ESPN Article on Floyd vs SRR

http://espn.go.com/boxing/story/_/id/9330198/floyd-mayweather-jr-vs-sugar-ray-robinson

i always enjoy these fantasy matchups from different eras. while its easy to say SRR beats the brakes off floyd, it may not be so cut and dry. you never really know i suppose, and it is so very difficult to compare fighters from different eras. SRR may be tougher and more battle tested from fighting the best of the best and having so little time off between fights, but at the same time floyds fresher and less shop worn. i think it goes to the cards, with SRR winning on points. floyd is much better than some guys who went the distance with SRR. interestng write-up to say the least

Floyd M vs. Sugar Ray Robinson?

I'm confused. Does anyone on here think this fight approaches anything competitive? No offense, just interested.

What has Mayweather done at WW to justify a comparison to SRR? I'm curious about that too.

My guess is that the writer was trying to find out what current fighters would make good sparring partners for Ray?

I need to go out of the sport to make an analogy. Let's say you have an ugly bitch as a gf. Now, you know this, however you think that saying she's pretty is going to change your reality. So you tell your friends you have a pretty girl. Fine, but regardless of what you say, you still have an ugly bitch.

Floyd M vs. SRR??? I have no further comment and never will.

Frank wrote:Floyd M vs. Sugar Ray Robinson?

I'm confused. Does anyone on here think this fight approaches anything competitive? No offense, just interested.

What has Mayweather done at WW to justify a comparison to SRR? I'm curious about that too.

My guess is that the writer was trying to find out what current fighters would make good sparring partners for Ray?

I need to go out of the sport to make an analogy. Let's say you have an ugly bitch as a gf. Now, you know this, however you think that saying she's pretty is going to change your reality. So you tell your friends you have a pretty girl. Fine, but regardless of what you say, you still have an ugly bitch.

Floyd M vs. SRR??? I have no futher comment and never will.

lol nice analogy... well im taking it as floyd at his best vs srr at his best. now it gets tricky because if floyd was born when srr was maybe srr wins easy. but floyd has decades of advancements in training and nutritrion to his advantage. i think it all depends on if you are dropping the 2000s version of floyd vs robinson from his era. robinson has the jab to ruin floyd but at the same time floyds quick and can counter.i dont think anyone has been able to bring out the best in floyd, SRR would. yes i agree SRR would win but id think itd be like 8-4 on rounds.. not a wide blowout relally

This will be my last comment on this. I once say Ray Robinson KO a man with a triple left hook. It was one of the fastest series of punches I ever saw. The first hook was to the body, second hook was to the neck and 3rd hook was to the jaw. He did this while moving back to the ropes. The 3rd one put his opponent across the ring and out.

Now personally I think the first hook to the body would've ended matters, however the punches were so fast, only the 3rd hook gave the man time to fall.

Ray Robinson was human, however when I see him at his best, it's hard to convince me of that.

Maybe Bruce Lee vs. Ray would've been something to watch. LOL

Frank wrote:This will be my last comment on this. I once say Ray Robinson KO a man with a triple left hook. It was one of the fastest series of punches I ever saw. The first hook was to the body, second hook was to the neck and 3rd hook was to the jaw. He did this while moving back to the ropes. The 3rd one put his opponent across the ring and out.

Now personally I think the first hook to the body would've ended matters, however the punches were so fast, only the 3rd hook gave the man time to fall.

Ray Robinson was human, however when I see him at his best, it's hard to convince me of that.

Maybe Bruce Lee vs. Ray would've been something to watch. LOL

i think SRR was on a-side meth! they didnt do USADA testing back then!

BoxingGenius wrote:

Frank wrote:This will be my last comment on this. I once say Ray Robinson KO a man with a triple left hook. It was one of the fastest series of punches I ever saw. The first hook was to the body, second hook was to the neck and 3rd hook was to the jaw. He did this while moving back to the ropes. The 3rd one put his opponent across the ring and out.

Now personally I think the first hook to the body would've ended matters, however the punches were so fast, only the 3rd hook gave the man time to fall.

Ray Robinson was human, however when I see him at his best, it's hard to convince me of that.

