Who is better, Cuevas or Robinson?
Sugar Ray Robinson leads with a GOAT score of 94.3 against 84.9 for Pipino Cuevas — a gap of 9.4 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Sugar Ray Robinson above Pipino Cuevas: 94.3 vs 84.9. Sugar Ray Robinson leads on Dominance, Honours, Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Robinson wins: Dominance, Peak, Longevity, Honours, Statistics
Cuevas wins: no category outright
Shareable URL · /compare/pipino-cuevas-vs-sugar-ray-robinson
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Robinson leads in 5 of 5 weighted categories.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇲🇽 Cuevas | 0 | 0 | 5 | 11 | 28 | 44 |
| 🇺🇸 Robinson | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 74 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | CuevasRetired | RobinsonRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World title defences | 11 | — |
| Professional wins | 35 | — |
| Knockout wins | 31 | — |
| Professional losses | 15 | — |
| World titles won | 1 | — |
| World titles | — | 6 |
| Career wins | — | 174 |
| Knockouts | — | 109 |
| Unbeaten run | — | 91 |
| Middleweight titles | — | 5 |
| Ring Magazine Fighter of the Year | — | 2 |
| Dominance w25% | 82 | 95 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 96 |
| Longevity w20% | 82 | 92 |
| Honours w20% | 82 | 94 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 94 |
Sugar Ray Robinson leads with a GOAT score of 94.3 against 84.9 for Pipino Cuevas — a gap of 9.4 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Cuevas does not lead any of the five categories; Robinson is ahead or level on all of them.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Cuevas: 84.9, Robinson: 94.3.
Make your case for Cuevas vs Robinson. The scoring is published in full — if you can point at the pillar or the weight you disagree with, we read it. Read the methodology paper.