Thread: Floyd's competition vs Manny's competition

Originally Posted by Greenbeanz

Without Cortez or blinkers on though Mannys win is Far more impressive. By a country mile. Scared the krap out of me. Even though against Floyd was his first KO I wasn't worried for his welfare like against Manny.

Well no doubt Manny's win was more violent and dominant.

Larry Holmes' win over Ali was more dominant than Frazier's, but we don't assign more value to Holmes for that.

Originally Posted by Greenbeanz

Don't think you should hold Floyds PED use against him

Floyd's hand injections aren't against the rules, though.

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Originally Posted by Fenster

You started the thread by discussing the quality of their opponents, at the time they faced them, but are now making the point that Floyd is superior because he made more money (lol).

Leonard was a bigger star, bigger draw and made more money than Duran but he's not rated higher than him on any serious historian/fan all-time great list.

No, that was a separate discussion that we were having that diverted from the main topic. If you want to really talk about making irrelevant points, we could talk about how I started a thread about who faced a higher quality of opposition, to which you responded by talking about who did better against the common opponents they faced (lol).

Leonard for sure was a bigger fighter than Duran and deserved to be ranked higher.

Hold up. Why did you mention their common opponents if they were irrelevant? You asked a question. If it's important to highlight that Floyd beat superior versions of these men then it's understandable that Manny beating them in a far more devastating fashion could sway people to believe he's the better fighter, right?

I then pointed out that Pac was in all-time great memorable battles with Marquez, Barrera and Morales before he ever became a possible rival to Floyd. Therefore looking at Pac's opposition outside of the common opponents, there's an argument that he's faced stronger competition, regardless of the fact he's been whopped.

Show me where Leonard is ranked higher than Duran by any reputable boxing publication/historian?

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Originally Posted by Maravilla2012

How bout that Marquez had to jump up two weight classes just for Floyd to not even attempt to make weight and just paid the fine. Floyd is not the same size of Marquez or Pac ( who are both small at 147). Dont be so quick to discredit Pacs win against Oscar cause he had to go down but praise Floyd for making Marquez move up two. Plus dont forget that Pac jumped up two weight classes to fight de la Hoya it was a big risk for him too.

Floyd not making weight was unprofessional for sure. He only missed it by two pounds but still unprofessional.

But Marquez also jumped 2 divisions to fight Pac at 147 too, and beat his ass twice, so how is it different? The JMM who fought Floyd at WW was the exact same size as the JMM who fought Pac at WW (and was two years younger as well).

Timeline
In February 2009, JMM fought at 135 against Juan Diaz.

By 2009, Floyd had already fought as high as 154 and consistently had fought at 147 for a number of years.

In September 2009, Floyd fought JMM at a contracted weight of ten pounds heavier than JMM's last fight, at 145, and Floyd came in at 147 (by the way, not just unprofessional, also the small welterweight idea is put to rest or he would have come in at 145 if that were the case, as contracted- why pay $200,000 to come in 2 pounds higher if you're better at a lesser weight?), 12 pounds heavier than JMM's last fight. JMM jumped two weight classes to face Floyd.

In 2010, JMM went back down to lightweight to face Juan Diaz and Kastidis. 135.

In July 2011, he moves up in weight to face Likar Ramos at 140.

In November 2011, he moves up in weight again to face Pacquiao at 144 and comes in only 2 pounds heavier than his last fight. Barelly any fluctuation in weight between fights and it's been 1 year since he last fought at lightweight.

Therefore, he only moved up 4 pounds to face Pacquiao from his previous fight and fought him at almost the same weight he was in his fight before against Ramos. He also had one year to get comfortable fighting at 142 and had done it successfully against Ramos too.

For Floyd, he moved up 10 pounds from his fight before, and then faced Floyd at a 12 pounds difference.

After facing Pacquiao and losing in 2011, he fought a Russian at 140 and then went up only 2 pounds again to face Pacquiao for a fight at 147.

Bottom line: in the times he faced Pacquiao he didn't move around much in weight. His weight stayed stable, around the same before and after. When he faced Floyd he had moved up 10 pounds from his last fight and jumped two weight classes. Take that for whatever it is worth.

