Sugar Ray Robinson

First topic message reminder :

A concensus number 1 P4P (not mine though). My questions are simple. Will he ever be surpassed? What does a boxer either active, not born yet have to do to be able to claim that fabled mantle? Obviously no semi decent boxer is going to have over 100 fights let alone 200 fights.

What if a boxer has 50 fights and in that time wins titles and dominates his division from lightweight to middleweight and has 2 losses on his record (and avenged). Also have in mind that he beat some very good boxers who themselves can be classed as ATGs along the way. Would that do it?

Of course. All must accept excuses for SRR otherwise it's a mental health issue. Had a modern day boxer lost as often as he did and to average fighters he would have been laughed b if considered an ATG.

We have an undefeated fighter still winning and he can't break the top 30 in many so called experts opinion. Maybe he should have padded his record out with bums called :"battling", 'fighting", or some other nickname.

Without SRR there would be no Mayweather.


Watch a couple of SRR fights you might surprise yourself.

azania wrote:Of course. All must accept excuses for SRR otherwise it's a mental health issue. Had a modern day boxer lost as often as he did and to average fighters he would have been laughed b if considered an ATG.

We have an undefeated fighter still winning and he can't break the top 30 in many so called experts opinion. Maybe he should have padded his record out with bums called :"battling", 'fighting", or some other nickname.

I don't think anyone here has Floyd that low, go take your Floyd issues up with the "experts" who do have him outside the top 30.

I said experts.

p4p and ATG is a touchy subject, after all PacMan has beaten, Marquez (x2), Barera, Morales, Mosley, Cotto, Hatton, de la Hoya, and a few decent fighters like Margarito, and Clottey. He got an endorsement from Leonard, and RJJ, and he still wont smell the top fifty

Pacquiao should waltz in to any decent top fifty at the very least, for me. It's become a bit fashonable over the past eighteen months (so basically, since Pacquiao's aura has started to dim) to downplay Manny and his career accomplishments - a lot of people have piped up in that time basically saying "Yeah, I knew he was overrated and not much cop from the start" and the like.

If Floyd's on the edge of most people's top ten or in their top fifteen, then I really don't see how Pacquiao can be any lower than about 30 or so at the very, very least. Like Floyd, Manny has been winning world title fights since 1998. Pacquiao's elite level wins, all things considered, read just as well as Floyd's, maybe even better. He doesn't quite have Mayweather's depth of 'good' wins underneath that and hasn't quite had that same level of dominance and virtuosity against his opponents, granted, but while Mayweather deserves to be ahead I certainly don't think he's in a completely different stratosphere to Pacquiao.

If B-Hop avenges Dawson and JC comes back and he whoops him, he goes up that list. Also, if he beats Taylor. Lol.

SRR the greatest yo, fact.

88Chris05 wrote:Pacquiao should waltz in to any decent top fifty at the very least, for me. It's become a bit fashonable over the past eighteen months (so basically, since Pacquiao's aura has started to dim) to downplay Manny and his career accomplishments - a lot of people have piped up in that time basically saying "Yeah, I knew he was overrated and not much cop from the start" and the like.

If Floyd's on the edge of most people's top ten or in their top fifteen, then I really don't see how Pacquiao can be any lower than about 30 or so at the very, very least. Like Floyd, Manny has been winning world title fights since 1998. Pacquiao's elite level wins, all things considered, read just as well as Floyd's, maybe even better. He doesn't quite have Mayweather's depth of 'good' wins underneath that and hasn't quite had that same level of dominance and virtuosity against his opponents, granted, but while Mayweather deserves to be ahead I certainly don't think he's in a completely different stratosphere to Pacquiao.

How do you split Pacquiao and Mayweather?

Neither make the top 20.

Pacquiao not quite top twenty for me (though he doesn't miss out by much), but Floyd definitely is. Mayweather's just demonstrably a better boxer than Pacquiao, has had a greater level of dominance against his peers and his overall opposition is of a pretty similar level - as I said before, Pacquiao's highest level wins such as Barrera I, Marquez II and Cotto read better than Floyd's three best victories in my eyes when context, timing, form of the opponent etc is taken in to consideration, but Floyd's been around the block so many times he has a plethora of very solid wins underneath that which Manny can't match.

