a joke, but it was pretty clear SRR was the better fighter.
He fought Young Joe Walcott 3 times from what I can remember, that man was just a bum, SRR won every single time.
Many fans are too intimidated by the boxing communities thoughts of SRR to challenge his record, I don't think he is this P4P god that everybody talks of, no doubt he is #1 P4P and one of the most skilled athletes the sport has ever seen, but his accomplishments can be surpassed, and IMO have been.
Wat do u mean?
I dont think any fighter will ever beat his record, fighting so often and fighting abroad.
I think he fought the same fighters so many times because he fought so often.
No fighter today could handle that, or perform so well.
I dont think any fighter will ever beat his record, fighting so often and fighting abroad.
I think he fought the same fighters so many times because he fought so often.
No fighter today could handle that, or perform so well.
As far as the quality of opponents.
As you can see, I think Leonard fought better opposition, although lesser amount.
Duran won once against Leonard in a VERY CLOSE fight, Robinson lost to Lamotta, Basilio, Fullmer...etc etc etc...
Leonard beat Duran twice so he won the Trilogy, he beat Hagler, he STOPPED Tommy Hearns...
Thats not a good example! Robinson in his prime years (1942 - 1960) he beat all the fighters better and more times than any of them beat him. The reason it's not a good example is because a lot of people thought Leanard lost against Hagler, (though I thought hi nicked it) And just about everybody thought he lost to Hearns the second time (10 round fight! knocked down twice and lost the first 5 rounds in many peoples opinion)
Leonard fought 4 people that were probably better than Robinson's 12 B level fighters.
Marvin Hagler > Jake Lamotta, Fullmer, Basilio
Hearns > Zivic, Angott, Gavilan
Duran > Turpin, Olson, Graziano
SRL fought Benetiz too...
IMO Leonard fought better opposotion and beat them, and the fights Leonard beat would have beaten the fighters Robinson beat
What in the world made you Categorize it like this? You've proved my point! Hagler v LaMotta even match up! Hearns v Gavilan even matchup! Duran v Graziano same! Robinson by a mile!
Comment