Maybe Bruce Lee vs. Ray would've been something to watch. LOL

i think SRR was on a-side meth! they didnt do USADA testing back then!

mayweather gets destroyed.robinson at welter was at his peak and no films of ray are around of robby at his peak.what is around is robby less then his peak yet still far above Floyd and anyone else.floyd fresh from inactivity while ray is shopwarn from fighting battles.what battles at welter.
frank I saw a clip of robby koing a guy with 5 shots.4 were when the guy was falling down backwards before he hit the ground..thats speed with power.floyds gonna counter robby with what. his lousy one punch counter while robbys tossing fast combos and bombs at him.by the way robinson was known at times to carry a guy or two.
robinson not only had hand speed he could fight inside or up against the ropes Floyd cant.robinson not only can outbox him lets not forget this guy was a all time great puncher also.both hands.
hearns destroys Floyd but robby kills him.leanard whips his ass.there are others also.thoses guys are no Oscar cotto RG castillio tc etc but guys at a different level of greatness then Floyd with robinson at his peak at the highest of levels.
Hannibal and his elefants have a better chance of beating todays united states air force in warfare the Floyd does in wining this fight.hanniballs chances are zero.floyds less then zero.a 15 round fight and Floyd don't make the distance.

BG by the way title fights in robbys era was 15 rounds not the 12 round bullshit of today.

dmar5143 wrote:BG by the way title fights in robbys era was 15 rounds not the 12 round bullshit of today.

lol true, however i can only go off what ive seen as i wasnt alive when SRR fought. maybe it was the latter years of his career that are on film so i may be misled. i dont think stamina for 15 rounds would be much of an issue however.

i dont think that 15 rounds would be too much of a problem for floyd because hes always in top condition. to me, the biggest joke about the article is saying that floyd has an edge in chin and ring IQ. first off, no way mayweather has a better chin that SRR. thats not debatable. second, both fighters are very talented and have great ring IQ, but SRR was amazing when it came to his ring intelligence. thats no knock on floyd because most people in history arent as smart as SRR in the ring.

im kind of in the middle on this topic though. i agree with both sides of the argument of how bad robinson beats floyd. i mean, i think that floyd is a great fighter. i also know that SRR, just like every other fighter to ever fight didnt win every round against every opponent he fought. so i will assume that floyd can win anywhere from 2-4 rounds in a 12 round fight and maybe another round or 2 in a 15 round fight.

if they fought a trilogy (ill make it fun and say they are 15 rounds), the first fight would be scored 10-5 and 11-4 on the scorecards with floyd getting in a few good counters to his credit. the second fight would be a late round TKO by SRR. he would catch floyd around the 13th round with a good shot and floyds toughness would keep him from staying down and his defense could at least block some bigger shots so the ref would step in. the third fight would be SRR winning by a wide margin on the scorecards. mayweather winning about 2 rounds. this is because floyd is now very passive and doesnt take any chances and just practices his defense most of the fight.

there is my scenario.

dmar5143 wrote:mayweather gets destroyed.robinson at welter was at his peak and no films of ray are around of robby at his peak.what is around is robby less then his peak yet still far above Floyd and anyone else.floyd fresh from inactivity while ray is shopwarn from fighting battles.what battles at welter.
frank I saw a clip of robby koing a guy with 5 shots.4 were when the guy was falling down backwards before he hit the ground..thats speed with power.floyds gonna counter robby with what. his lousy one punch counter while robbys tossing fast combos and bombs at him.by the way robinson was known at times to carry a guy or two.
robinson not only had hand speed he could fight inside or up against the ropes Floyd cant.robinson not only can outbox him lets not forget this guy was a all time great puncher also.both hands.
hearns destroys Floyd but robby kills him.leanard whips his ass.there are others also.thoses guys are no Oscar cotto RG castillio tc etc but guys at a different level of greatness then Floyd with robinson at his peak at the highest of levels.
in wining thisHannibal and his elefants have a better chance of beating todays united states air force in warfare the Floyd does fight.hanniballs chances are zero.floyds less then zero.a 15 round fight and Floyd don't make the distance.

That's an accurate analogy. LOL

well there is certainly an old timer bias in these parts lol you guys would probably pick a propeller plane over a boeing jet as well!

BoxingGenius wrote:well there is certainly an old timer bias in these parts lol you guys would probably pick a propeller plane over a boeing jet as well!

I have no old timer bias. I'm 36. I know much more about boxing of the past 30 yrs than I do about the old timers. I have only in the past couple years started to really delve into fighters before 1970.

Robinson has hands that are faster than Floyd. Robinson has much more power.
'
Who has Floyd faced at 147?

Hatton-best weight 140. Luis Collazo beat him at 147, unless of course you still believe in the tooth fairy and santa claus.

ODH-a guy who hadn't been a full time fighter for a long time.

Mosley-if Shane hadn't beaten Margarito (whose lack of speed added to getting caught with hand wraps made him tailor made for anyone fast that night) we would have been saying how can anyone fight Mosley.

RG-he had a couple of decent wins at 147, but he wasn't ready for it (and probably never was going to be ready for it).