Regardless of where you rank them, my point is that, based on records, achievements and impact on the sport, you can't really have them worlds apart. Roughly speaking, if Mayweather's top five then Pacquiao is top fifteen, for instance. If Mayweather's top fifteen then Pacquiao must be around 25 or so, etc.

Just how I see it, anyway.

Pacquiao is the three time boxer of the year. Cant be that far out to have him top 20?

88Chris05 wrote:Pacquiao not quite top twenty for me (though he doesn't miss out by much), but Floyd definitely is. Mayweather's just demonstrably a better boxer than Pacquiao, has had a greater level of dominance against his peers and his overall opposition is of a pretty similar level - as I said before, Pacquiao's highest level wins such as Barrera I, Marquez II and Cotto read better than Floyd's three best victories in my eyes when context, timing, form of the opponent etc is taken in to consideration, but Floyd's been around the block so many times he has a plethora of very solid wins underneath that which Manny can't match.

Regardless of where you rank them, my point is that, based on records, achievements and impact on the sport, you can't really have them worlds apart. Roughly speaking, if Mayweather's top five then Pacquiao is top fifteen, for instance. If Mayweather's top fifteen then Pacquiao must be around 25 or so, etc.

Just how I see it, anyway.

Has Mayweather ever dominated, though? I don't see Floyd having more solid wins than Pacquiao. There's nothing between them.

They both beat: Cotto, Hatton, Oscar, Mosley, Marquez (Pacquiao twice).

Floyd has: Gatti, Ortiz, Corrales, Castillo (twice), Hernandez and Judah.
Pacquiao has: Margarito, Clottey, Morales (twice), Barrera (twice)

The rest is much of a muchness. I don't see a lot in the rest of their work.

I side more with the list published earlier in the thread. Both don't belong that high as they didn't face one another.

I mean, how could you have either over a fighter like Thomas Hearns?

Or Roy Jones?

Strictly speaking, I dont rate either over Hearns, but I dont think a case cant be made. Hearns did lose to both Leonard and Hagler and a decent Barkley (twice)

azania wrote:Of course. All must accept excuses for SRR otherwise it's a mental health issue. Had a modern day boxer lost as often as he did and to average fighters he would have been laughed b if considered an ATG.

We have an undefeated fighter still winning and he can't break the top 30 in many so called experts opinion. Maybe he should have padded his record out with bums called :"battling", 'fighting", or some other nickname.

Which is something you've lifted off Truss' silly fizzy-knickers thread the other day with no actual backing.

Mayweather wont be properly rated until after he retires, and even then will probably change over time so I dont think saying he is/isnt top 30 as of yet has too much bearing.

If anyone puts Floyd outside of a top 20 then I'd say they're being unnecessarily harsh. This would re-iterate Az's point that becoming #1 is impossible.

All Floyd needs to do is for his next 6 fights, follow this pattern to achieve #1 in my eyes;

1) Deal with Guerrero comfortably.
2) Step up and face Canelo at 154 beforehe gets too big to make the weight.
3) Defend at 154 against Trout or another champion like Ishe Smith
4) Step up to MW and fight the winner of a UK Middleweight tourney between Macklin/Barker and Murray, showing he can fight outside of America.
5) Fight the current MW champion, unlikely to be Martinez due to age, but Geale/Golovkin etc
6) Defend against someone highly rated, maybe a rematch with the MW champion.

If he follows this path and wins them all, he'll be an undefeated champion in 6 weight divisions, undefeated in title fights with a 15+ year reign - he'll have fought the best in each weight category while moving up (lets look at Marquez now and NOT Pacquiao as the best at Welterweight)

The only name missing is Bradley really as a fight he should have taken at some point, but nobody can be perfect.

So, 50 - 0 would make him the greatest of all time, and the PPV numbers for Mayweather vs Alvarez would make every other sporting event look shizenhausen.

hazharrison wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:Pacquiao not quite top twenty for me (though he doesn't miss out by much), but Floyd definitely is. Mayweather's just demonstrably a better boxer than Pacquiao, has had a greater level of dominance against his peers and his overall opposition is of a pretty similar level - as I said before, Pacquiao's highest level wins such as Barrera I, Marquez II and Cotto read better than Floyd's three best victories in my eyes when context, timing, form of the opponent etc is taken in to consideration, but Floyd's been around the block so many times he has a plethora of very solid wins underneath that which Manny can't match.