And the eye test, Marquez physically was a much different fighter when he faced Floyd than when he faced Manny. There's a meme out there that shows an entirely different physical appearance from Marquez 2009 and 2012. It's actually quite remarkable.

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Originally Posted by Maravilla2012

How bout that Marquez had to jump up two weight classes just for Floyd to not even attempt to make weight and just paid the fine. Floyd is not the same size of Marquez or Pac ( who are both small at 147). Dont be so quick to discredit Pacs win against Oscar cause he had to go down but praise Floyd for making Marquez move up two. Plus dont forget that Pac jumped up two weight classes to fight de la Hoya it was a big risk for him too.

Floyd not making weight was unprofessional for sure. He only missed it by two pounds but still unprofessional.

But Marquez also jumped 2 divisions to fight Pac at 147 too, and beat his ass twice, so how is it different? The JMM who fought Floyd at WW was the exact same size as the JMM who fought Pac at WW (and was two years younger as well).

And Floyd is a small 147lber. On fight night he is consistently outweighed by 10-20lbs by his opponents.

With respect to Hatton, I'm not sure which win I rank higher. Floyd beat him at 147 after Hatton had struggled with Collazo at that weight and at a weight class where I don't think Hatton was at his best. Manny beat Hatton at Hatton's best weight, BUT he beat him after Floyd beat him. Still Hatton had stopped Malignaggi in between Floyd beating him and Manny facing him at 140. Considering the devastating fashion that Manny beat him, and that Floyd lost a few rounds to Hatton in their match, all in all, it's close but I probably lean toward Manny's win over Hatton being ranked higher. Close though.

For Cotto, it's also close for me. No matter his win over Sergio recently, I've always considered Cotto best at welterweight and in the 2007/2008 ish years. I can't forget that Cotto literally lost every round against Austin Trout at 154. Manny got to Cotto first before Floyd and close to Cotto's prime. But, Manny got to Cotto after Margarito did his number on him and for what it's worth so did Floyd. Manny stopped Cotto and Floyd had a bit of trouble with Cotto. Again, probably lean Manny, but it's close.

Also, you can't have it both ways. Either Clottey is good and the Cotto win counts a lot or Clottey is bad and Cotto's win doesn't count for much. If he's good, it's impressive Manny shut him out. If he's bad, it shouldn't matter he was coming off a loss.

To me, I think styles make fights. Manny was so much faster than Clottey that Clottey couldn't afford to come out of his shell. Against Cotto, speed differential wasn't there and Clottey could fight more of his fight. It's a shame he wouldn't come out of his shell though to give it a shot.

Also, realize that when Manny faced Oscar, he was a -200 underdog. Most experts predicted Manny to lose that fight. Now when we look back Oscar seemed drained but at the time it was a risky fight to take. The risk factor at the time of the fight should probably be factored into how high it is ranked to an extent too.

Originally Posted by Fenster

Hold up. Why did you mention their common opponents if they were irrelevant? You asked a question. If it's important to highlight that Floyd beat superior versions of these men then it's understandable that Manny beating them in a far more devastating fashion could sway people to believe he's the better fighter, right?

I then pointed out that Pac was in all-time great memorable battles with Marquez, Barrera and Morales before he ever became a possible rival to Floyd. Therefore looking at Pac's opposition outside of the common opponents, there's an argument that he's faced stronger competition, regardless of the fact he's been whopped.

Show me where Leonard is ranked higher than Duran by any reputable boxing publication/historian?

When determining the quality of opposition, it's important to look at the context. Larry Holmes beat the same guy in 1980 that Joe Frazier beat in 1971: they'd both answer to the name Muhammad Ali and a DNA test would conclude that they were the same person. But as boxing fans, we look at the context and understand that Frazier's win was of higher quality because Muhammad Ali was a better fighter in 1971 than he was in 1980. It's not just the name that counts.

So when I say something like "Manny fought Hatton after Floyd beat him", that's providing context to judge the quality of the wins. When Floyd beat Hatton, he was undefeated, ranked higher and held to a much higher esteem by boxing fans. When Pac beat him, he had been knocked out, had split with his long time trainer, and by all accounts his drug and alcohol addictions were getting worse. Still a fantastic win, but Mayweather's meant more. Mayweather took his 0. So in bringing that up, I was bringing up something relevant to determining the quality of opponent.