Marquez-Floyd fought a guy that had never weighed in above 135 and was weighing only around 142-143 in the ring (at that time), and yet Floyd had to resort to blowing off weight to get an extra advantage.

Sugar Ray Robinson most likely eats Floyd up.

I would pick Leonard to beat Floyd.

I give Floyd credit. He has been a great fighter, but I don't believe that his style is unbeatable. Castillo was able to get to him. There are guys throughout history that could have followed a similar pattern and done that much better. Zab Judah's handspeed gave Floyd a lot of trouble for 4 rounds. There are fighters throughout history that have better handspeed than Zab, better power than Zab, and the mental strength to keep it together if Floyd were to get back into the fight.

BoxingGenius wrote:well there is certainly an old timer bias in these parts lol you guys would probably pick a propeller plane over a boeing jet as well!

i do agree that there is old timer bias here, but as captain said, i am young and i just dont see mayweather beating SRR. now there have been other fantasy match ups in which i have strongly disagreed with the old timers of this board.

No oldtimer here. I just saw the films of Robby.

I wasn't alive when Joe Louis was champion either, but I'm sure that was him on those films knockng guys into different time zones.

powerpuncher wrote:

BoxingGenius wrote:well there is certainly an old timer bias in these parts lol you guys would probably pick a propeller plane over a boeing jet as well!

i do agree that there is old timer bias here, but as captain said, i am young and i just dont see mayweather beating SRR. now there have been other fantasy match ups in which i have strongly disagreed with the old timers of this board.

oh dont get me wrong im not picking floyd to win by any means. i just dont see the 12-0 drubbing that some here are assuming. give our current fighters at least some credit lol

BoxingGenius wrote:

powerpuncher wrote:

BoxingGenius wrote:well there is certainly an old timer bias in these parts lol you guys would probably pick a propeller plane over a boeing jet as well!

i do agree that there is old timer bias here, but as captain said, i am young and i just dont see mayweather beating SRR. now there have been other fantasy match ups in which i have strongly disagreed with the old timers of this board.

oh dont get me wrong im not picking floyd to win by any means. i just dont see the 12-0 drubbing that some here are assuming. give our current fighters at least some credit lol

BG, we're giving your fighters some credit. Let me say this. As a defensive genius, Floyd is on the level of Pernell Whitiker and Wilfred Benitez. That's a helluva compliment. However in Sugar Ray Robinson, you're fucking with one of the baddest or maybe THE baddest SOB to ever live. At least in boxing.

BG and others.where have you read anyone myself frank etc assumed a 12-0 or a 15-0 drubbing.no offense but I personaly get tired of folks putting words into folks minds that never were said.nor is there old time bias.since frank is not old time that leaves me.if anyone has read my previous posts on mayweather on any topic and they have something that resembles a memory they will understand clearly fighters of today get there proper due and respect.saying that Floyd pac bohop etc etc are indeed all time great ones is giving fighters of today credit.to say that Floyd would of been considered a top fighter in any era proves that credit and respect. I stated robby by a ko and a devastating ko.there are reasons for that and none is bias.
I give credit to all you guys for knowledge of todays fighters which is very good.there are fighters and divisions today I have no interest in at all.that ill admit.but the ones that I do have a interest in the knowledge is on par at least on par with anyone here.
my thoughts on topics such as this is not based on bias.its based on knowledge and having seen fighters fight live or on tv live in several eras.and to understand the caliber of fighter they were fighting who also was at there peak.many had a career of greatness several had a peak of 15-20 fights in a row in which there talent was as good or almost as good as any great fighter of any given era.
theres only one guy on here with that first hand knowledge outside me and that's boxing lawyer.in several email conversations a few years back with lettermen on the topic of eras we are similar in thoughts.there was a hunger a real hunger a toughness a determination and the completeness of a fighter in droves that is not here today.anyone who disputes that is sadly wrong.
I can list the guys for example robinson and gavilyn fought and when they fought them and just say wow.they fought them at there best and thoses guys were dam dam good.i can name the names and all of you will say who or yeah I heard that name but that's the extent of what you know.an example of that is powerpuncher when I wrote my first article about fighters of the past.i picked good ones very good ones and he said i heared the name but never saw him fight that was pastrano.like all the guys robby or gavilyn fought or zivic fought you have no idea how good they were at the time of that fight.none.
to quote a sportswriter until you do you need to do a lot of fucking serious homework.
im bias on two fighters.chuvalo and Marciano.boxing lawyer is on haggler and hollyfield.thats tossed out the window when we talk on thoses fighters gifts and abilty.
since no one here picked Floyd does that mean all are bias or just me.
you can say im arrogant or snobbish or whatever.your wrong there too.my thoughts are based on 64 years watching fights and talking with tons of fighters from my era of youth to all time greats of the past that shared there knowledge with me.ross Dempsey basilio Marciano mickey walker tony canzaneeri the first I talked with live at age 11 or 12.bushy grahm and several others..its been a hobby and love of mine since I saw my first fight which was Marciano-Louis.before that I listened on the radio for a few years.my dad was a huge fan.saw walker greb 6 times Dempsey pep tunney robby and tons of others live at the arena.baseball is my first love by the way.
maybe im getting thin skinned in my old age but im angry or upset when one dismisses my thoughts as bias.
again ill say all the forum guys have very respectable knowledge on todays fighters.and give good thoughts on how they think a fight may play out.why am I not given the same courtesy since yes I do know what im talking about because I know first hand how good the fighters fullmer robby gavilyn Charles for example and all of them fought and when they fought them.you don't.none of you do outside lawyer.thats not bias.if you want to talk about fighters of today your era your thoughts are respected cause you are hardcore fans.but if you want to say im bias then take that sportswriters advise that until you do a few years of serious homework and reading of old back issues of boxing mags and talk with fighters from that era then either remain silent or respect mine or boxing lawyers thoughts.
if you think its bias then remember roger mayweahters great quote.

