Sugar Ray Robinson

[neems 2,406]

 

I think people put the older fighters on a pedestal,I don't see anyone between middle and light heavy beat beating Jones jr.

We can say yes they lived in different times,didn't have the training or nutrition of modern times and fought more regularly,but the fact remains they were slower,smaller and weaker (in general).

 

They were slower smaller and weaker for that very reason.....can you imagine the Robinson/LaMotta series of fights with todays advances in training/nutrition ? They were unbelievable fights and they were men off the streets in physical comparison....................its like comparing Roger Bannister to Seb Coe......was Coe a FASTER runner of course he was......was he a BETTER runner not necessarily.

We can only go off what we see,Jones was a better middleweight than Robinson.

 

We can only guess how much better Robinson would have been with advances in training and nutrition,maybe he'd be knocking heavyweights out or maybe he'd be almost exactly the same.

[inan 841]

 

 

I think people put the older fighters on a pedestal,I don't see anyone between middle and light heavy beat beating Jones jr.

We can say yes they lived in different times,didn't have the training or nutrition of modern times and fought more regularly,but the fact remains they were slower,smaller and weaker (in general).

They were slower smaller and weaker for that very reason.....can you imagine the Robinson/LaMotta series of fights with todays advances in training/nutrition ? They were unbelievable fights and they were men off the streets in physical comparison....................its like comparing Roger Bannister to Seb Coe......was Coe a FASTER runner of course he was......was he a BETTER runner not necessarily.

We can only go off what we see,Jones was a better middleweight than Robinson.

 

We can only guess how much better Robinson would have been with advances in training and nutrition,maybe he'd be knocking heavyweights out or maybe he'd be almost exactly the same.

 

Apart from a relatively untested Bernard Hopkins, who did Jones beat at 160lbs to give you the impression he was a better middleweight than Ray Robinson? Boxing has regressed since the 40's not improved,thousands of small clubs have closed,there are not the trainers in the game that there were to tutor young kids.

 

TV killed boxing in the US in the late 50's,it made it very big but because there were fights on virtually every night the demand overtook the supply, green kids were pushed beyond their abilties to satisfy the demand and did not have the opportunity to learn their trade. Today the emphasis is on keeping an unbeaten record,hard learning fights are avoided because of the risk of picking up a loss.Kids are fighting for world titles after 20 fights they no nothing of defence ,cannot feint or slip a punch and don't know how to parry a jab.

This is because there is no one around to teach those skills and also because they do not have time to learn them before they are pushed into title shots.

 

I'll tell you something that will make you laugh now.

Roy Jones is not a good boxer, his feet are too far apart he does not slip punches well, he seldom utilises his jab to its maximum , his head is there to be hit, and he throws wide punches. His technical flaws have only become apparent now that his god given,speed,and reflexes have slowed with age , he never learned to ride a punch so now ,when he is caught he takes the full impact of a shot. His chin is none too solid and because he takes shots that defensive technique would have allowed him to avoid, even as an older fighter he gets kod.

 

Bernard Hopkins is a far more complete fighter than Jones has ever been, that is why he can still be on top of the tree at 50 and Jones is washed up,he has learned every facet of the art, he was never blessed with Jones extraordinary speed and reflexes, but he compensated by learning the game inside out.He is "oldschool" a throw back to the 40's.If boxing had improved in the last say 5 decades do you think fighters of his age would still be champions let alone competitive?There isnt the competition to challenge these older guys who have learned their trade.

 

Hopkins recently defended against a Russian kid who had 15 fights under his belt he had the skill set of a novice,Hopkins lack of speed and stamina was never tested because the kid allowed him to dictate the pace of the fight, to box at a tempo he was comfortable with.

 

Boxing is dying MMA is far more popular now.The idea that todays fighters are better than those of the golden era is totally erroneous.