Regardless of where you rank them, my point is that, based on records, achievements and impact on the sport, you can't really have them worlds apart. Roughly speaking, if Mayweather's top five then Pacquiao is top fifteen, for instance. If Mayweather's top fifteen then Pacquiao must be around 25 or so, etc.

Just how I see it, anyway.

Has Mayweather ever dominated, though? I don't see Floyd having more solid wins than Pacquiao. There's nothing between them.

They both beat: Cotto, Hatton, Oscar, Mosley, Marquez (Pacquiao twice).

Floyd has: Gatti, Ortiz, Corrales, Castillo (twice), Hernandez and Judah.
Pacquiao has: Margarito, Clottey, Morales (twice), Barrera (twice)

The rest is much of a muchness. I don't see a lot in the rest of their work.

I side more with the list published earlier in the thread. Both don't belong that high as they didn't face one another.

SRR dominated one division. At MW he was very average.

JabMachineMK2 wrote: So, 50 - 0 would make him the greatest of all time.

This is incorrect.

hazharrison wrote:

JabMachineMK2 wrote: So, 50 - 0 would make him the greatest of all time.

This is incorrect.

he has fought approx about 5 times in 5 years and missed his greatest challenge.

I find it difficult to rank him in the top 20

cheers rodders

hazharrison wrote:

JabMachineMK2 wrote: So, 50 - 0 would make him the greatest of all time.

This is incorrect.

*in my opinion

Rodney wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

JabMachineMK2 wrote: So, 50 - 0 would make him the greatest of all time.

This is incorrect.

he has fought approx about 5 times in 5 years and missed his greatest challenge.

I find it difficult to rank him in the top 20

cheers rodders

Even with the CV Jab mapped out?

Not the greatest ever but top 10 material if thats the case mate. Still doesnt the excuse of the inactivity and the comeback without fighting the P4P king at the time in his own weight class.

I'm like a broken record I know

Cheers Rodders

Dempsey missd his greatest challenge...He's top 10 and his record is pap in comparison.

More double standards.

Can we not forget Manny.............After all he's been schooled in 3/4 of his fights with Marquez...the last one canvas licking!!

Beaten by Morales etc.................

So doesn't take much in the brains department to figure out he'd have got a slap...

So Floyd doesn't have brains then?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Can we not forget Manny.............After all he's been schooled in 3/4 of his fights with Marquez...the last one canvas licking!!

Beaten by Morales etc.................

So doesn't take much in the brains department to figure out he'd have got a slap...

We'll never know, though, because they didn't fight.

To be honest Floyd is lucky...........

I mean when the only thing people can think off to slap you down is not fighting a guy who's been repeatedly outboxed by a guy..............you pitched a shutout against...........

Then you know you've got all bases covered..

Dear oh dear...We were just having a little throw about on Owen's thread and it's been locked.....

Fiery debate is becoming a thing of the past.....People should be less sensitive....

Wally is a term of endearment...In the US handbook.

1. Mayweather
2. Whittaker..............For posterity!!

I thought boxing was the one sport whereby you cant assume someone (Floyd) can beat someone (Manny) just cause They faced the same person and had different results.
See: Norton-Ali-Foreman
Or Barrera-Pac-Morales

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:To be honest Floyd is lucky...........

I mean when the only thing people can think off to slap you down is not fighting a guy who's been repeatedly outboxed by a guy..............you pitched a shutout against...........

And yet, despite being so clearly inferior, Floyd found a way to never fight him but instead go on holiday for a year or so then come back to fight a fat blown up LW at a catchweight he didn't even bother adhering too......

He found 50/50 hard to stomach you're right...

After all he's American......The bigger, better fighter , the fight is in America.....

Never sell yourself short..........................

Cant be serious mate...

That it...your rebuttal...Don't bother Mate..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Dear oh dear...We were just having a little throw about on Owen's thread and it's been locked.....

Fiery debate is becoming a thing of the past.....People should be less sensitive....

Wally is a term of endearment...In the US handbook.

Is 'idiot' a term of endearment as well?