dmar5143 wrote:BG and others.where have you read anyone myself frank etc assumed a 12-0 or a 15-0 drubbing.no offense but I personaly get tired of folks putting words into folks minds that never were said.nor is there old time bias.since frank is not old time that leaves me.if anyone has read my previous posts on mayweather on any topic and they have something that resembles a memory they will understand clearly fighters of today get there proper due and respect.saying that Floyd pac bohop etc etc are indeed all time great ones is giving fighters of today credit.to say that Floyd would of been considered a top fighter in any era proves that credit and respect. I stated robby by a ko and a devastating ko.there are reasons for that and none is bias.
I give credit to all you guys for knowledge of todays fighters which is very good.there are fighters and divisions today I have no interest in at all.that ill admit.but the ones that I do have a interest in the knowledge is on par at least on par with anyone here.
my thoughts on topics such as this is not based on bias.its based on knowledge and having seen fighters fight live or on tv live in several eras.and to understand the caliber of fighter they were fighting who also was at there peak.many had a career of greatness several had a peak of 15-20 fights in a row in which there talent was as good or almost as good as any great fighter of any given era.
theres only one guy on here with that first hand knowledge outside me and that's boxing lawyer.in several email conversations a few years back with lettermen on the topic of eras we are similar in thoughts.there was a hunger a real hunger a toughness a determination and the completeness of a fighter in droves that is not here today.anyone who disputes that is sadly wrong.
I can list the guys for example robinson and gavilyn fought and when they fought them and just say wow.they fought them at there best and thoses guys were dam dam good.i can name the names and all of you will say who or yeah I heard that name but that's the extent of what you know.an example of that is powerpuncher when I wrote my first article about fighters of the past.i picked good ones very good ones and he said i heared the name but never saw him fight that was pastrano.like all the guys robby or gavilyn fought or zivic fought you have no idea how good they were at the time of that fight.none.
to quote a sportswriter until you do you need to do a lot of fucking serious homework.
im bias on two fighters.chuvalo and Marciano.boxing lawyer is on haggler and hollyfield.thats tossed out the window when we talk on thoses fighters gifts and abilty.
since no one here picked Floyd does that mean all are bias or just me.
you can say im arrogant or snobbish or whatever.your wrong there too.my thoughts are based on 64 years watching fights and talking with tons of fighters from my era of youth to all time greats of the past that shared there knowledge with me.ross Dempsey basilio Marciano mickey walker tony canzaneeri the first I talked with live at age 11 or 12.bushy grahm and several others..its been a hobby and love of mine since I saw my first fight which was Marciano-Louis.before that I listened on the radio for a few years.my dad was a huge fan.saw walker greb 6 times Dempsey pep tunney robby and tons of others live at the arena.baseball is my first love by the way.
maybe im getting thin skinned in my old age but im angry or upset when one dismisses my thoughts as bias.
again ill say all the forum guys have very respectable knowledge on todays fighters.and give good thoughts on how they think a fight may play out.why am I not given the same courtesy since yes I do know what im talking about because I know first hand how good the fighters fullmer robby gavilyn Charles for example and all of them fought and when they fought them.you don't.none of you do outside lawyer.thats not bias.if you want to talk about fighters of today your era your thoughts are respected cause you are hardcore fans.but if you want to say im bias then take that sportswriters advise that until you do a few years of serious homework and reading of old back issues of boxing mags and talk with fighters from that era then either remain silent or respect mine or boxing lawyers thoughts.
if you think its bias then remember roger mayweahters great quote.

d, good post. let me just say i wasnt being disrespectful of your opinion or anything i was just busting you balls abit wit that "old time bias" comment. no harm menat. i respect everyones opinion on here, creates some good back and forth.