Edited July 20, 2014 by inan

[inan 841]

 

 

fcuk them all they wouldnt stand a chance against rocky balboa, he even beat he big russian giants way back in the 80s. i think george foreman would have dominated in any era, he had power to spare

big George didn't dominate his own era

 

apart from ali who beat him?

 

Jimmy Young.

[inan 841]

 

Neems

I agree , Calzaghe fought them at the end of there careers but both were still able to drop him. A prime Jones was the best fighter I've seen in the last 30 years, just look at Jones record and who he fought then look at Calzaghes record.Calzaghes biggest win was over Kessler, a Calzaghe was good but he wasn't Roy Jones.Jones was told if he moved upto heavyweight he would have to stay at that weight as his body would never be the same again, he didn't listen and moved back down to lightheavyweight ,he won over Tarver then his career fell apart,Jones is still fighting now and is a shell of his former self he simply can't walk away from the sport.

It's hard to imagine any of these old pre 60s fighters who fought much more regularly even getting near him at middle or light heavy,let alone beating him.

 

Actually its hard to imagine Jones beating.Harold Johnson,Archie Moore, Bob Foster,Mike Spinks,Billy Conn,Jack Delaney,Tommy Loughran, and also at 175lbs Sam Langford, Ezzard Charles,Gene Tunney John Henry Lewis,Maxie Rosenbloom,and about 20 others.Later light heavies such as Saad Muhammad ,Dwight Braxton, Marvin Johnson ,Eddie Gregory,John Conteh,Victor Galindez ,would have walked through Jones.

 

Middleweights that would beat him ? Monzon ,Hagler,Robinson,Greb,Ketchel,Steele,Hostak,Tiger,Walker,Burley.toss ups Giardello, Apostoli,Zale,Lamotta,Valdez.

 

 

Jones's competition has been very average.

[inan 841]

 

 

 

fcuk them all they wouldnt stand a chance against rocky balboa, he even beat he big russian giants way back in the 80s. i think george foreman would have dominated in any era, he had power to spare

big George didn't dominate his own era

 

apart from ali who beat him?

 

First time round Jimmy Young....second time round Holyfield,Morrison and someone else i forget who now.

 

Shannon Briggs

[inan 841]

Neems

I agree , Calzaghe fought them at the end of there careers but both were still able to drop him. A prime Jones was the best fighter I've seen in the last 30 years, just look at Jones record and who he fought then look at Calzaghes record.Calzaghes biggest win was over Kessler, a Calzaghe was good but he wasn't Roy Jones.Jones was told if he moved upto heavyweight he would have to stay at that weight as his body would never be the same again, he didn't listen and moved back down to lightheavyweight ,he won over Tarver then his career fell apart,Jones is still fighting now and is a shell of his former self he simply can't walk away from the sport.

Calzaghe may be the best fighter the Uk has produced in the last 30 years and that is debatable , but he certainly wasnt the best world wide I could name 20 better.

[darbo 4,776]

 

 

 

I think people put the older fighters on a pedestal,I don't see anyone between middle and light heavy beat beating Jones jr.

We can say yes they lived in different times,didn't have the training or nutrition of modern times and fought more regularly,but the fact remains they were slower,smaller and weaker (in general).

They were slower smaller and weaker for that very reason.....can you imagine the Robinson/LaMotta series of fights with todays advances in training/nutrition ? They were unbelievable fights and they were men off the streets in physical comparison....................its like comparing Roger Bannister to Seb Coe......was Coe a FASTER runner of course he was......was he a BETTER runner not necessarily.

We can only go off what we see,Jones was a better middleweight than Robinson.

 

We can only guess how much better Robinson would have been with advances in training and nutrition,maybe he'd be knocking heavyweights out or maybe he'd be almost exactly the same.

 

Apart from a relatively untested Bernard Hopkins, who did Jones beat at 160lbs to give you the impression he was a better middleweight than Ray Robinson? Boxing has regressed since the 40's not improved,thousands of small clubs have closed,there are not the trainers in the game that there were to tutor young kids.