Sports illustrated did an article.............it's on the net

Manny 15 fights on PPv..............9.9 million buys $525 million
Mayweather 9 fights on ppv.......9.6 million buys $540 million

Mayweather - Cotto ws the second highest grossing non heavyweight ppv boxing event in history,,

Okay let me give you a serious argument. It takes two to tango, and even though Floyd may be the Yank, he was never gonna make AS much money as he would vs Pacquiao, isnt this why he got the 50/50 split with ODLH? Or would you believe Floyd sold that on his own?

Thread was locked because Ozzy asked for it to be locked. I am a man of the people.

You're a proud yorkshireman...........

I knew there would be one...somewhere!!

kingraf wrote:Okay let me give you a serious argument. It takes two to tango, and even though Floyd may be the Yank, he was never gonna make AS much money as he would vs Pacquiao, isnt this why he got the 50/50 split with ODLH? Or would you believe Floyd sold that on his own?

You are so wrong...You get what you deserve in this life.................The buys show Mayweather was the bigger name......and generally regarded as the better fighter anyway..........Only when Floyd took time out did Manny assume top spot!!

If a business is worth 10 million...Do I accept 6 because I don't want to be greedy.....

Nope..I'll take what it's worth..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He found 50/50 hard to stomach you're right...

After all he's American......The bigger, better fighter , the fight is in America.....

Never sell yourself short..........................

All perfectly convenient excuses not to make the fight. If it were that important he'd have made the fight. He didn't. Because he considered his '0' would count for more for his legacy.

I refer you to the above answer...

He should have fought manny for free............... ...

"Generally regarded as the better fighter" because in boxing talent= Numbers, right? See Fury, Tyson.


Pacquiao 2006, 2008, 2009 fighter of the year.
Mayweather 1998, 2007 fighter of the year.

Hardly a chasm in accolades, no?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I refer you to the above answer...

He should have fought manny for free............... ...

Who said free?

Did I miss something?

Can you quote where anyone suggested anything even close?

Looking at the PPV numbers for various fights they look about level, apart from Floyd-Oscar which blew everything else out the water, but it's not like that was all Floyd - that marked the handing over of the mantel of the world's most marketable fighter.

kingraf wrote:"Generally regarded as the better fighter" because in boxing talent= Numbers, right? See Fury, Tyson.


Pacquiao 2006, 2008, 2009 fighter of the year.
Mayweather 1998, 2007 fighter of the year.

Hardly a chasm in accolades, no?

P**s poor argument..................Now go on youtube and you'll find that only Bonecrusher Smith out of.........Camacho, Spinks, Leonard, Haugen, Pazienza, Marquez, Holmes...............

Picked Manny to win...............Marquez being the real obvious one..

With the numbers thing...don't take me out of context..

I don't like it.

Well taking 50:50 against Manny would still have made him more green than his 75:25 split against Ortiz and his 65:35 against Cotto. If you're so determined that Floyd should get every single penny out of boxing that he can, then he's done himself out of some serious cash by not taking the 50:50 against Manny, surely? That must upset you, as I know you don't want Floyd to be living hand to mouth.

Take the test, Poochuiao. And give me a bigger share of the pot. And get rid of your promoter or else we can't even talk (for some reason)....

Mayweather doesn't need Paccy and here is why....

1. Boxers are rated on their records......always have been and always will be.
2. Americans will decide Floyd's fate anyway.....As all the respected lists are American...

So a few jealous Brits are irrelevant..

88Chris05 wrote:Well taking 50:50 against Manny would still have made him more green than his 75:25 split against Ortiz and his 65:35 against Cotto. If you're so determined that Floyd should get every single penny out of boxing that he can, then he's done himself out of some serious cash by not taking the 50:50 against Manny, surely? That must upset you, as I know you don't want Floyd to be living hand to mouth.

Take the test, Poochuiao. And give me a bigger share of the pot. And get rid of your promoter or else we can't even talk (for some reason)....

Manny didn't deserve 50/50.................FFS.............If I'm worth more...I want more...........

Why knock Floyd...why not knock Manny for not accepting 40/60..............pathetic.

Since Floyd-Oscar, Floyd has done 6.17m buys (5 fights) whereas Manny has done 9.84m buys in 9 fights. Average buy per fight 1.234 v 1.093 which, if applied to a revenue split would be 53:47 in Floyd's favour. As said above, hardly a chasm of popularity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pay-per-view

If you add Floyd-Oscar back (which I think is generous as it over-emphasis Floyd as a draw) the split becomes 57:43 in Floyd's favour.