We all know that at one point or another, we've considered the legends of the Sweet Science, above reproach. Did Ray Robinson have a problem with spouse abuse? Of course not. These are the jealous rantings of one of his KO victims. Did Ali really meet with the Klan to promote racial segregation? How dare you? They just put that in the "Thriller in Manilla" documentary with animation and voice over. Was Ray Leonard more arrogant and more self centered than most fighters. No. He certainly didn't mean to embarrass Hagler when he invited him to a ceremony which was supposed to announce their fight, then stood in the middle of the ring and uttered those famous words, "A fight with this great man, would be....blah blah blah...but unfortunately, it'll never happen." What are some of things you've noticed, either by meeting or observing your favorite fighters that have turned you off, yet you keep your silence out of loyalty and the refusal to admit that these men are just, well, men. Human like the rest of us. When they're handed their death certificates as fighters, it becomes obvious, however they make it plain to the human eye years before that awful event takes place. Remember, we're not on ESPN anymore, so hopefully, these confessions won't start any bitter debates. Nothing wrong with healthy disagreements. Also, I didn't create this to destroy reputations. I think it's important to notice imperfections in the best of us and forgive them. I think it's the only way we can learn how to forgive ourselves.

The viewing of fighters from 30+ years ago through rose-colored glasses makes me a bit sick to my stomach at times.

I've tried.

Seems to me the majority of people here feel simply because the oldtimers fought 4 times a month (with many of them coming against Hobo Joe and Vagabond Smith) that no fighter of today would stand a chance with them.

Quantity doesn't always trump everything. Obviously the title fight pool was deeper then, but on a one vs one basis I see a lot of today's fighters doing far better than a lot do here.

there are examples of great careers back then that mostly fought quality..if you look at gene fullmer for example and just look at his last 11 fights..every one of thoses middles he fought would be legit champ today.every one no exception..the welter he fought benny kid paret today would rank number 4 in that division..fullmer before then still fought top fighters several fights..i know very well every one of thoses fighters in there prime..saw them fight live many times..his resume is better than any fighter today...
harry greb for example in one year 1919 fought either 43 or 45 fights.lost none.beat 6 real hofamers during that period plus several other good fighters also..did he have some easy fights also..of course..but in one year only who he fought is better than any fighters resume for there whole career..anyones.and it was done in one year..charles for a 3 or 4 year run had i think 60 fights.lost once..his competion better than any resume today and thats in a 4 year period..
yes i can go on and on..yes today in several lower weight classes there are many many terrific fighters and several potential great to near great ones..in the older days that was the norm..why begrudge fighters that had a dozen fights ever year for several years and 5 of those fights in one year was against the best..some easy oines of course...so in a 3 year period they had 15-18 fights against the best of the best..thats more than anyones resume today....instead of begrugeing thoses fighters..admire them..robinson for example fought lamata twice and another fight inbetween in less than a month...pac and floyd can you see them doing that..or anyother fighter....soo when we speak of greatness it goes beyound showing it for a few fights over a 5 year period like floyd and shane and winky and others..greatness was proven in the ring time and time again over and over not against tomatoe cans but against the best of the best...admire them not discredit them..they EARNED it.

I hate comparing generations. The past does get romanticized, but those guys were great. Also, it was a very different social climate.

marble you gave perfect examples and there are hundreds just like that...

marble and folks heres an example of what marble and i are talking about..welterweight gil turner..whos he.well ill tell you..he was a good not greast welter in the 50s who for years was always ranked in the top 10 and several times in the top 5..he was like dozens of what we consider good fighters of that era.not great but dam good..his recortd 57-19 and a few draws..a tomatoe can right..who did he beat ..hall of famers gene fullmer beau jack twice ike williams all hofamers..beat good fighters like del flanagan 2 times vir akins charley fusari bobby dykes..who beat him..hall of famers basilio fullmer twice gavilin giardello all hofamers..then champs and other good fighters just like him.jonny saxton joey giambra isaac logart twice vince martinez ralph dupas langlois rocky castellani ..had a draw with garret hart...all very good to a few near great fighters.0.his resume exceeds fighters of today.all of them..yes he lost fights.many of them very very close ones..how do i know..cause i saaw him fight about 25 -30 times..every fighter mentioned that he fought had a similkar or better resume..there unknown to many here..if they fought today.pac floyd shane berto etc etc all would have a few more losses or several losses against these unknown guys...if they fought turners resume

Marble, dmar, I never meant this thread to negate the atheletic accomplishments of fighters of the past. I'm with you on your observations. Yesterdays fighter was better than todays. I was talking about character. Discussing personality imperfections in boxers who were, for a decade or two, perfect in their practice of the sport. Repeat, this thread has nothing to do with who is the best fighter from what ever era. It has more to do with noticing things that annoy you about your favorite fighters. If you read my opening post again, you'll get it. As far as Robinson, Ali and Leonard are concerned, I've never seen anything close to them for a while (well, Manny P but that's about it. lol). If you guys want to debate fighters from different eras, that's fine. However, I'm with the fighters of the past. I was talking about men who resemble "The Mighty Casey" and their weaknesses, what ever they might be. This thread is about admitting weakness within some of the characters of those men who showed greatness in the ring.

Another huge dissapointment was James Toney and his steroid use and refusal to stay in shape for fights.

Thanks for the responses, Boxing Lawyer. Maybe the thread will take another direction now.