What happened to Sugar Ray Robinson in the Mayweather Jr GOAT discussion?

He wasn't wildly talented, but he was a very good fighter. He was extremely tough (and dirty), very well conditioned, had a bit of versatility, and was great on the inside. That's enough to be a very good fighter in any era.
The point I was trying to make was that there was nothing wildly unique about the guy that we don't see anymore.
 
It weird not to utilize stats comparing people from different eras. You can use the eye test, or resumes but ultimately stats are where its at.

If i use the eye test i would say floyd takes it hands down but we dont have very much film of SRR but then theres a debate that if we dont have film is it truly accurate or is hyped by mythical standards that no one can truly argue.

stats have been done by espn already and i have posted them in here before. No one in the history of boxing compares to floyd. His % for defense and offense dwarf every known boxer.

resume is the only place SRR can take a lead because of how much he fought and the legends he did fight but you can still make a case for floyd resume being incredible and it will keep growing as long as canelo keeps doing well.
 
It weird not to utilize stats comparing people from different eras. You can use the eye test, or resumes but ultimately stats are where its at.

If i use the eye test i would say floyd takes it hands down but we dont have very much film of SRR but then theres a debate that if we dont have film is it truly accurate or is hyped by mythical standards that no one can truly argue.

stats have been done by espn already and i have posted them in here before. No one in the history of boxing compares to floyd. His % for defense and offense dwarf every known boxer.

resume is the only place SRR can take a lead because of how much he fought and the legends he did fight but you can still make a case for floyd resume being incredible and it will keep growing as long as canelo keeps doing well.

Firstly, there is plenty of footage of SRR, its just that most of it is past prime. But there is some footage in prime although the video quality is bad. Just off whats available i can say SRR looked better than Floyd, granted a lot of that is subjective, but his aggresiveness, movement, offensive creativity and punch accuracy blow Floyd out the water. The only thing Floyd has on him is defense. As far as stats are concerned you guys still havent explained how you make it an apples to apples comparison. The sport was structurally very different, when you fight as often as SRR did it neccessarily affects your stats as well as everything about your game.

Another element Floyd riders love to mention is how many champions he's beaten. That totally ignores belt inflation, more belts and more weight classes equals more champions. How many champions would SRR have beaten if there were the same proliferation of belts in his era?
 
Firstly, there is plenty of footage of SRR, its just that most of it is past prime. But there is some footage in prime although the video quality is bad. Just off whats available i can say SRR looked better than Floyd, granted a lot of that is subjective, but his aggresiveness, movement, offensive creativity and punch accuracy blow Floyd out the water. The only thing Floyd has on him is defense. As far as stats are concerned you guys still havent explained how you make it an apples to apples comparison. The sport was structurally very different, when you fight as often as SRR did it neccessarily affects your stats as well as everything about your game.

Another element Floyd riders love to mention is how many champions he's beaten. That totally ignores belt inflation, more belts and more weight classes equals more champions. How many champions would SRR have beaten if there were the same proliferation of belts in his era?

Yes and the footage that is out there does nothing to think hes so great IMO. I know that footage is him past his prime but the only thing that he looks like he would have over floyd is size and that doesnt help his all time discussion.

The champions argument is just like the SRR beat so many people argument. Its a different era
 
Yes and the footage that is out there does nothing to think hes so great IMO. I know that footage is him past his prime but the only thing that he looks like he would have over floyd is size and that doesnt help his all time discussion.

The champions argument is just like the SRR beat so many people argument. Its a different era
You claimed earlier that there wasnt a lot of footage when there was, makes me wonder whether you actually watched enough of it to form an educated opinion. I've watched plenty of complete fights of Robinson and most of Floyd's fights. I suspect a lot of folks base their opinion of Robinson from highlight videos.
 
You claimed earlier that there wasnt a lot of footage when there was, makes me wonder whether you actually watched enough of it to form an educated opinion. I've watched plenty of complete fights of Robinson and most of Floyd's fights. I suspect a lot of folks base their opinion of Robinson from highlight videos.

Theres not alot of footage compared to how many fights he had and most of the footage is after his prime so we really have no clue to say how great he really was. Its a myth.

Educated opinion hahah. Ok buddy i just have boxed and trained people my whole life but a sherdogger cant accept other peoples argument so hey youre not as smart as me argument usually shows who is non educated
 
also fyi i dont care if you think SRR is better but dont be so upset when others have educated opinions on why floyd might have a legit challenge to the throne.

shit so many people hate floyd sometimes he doesnt even make top 50 lol
 
Theres not alot of footage compared to how many fights he had and most of the footage is after his prime so we really have no clue to say how great he really was. Its a myth.

Educated opinion hahah. Ok buddy i just have boxed and trained people my whole life but a sherdogger cant accept other peoples argument so hey youre not as smart as me argument usually shows who is non educated

I'm not trying to be a dick, but you claimed there wasnt a lot of footage which isnt true. Its fair to question whether you actually have watched enough footage given your answer. And youre not the only one thats fought, its lame to use that card.
 
I'm not trying to be a dick, but you claimed there wasnt a lot of footage which isnt true. Its fair to question whether you actually have watched enough footage given your answer. And youre not the only one thats fought, its lame to use that card.