BG thank you for clearing that up.its greatly appreciated.

Here is my take. I have seen the old fighters and I have seen the new ones. I have seen old fighters that could stand with the best of the new era and vice versa. This fight is NOT one of those that would be competitive. SRR at welterweight is the BEST fighter of all time. He has more KOs than Floyd has rounds fought as a pro, lol! He was never off his feet, only Marvin Hagler is on the same level as Robinson when it comes to chin, endurance, and power. Mayweather would have NO speed advantage over Robinson. He would be at distinct disadvantage in power, toughness, chin, and ring IQ. I dont think there is a way in hell that Mayweather finishes the fight, never mind wins it. There is no argument to be made that would have me believe otherwise, but feel free to try and make it. LOL>

boxinglawyer wrote: Here is my take. I have seen the old fighters and I have seen the new ones. I have seen old fighters that could stand with the best of the new era and vice versa. This fight is NOT one of those that would be competitive. SRR at welterweight is the BEST fighter of all time. He has more KOs than Floyd has rounds fought as a pro, lol! He was never off his feet, only Marvin Hagler is on the same level as Robinson when it comes to chin, endurance, and power. Mayweather would have NO speed advantage over Robinson. He would be at distinct disadvantage in power, toughness, chin, and ring IQ. I dont think there is a way in hell that Mayweather finishes the fight, never mind wins it. There is no argument to be made that would have me believe otherwise, but feel free to try and make it. LOL>

I think that should end matters. Thanks BL. I honestly think Mayweather would've made a decent sparring partner for Robinson as long as he took no cheap shots.

my take is this, being a bit younger than some here, floyd is probably the most talented all around fighter of my lifetime, or at least that i have seen live. now, ive seen clips of SRR, which were probably from his later years when he wasnt at his peak. while ithink even that version beats floyd no problem, i find it hard to believe that anyone can absolutely completely dominate and outclass the best fighter of my generation. by that i mean utterly beat him down until hes KO'd and/or win 10+ rounds of 12. ive been a die hard boxing fan since i was about 12 which is when i started fighting myself, ive seen probably every one of floyds fights (im not really a big fan of his personally i just respect the hell out of his fight game) and i can count on 1 hand the amount of times ive seen him tagged good, thats in almost a 20 year career. now i know hes never faced anyone near SRRs caliber, but i just find it hard to believe that he couldnt finish on his feet. less talented fighters, and guys who certainly dont have the D of floyd went the distance with SRR. im not talking the floyd now, im moreso referring to floyd at his peak (which is probably below 147 anyways) floyd was lightning fast back in the day. maybe i need to see more of SRR, if its even out there on tape to be seen, but i just cant envision floyd at his peak being beaten to a pulp by anyone at 147. SRR beats him from what ive seen you will find no argument hear about that, but a complete and utter domination i just cant envision. sorry if that irks or rubs people the wrong way but i can only go off of what i have seen personally. its tough to picture the very best of my generation and then envision someone head and shoulders above that. )((floyd being the best of my generation again is debatable manny, roy jones even, holyfield, etc, are all in that convo, i just think floyds a touch better overall)

I think that Boxing is one the only sports where you can compare different eras. They both have to weigh the same, so they are all about the same size. I doubt any new training techniques or nutrition will make much of a difference in the ring. Ray was a seasoned veteran that came up tough, Floyd had modern gyms & the ability to choose his opponents wisely. Ray would've been too tough for Floyd.

BG I don't understand your logic or thinking on this.you cannot see Floyd getting koed yet you predict alvarez koing Floyd.why because he may be 18 or so pounds heavier fight night.robinson is one of the greatest punchers of all time.alvarez isn't the best puncher today forget all time.robinson threw with awesome speed and at several angles.alvarez does not.robinson hits much harder then a alvarez.power wise there not in the same league..intelligence experience real toughness awesome boxing skills robby had.alvarez hasn't a clue on things like that compared to robinson.we are talking about perhaps the most complete fighter of all time.alvarez is not what I view as a complete fighter.
oh lets not leave out conditioning either.alvarez falls far short.you can see a alvarez koing Floyd yet the greatest fighter of all time with great power cannot.im at a loss for words on that .