The question of who did better against a common opponent has no relevance to the quality of opposition faced. If Wlad fights Stiverne, David Haye and Andy Ruiz Jr next year and KO's them all, and I fight Stiverne, David Haye and Andy Ruiz Jr next year and get destroyed in 30 seconds by all of them, me and Wlad have fought the same quality level of opposition. I hope that clarifies.

And really I could give a fuck less how many people want to rate Duran - a guy who lost to all his best peers, got KTFO, quit because of a tummy ache, ect - over Leonard. People not knowing boxing isn't my problem.

Manny has the best Cotto win, he absolutely destroyed Cotto.

I'm not even touching the Hatton best weight argument, it's just too ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Also, you can't have it both ways. Either Clottey is good and the Cotto win counts a lot or Clottey is bad and Cotto's win doesn't count for much. If he's good, it's impressive Manny shut him out. If he's bad, it shouldn't matter he was coming off a loss.

To me, I think styles make fights. Manny was so much faster than Clottey that Clottey couldn't afford to come out of his shell. Against Cotto, speed differential wasn't there and Clottey could fight more of his fight. It's a shame he wouldn't come out of his shell though to give it a shot.

Also, realize that when Manny faced Oscar, he was a -200 underdog. Most experts predicted Manny to lose that fight. Now when we look back Oscar seemed drained but at the time it was a risky fight to take. The risk factor at the time of the fight should probably be factored into how high it is ranked to an extent too.

I think Clottey is a hell of a fighter and I was impressed with his win, but the fact remained he was coming off of a loss.

Cotto is great but when he looked mediocre vs Clottey, a lot of people started questioning whether or not he was washed up.

You forget he came from lightweight and knocked out the champ.
DLH who volunteered to fight at welterweight so he was to blame and the fool. Pac Man wiped him out.
Ricky Hatton may have had a bad camp but Manny wiped him out at his weight.
Cotto was great win and performance.
Clottely beaten easily.
Marg was his most impressive performance against a much bigger man.
Then it started to go down in performance against Shane Mosley, JMM, Tim Bradley, Brandon Rios and probably Chris Algeri.
To be fair I do not argue who fought the better opposition as I do not care. What I do care is that they never fought one another 2009ish when Manny was awesome and Floyd used the excuse that he must be on drugs. Both of them are prats.

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Originally Posted by Fenster

Hold up. Why did you mention their common opponents if they were irrelevant? You asked a question. If it's important to highlight that Floyd beat superior versions of these men then it's understandable that Manny beating them in a far more devastating fashion could sway people to believe he's the better fighter, right?

I then pointed out that Pac was in all-time great memorable battles with Marquez, Barrera and Morales before he ever became a possible rival to Floyd. Therefore looking at Pac's opposition outside of the common opponents, there's an argument that he's faced stronger competition, regardless of the fact he's been whopped.

Show me where Leonard is ranked higher than Duran by any reputable boxing publication/historian?

When determining the quality of opposition, it's important to look at the context. Larry Holmes beat the same guy in 1980 that Joe Frazier beat in 1971: they'd both answer to the name Muhammad Ali and a DNA test would conclude that they were the same person. But as boxing fans, we look at the context and understand that Frazier's win was of higher quality because Muhammad Ali was a better fighter in 1971 than he was in 1980. It's not just the name that counts.

So when I say something like "Manny fought Hatton after Floyd beat him", that's providing context to judge the quality of the wins. When Floyd beat Hatton, he was undefeated, ranked higher and held to a much higher esteem by boxing fans. When Pac beat him, he had been knocked out, had split with his long time trainer, and by all accounts his drug and alcohol addictions were getting worse. Still a fantastic win, but Mayweather's meant more. Mayweather took his 0. So in bringing that up, I was bringing up something relevant to determining the quality of opponent.

The question of who did better against a common opponent has no relevance to the quality of opposition faced. If Wlad fights Stiverne, David Haye and Andy Ruiz Jr next year and KO's them all, and I fight Stiverne, David Haye and Andy Ruiz Jr next year and get destroyed in 30 seconds by all of them, me and Wlad have fought the same quality level of opposition. I hope that clarifies.