 

TV killed boxing in the US in the late 50's,it made it very big but because there were fights on virtually every night the demand overtook the supply, green kids were pushed beyond their abilties to satisfy the demand and did not have the opportunity to learn their trade. Today the emphasis is on keeping an unbeaten record,hard learning fights are avoided because of the risk of picking up a loss.Kids are fighting for world titles after 20 fights they no nothing of defence ,cannot feint or slip a punch and don't know how to parry a jab.

This is because there is no one around to teach those skills and also because they do not have time to learn them before they are pushed into title shots.

 

I'll tell you something that will make you laugh now.

Roy Jones is not a good boxer, his feet are too far apart he does not slip punches well, he seldom utilises his jab to its maximum , his head is there to be hit, and he throws wide punches. His technical flaws have only become apparent now that his god given,speed,and reflexes have slowed with age , he never learned to ride a punch so now ,when he is caught he takes the full impact of a shot. His chin is none too solid and because he takes shots that defensive technique would have allowed him to avoid, even as an older fighter he gets kod.

 

Bernard Hopkins is a far more complete fighter than Jones has ever been, that is why he can still be on top of the tree at 50 and Jones is washed up,he has learned every facet of the art, he was never blessed with Jones extraordinary speed and reflexes, but he compensated by learning the game inside out.He is "oldschool" a throw back to the 40's.If boxing had improved in the last say 5 decades do you think fighters of his age would still be champions let alone competitive?There isnt the competition to challenge these older guys who have learned their trade.

 

Hopkins recently defended against a Russian kid who had 15 fights under his belt he had the skill set of a novice,Hopkins lack of speed and stamina was never tested because the kid allowed him to dictate the pace of the fight, to box at a tempo he was comfortable with.

 

Boxing is dying MMA is far more popular now.The idea that todays fighters are better than those of the golden era is totally erroneous.

 

you certainly are a keen observer of the boxing game what are your views on a fit on his game james toney i think his defence and style was good to watch .

[desertbred 5,490]

The art and craft of boxing are learnt in the ameteur ring and the gym, once you step up to the professional ranks it is a whole new ball game but the basics remain the same , bob and weave slip and slide, keep you guard tight and punch to hit muscle and bone not throw flashy jabs into fresh air, show boaters soon get found out when they get in with a skilfull boxer.

Edited July 20, 2014 by desertbred

[j j m 6,553]

good fighter

[inan 841]

 

I think people put the older fighters on a pedestal,I don't see anyone between middle and light heavy beat beating Jones jr.

 

We can say yes they lived in different times,didn't have the training or nutrition of modern times and fought more regularly,but the fact remains they were slower,smaller and weaker (in general).

 

They were slower smaller and weaker for that very reason.....can you imagine the Robinson/LaMotta series of fights with todays advances in training/nutrition ? They were unbelievable fights and they were men off the streets in physical comparison....................its like comparing Roger Bannister to Seb Coe......was Coe a FASTER runner of course he was......was he a BETTER runner not necessarily.

 

Bannister was a sprinter, Coe was an 800metres specialist, but I see the analogy and its misleading.Track surfaces and different shoes have helped, and men are bigger , but running is relatively simple, boxing is not, it is a science. Training? What trainers today can compare with Whitey Bimstein,Ray Arcel,Harry Lenny,Eddie Futch,Benny Georgino,Charley Goldman,Jack Blackburn,Doc Robb,Freddie Brown etc?

Edited July 20, 2014 by inan

[neems 2,406]

 

 

Neems

I agree , Calzaghe fought them at the end of there careers but both were still able to drop him. A prime Jones was the best fighter I've seen in the last 30 years, just look at Jones record and who he fought then look at Calzaghes record.Calzaghes biggest win was over Kessler, a Calzaghe was good but he wasn't Roy Jones.Jones was told if he moved upto heavyweight he would have to stay at that weight as his body would never be the same again, he didn't listen and moved back down to lightheavyweight ,he won over Tarver then his career fell apart,Jones is still fighting now and is a shell of his former self he simply can't walk away from the sport.