Bro youre really arguing now over the word "alot"

I dont think theres alot and the footage i have seen doesnt make me think that hes the greatest of all time. I do however listen to historians but i take things like that with a grain of salt.

I really dont even know wtf youre even talking about anymore, like youre arguing over a word "alot"... and if you dont like the card used dont say dumb shit about people being uneducated as boxing fans when you havent defeated anyones argument with your own so called expert motherfucking knowledgeable godly manly cant touch this opinion of yours
 
Bro youre really arguing now over the word "alot"

I dont think theres alot and the footage i have seen doesnt make me think that hes the greatest of all time. I do however listen to historians but i take things like that with a grain of salt.

I really dont even know wtf youre even talking about anymore, like youre arguing over a word "alot"... and if you dont like the card used dont say dumb shit about people being uneducated as boxing fans when you havent defeated anyones argument with your own so called expert motherfucking knowledgeable godly manly cant touch this opinion of yours

Dont act so butthurt man, we're just having a conversation
 
Boxing is a sport and stats are what matters in sports. Thats the only logical and fair way to compare guys from different eras. Wins and losses are what the sport is about. We enjoy it for other reasons but greatness is defined by results.

I don't argue that Robinson isn't great, I argue that Floyd is also and that making a comparison of the two is not insulting to anyone. Floyd sat atop the P4P peak for over a decade at an age when other greats we're talking about were losing to nobodies.
Stats is not solely how greatness is assessed. Zinedine Zidane and Andres Iniesta have far weaker stats than Mesut Ozil in Soccer, but the former two are both better and greater than Ozil.
You'll get lost in translation by having a fixation on stats because anyone can rig stats to their favour, especially with the leeway that today's era brings. It's easier for the winner of the WBSS 168LB tourney to assert dominance in this new mediocre era with incredible stats, than it is for the era almost 10 years ago when Andre Ward had to beat the likes of Kessler, Abraham, Froch etc. at Super Middleweight.

Again, don't avoid this point - all of these 'modern day fighters' have had crazy amateur records at the senior level - so many losses. Boxing back then was a more brutal version of today's amateur boxing schedule. The only anomaly is Lomachenko who is essentially seen as the SRR of amateur boxing as a result. A lot of Loma's top opponents have losses left, right and centre. Is this ATG Amateur a bum because he has 45 losses for example? http://www.sportenote.com/vedi_dettagli.asp?id=10863
Losses is just a part of the territory with that schedule.
Ironically, speaking of stats, if you're fighting the best very often in an era where everybody loses a lot, and in your prime you amassed a 128-1 record, that is remarkable.
 
If losses are taken into account to appraise a fighter greatness, which they should be, their being pre or post prime should count, as well as the weight class or their being avenged or not. As for wins, their being controversial or against prime or green / over the hill opponents should matter too. Every single boxer's resume in history has weaknesses. Including SSR's and Floyd's. They're just dwarfed by their accomplishements.
 
... anyone can rig stats to their favour

One thing is statiscal data or facts and another thing is the statistical inferences drawn upon such data. Of course, lately we have learned about alternative facts and reality, but that’s for another type of forums...
The fact of the matter is the following: SRR won 4 championship belts out of 8 possible weight classes. So, SRR P4P championship-equivalent is 4/8=0.5 points or 50%. Floyd won titles in 5 out of 17 weight classes (regardless of sanctioning bodies), so he gets 5/17=0.3 or 30%. Next, Floyd has 50 wins in 50 fights; i.e., he gets 50/50=1, and SRR has 173/200=0.87. Putting all together: Floyd P4P scores is 1.3 and SRR is 1.37. Any question?
 
How many all time greats did Mayweather Jr beat when they were in their prime? Shouldn't that be taken into concideration?

So this was never really a "why did we forget about Robinson?" thread, was it? It was a "Floyd Mayweather isn't the greatest of all time" thread.
 
One thing is statiscal data or facts and another thing is the statistical inferences drawn upon such data. Of course, lately we have learned about alternative facts and reality, but that’s for another type of forums...
The fact of the matter is the following: SRR won 4 championship belts out of 8 possible weight classes. So, SRR P4P championship-equivalent is 4/8=0.5 points or 50%. Floyd won titles in 5 out of 17 weight classes (regardless of sanctioning bodies), so he gets 5/17=0.3 or 30%. Next, Floyd has 50 wins in 50 fights; i.e., he gets 50/50=1, and SRR has 173/200=0.87. Putting all together: Floyd P4P scores is 1.3 and SRR is 1.37. Any question?
That's the problem. Statistical inferences drawn from the data you limited this to does not actually tell the full story, thus analyzing such data in very a one dimensional manner is barking up the wrong tree..circular reasoning.
 
So this was never really a "why did we forget about Robinson?" thread, was it? It was a "Floyd Mayweather isn't the greatest of all time" thread.

You should give this guy a break; he seems really, really slow.
 
This is easily the creepiest thread I have ever stumbled upon.

It feels like it's gonna end with one of you missing and the other guy being blamed for it on an episode of Unsolved Mysteries.


Unsolved-Mysteries.jpg
is that jenner?
 


Eddie Mustafa knows what he's talking about, accurately broke down what Floyd would need to do and pointed out that Robinson-Burley is the true dream fight.

Who's that idiot that said Robinson pulled out of more fights than he's fought? That guy needs a beating for such disrespect.
 
Back
Top