And really I could give a fuck less how many people want to rate Duran - a guy who lost to all his best peers, got KTFO, quit because of a tummy ache, ect - over Leonard. People not knowing boxing isn't my problem.

This along with your assertion that

"If both retired tomorrow, we've seen Pac beaten and/or knocked out in every stage of his career, whereas Floyd has never lost. Floyd was the bigger star, the bigger draw, made a lot more money and has never had a true equal in the ring."


throws doubt on your ability to remain objective when discussing Floyd. You obviously don't rate Duran despite overwhelming evidence that the guy was a true boxing phenomenon and have already made up your mind that Floyd is peerless, an opinion that no doubt would not even change were Manny, or somebody else, to get in the ring with him and knock him out. It seems you have made you mind up so why ask the question?

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

The perception seems to be that, when you're talking about the competition each guy has faced, Manny was a real man who fought nothing but the best and Floyd was the guy who meticulously cherry picked easily opponents. A lot of people still believe Pac was the better fighter because he fought much better opposition.

Can someone explain that to me?

DLH - a guy Floyd beat a year prior. Forced to drain himself down to a weigh class he hadn't fought at in 7 or 8 years prior to that fight.

Ricky Hatton - Great win but another Floyd leftover who's camp seemed to be in turmoil and had broke off with his long time trainer.

Cotto - great win, but came at a time when Cotto's stock had fallen greatly after being physically destroyed by Marg and was coming off a controversial split decision win over Clottey where he looked terrible.

Clottely - Tough fighter but actually coming off of the loss to Cotto.

Marg - newly off of his suspension after being absolutely destroyed by Mosley. Shane Mosley leftover

Shane Mosley - Floyd leftover coming off a dominating loss to Floyd and a draw where he looked like absolute shit against Sergio Mora of all people.

JMM - Great fighter, but obviously it has to be noted that JMM is a guy who gave Pac absolute fits and knocked him unconscious, whereas Floyd pitched a virtual shutout against him and made JMM look like an amateur (the only person to have done that)

Tim Bradley - nothing to complain about here. Manny fought the undefeated, crafty Bradley twice and won twice (despite what the judges said the first time). Great wins.

Brandon Rios - Blown up 135lber coming off a loss to Alvarado. Pointless fight.

Chris Algeri - Virtual unknown until a SD win over Provodnikov. Tall with long reach, but seemingly no power. I think most boxing fans are in agreement that this is a pretty uninteresting fight.



Am I being unfair to Manny? I'm not saying that these fights meant nothing because for the most part they were fought against very tough fighters. But once you get past the fact that Manny was fighting larger guys (something Floyd has done every time out), how come we don't scrutinize Manny's competition like we do Floyd's?

Superb

Originally Posted by Greenbeanz

I think both guys competition is very comparable.There are a huge raft of shared opponents but Manny's wins have often seemed more emphatic. Horses for courses, very different styles, personalities and fighters are Floyd and Manny. I don't think one is emphatically better than the other in reality, but Manny is easier for the non boxing anorak to appreciate.

Superb again and it is far easier for any casual fan to accept manny rather than floyd

The majority of us would probably all agree that floyd has the edge in the harder opponents and has consistently beat everyone of his 47 opponents including castillo with a torn rotator.

Can we please discuss manny pac 5 losses..?

Do you think we could touch on that a teeny weeny bit?

Manny is a great guy (no doubt) but lets exclude the wars he had with marquez with the last one leaving him completely sparked out by an out of prime 40 year old who jumped up in weight?!!

Lets stay away from the easy accusation of nut hugging and deflecting the arguement and deal with mannys great but flawed record.

Floyd and manny are worlds apart in skill and £worth£ but lets keep ignoring it and make it seem like manny is ying to floyds yang as it keeps everyone guessing..

Next time this thread should be between manny and bradley as they both beat each other but after bradleys injury in the second fight it was plain to see he was a different fighter (again).

Close your eyes.

Put your house on the fight.

Be honest with yourself

Who would you really bet on to win..exactly.

Floyd would win so take the fight and not pussy out and accuse him of drug taking.