 

It's hard to imagine any of these old pre 60s fighters who fought much more regularly even getting near him at middle or light heavy,let alone beating him.

Actually its hard to imagine Jones beating.Harold Johnson,Archie Moore, Bob Foster,Mike Spinks,Billy Conn,Jack Delaney,Tommy Loughran, and also at 175lbs Sam Langford, Ezzard Charles,Gene Tunney John Henry Lewis,Maxie Rosenbloom,and about 20 others.Later light heavies such as Saad Muhammad ,Dwight Braxton, Marvin Johnson ,Eddie Gregory,John Conteh,Victor Galindez ,would have walked through Jones.

 

Middleweights that would beat him ? Monzon ,Hagler,Robinson,Greb,Ketchel,Steele,Hostak,Tiger,Walker,Burley.toss ups Giardello, Apostoli,Zale,Lamotta,Valdez.

 

 

Jones's competition has been very average.

What you say would hold up if you were comparing the relative achievements of fighters,which probably is a fairer way of comparing them.

 

but even a casual observer can see modern fighters are far faster and stronger,head to head Jones on his best day beats every man on your list on theirs.

 

without wanting to sound disrespectful to the old timers,he'd make most of them look very bad.

[Ggib 370]

 

Neems

I agree , Calzaghe fought them at the end of there careers but both were still able to drop him. A prime Jones was the best fighter I've seen in the last 30 years, just look at Jones record and who he fought then look at Calzaghes record.Calzaghes biggest win was over Kessler, a Calzaghe was good but he wasn't Roy Jones.Jones was told if he moved upto heavyweight he would have to stay at that weight as his body would never be the same again, he didn't listen and moved back down to lightheavyweight ,he won over Tarver then his career fell apart,Jones is still fighting now and is a shell of his former self he simply can't walk away from the sport.

Calzaghe may be the best fighter the Uk has produced in the last 30 years and that is debatable , but he certainly wasnt the best world wide I could name 20 better.

 

then why in your last post did you say hopkins is still a top level fighter who dominates still at 50? so why dont you rate joe calzaghe? after all he beat hopkins fair and square so he beat him when he was at the top of the game.

[DannyMc 143]

Inan didn't Hopkins only start learning his craft in jail in his 20's,wereas Jones was an olympian with an awesome amateur pedigree. Hopkins longevity has more to do with the way he lives his life than the way he fights.

[neems 2,406]

Inan didn't Hopkins only start learning his craft in jail in his 20's,wereas Jones was an olympian with an awesome amateur pedigree. Hopkins longevity has more to do with the way he lives his life than the way he fights.

Hopkins doesn't have the physical gifts Jones had,so he had to learn to compensate by becoming a better technician.

 

when Jones' speed and coordination left him he wasn't a great fighter anymore,Hopkins knows how to compensate for any weaknesses he has.

[gnasher16 30,267]

 

 

I think people put the older fighters on a pedestal,I don't see anyone between middle and light heavy beat beating Jones jr.

We can say yes they lived in different times,didn't have the training or nutrition of modern times and fought more regularly,but the fact remains they were slower,smaller and weaker (in general).

They were slower smaller and weaker for that very reason.....can you imagine the Robinson/LaMotta series of fights with todays advances in training/nutrition ? They were unbelievable fights and they were men off the streets in physical comparison....................its like comparing Roger Bannister to Seb Coe......was Coe a FASTER runner of course he was......was he a BETTER runner not necessarily.

We can only go off what we see,Jones was a better middleweight than Robinson.

 

We can only guess how much better Robinson would have been with advances in training and nutrition,maybe he'd be knocking heavyweights out or maybe he'd be almost exactly the same.

 

 

Cant agree with that mate it doesnt matter what you are comparing from different generations sport,cars,tools anything you just have to keep a common sense approach and take everything into account............surely thats the essence of what " comparison " is.