Thread: Deeper look at Manny and Floyd opponents

As discussed/promised previously, a more in depth analysis and study of each man's best wins and how they stack up. To limit the subjectivity, I will be posting the names of the biggest wins, if they are or will likely be Hall of Famers, weights fought at, and if these fighters were in their primes or not. Here we go:

Floyd:
1. Chico Corrales, 33-0, P4P #5 at time of fight, Prime of his career, not a strong HOFer, at both men's weight of 130
2. Ricky Hatton, 43-0, P4P #8 at time of fight, Prime of his career, may end up a HOFer, Hatton moved up to 147
3. Jose Luis Castillo 45-4-1, not ranked P4P, Prime of his career, not close to HOF, Both men's weight of 135, Floyd probably lost this fight in reality
4. Shane Mosely, 46-5, Ranked #3 P4P, 2nd prime (?) of his career, HOF fighter, Both Men's weight of 147
5. Miguel Cotto, 37-2, Unranked P4P, not in his prime, HOF fighter, Floyd went up in weight to fight Cotto at 154

Manny:
1) Marco Antonio Barrera, 57-3, Ranked #3 P4P, Prime of his career, HOF fighter, Both men's weight of 126
2) Erik Morales, 48-3, Ranked #6 P4P, Prime of his career, HOF fighter, Manny moved up to fight at 130
3) Juan Manuel Marquez, 48-3-1, ranked #4-6 P4P during various fights, Prime of his career, HOF fighter, both men's weight of 126 (and 130, 147)
4) Timothy Bradley, 31-0, Ranked #3 P4P, Prime of his career, not HOF at this time, fought at both men's weight of 147
5) Miguel Cotto, 34-1, Ranked #7 P4P, Post Margarito/past absolute best prime, HOF, Cotto fought at a catchweight to suit Manny

Looking at top wins, I see Manny as facing hands down the better competition, especially considering the trio of Barrera, Morales and JMM. I can't see a case at all for Floyd's top wins being better competition, and of the shared opponents Floyd beat JMM easily after JMM jumped to weightclasses and Floyd didn't make weight, Manny destroyed a tougher/more prime Cotto where Floyd struggled a bit with the older version, and Manny destroyed a Hatton and Oscar who Floyd had already beaten (although he struggled more with both and Oscar was ahead against Floyd until the later rounds).

Floyd has names like Oscar de la Hoya, Arturo Gatti, Canelo Alvarez, Zab Judah, Demarcus Corley, Marcos Maidana, Jesus Chavez, Famoso Hernandez, Genaro Hernandez, Angel Manfredy, N'dou, Carlos Baldomir and Sharmba Mitchell on his resume' and most of those were good, solid wins. None of those guys were P4P ranked at the time, and some of them (Oscar, Zab, Mitchell) had seen better days, for sure. That being said, it is a good resume' with solid competition.

I feel that Manny's second tier wins over Hatton, Oscar, Oscar Larios (good fighter if you don't know who he is, look him up), Lehlo Ledwaba (great win where Manny annihilated the odds on favorite), Shane Mosely, Antonio Margarito, and Josh Clottey were just as good if not better. While Floyd was brilliant in shutting most of the guys listed above out, Manny savaged most of the names on this list and had some memorable knockouts against Ledwaba and Hatton, two of the most vicious ever seen (knockouts).

So, to sum up my point: Floyd is a better all around fighter and in my opinion would win the head to head match up vs. the smaller Manny (although I can see a case for Manny getting up for this fight and outworking Floyd for a close decision). Floyd has fought good competition and in my opinion tried to fight many of the big fights that got away for one reason or another (younger Shane, Kostya...etc.). All of that being said, Manny, in my opinion and from what I've looked up, researched and remember, fought tougher competition throughout his career and pushed himself to do things many thought were crazy (EVERYONE knew Oscar was way too big for Manny to even be competitive, let alone win).

What about steroids?

People need to stop using these phantom "p4p" numbers as if they have any relevance. They dont.Its an odd anagram for "favourite list" Its means about as much in these comparisons and silly compubox numbers do to the actual punch facts of a fight.

while i commend you for putting in the effort to do this, there are a few things i totally disagree with. but first off, i will say that head to head, pac probably had the tougher competition.

first, the de la hoya fight with floyd should 100% be on his top 5 list. that was a huge win. de la hoya was getting to the end up his career at the time but definitely wasnt done. it was a great win. to me, probably floyds best win. he even went up in weight to do it.

with pac, if you are saying that de la hoya was at the end of his career, then morales and barrera were both at the end of their careers too. i actually think that both of them were more on their way out than de la hoya was when he fought floyd. the morales that lost to pac was not at all a prime morales. barrera was still considered good but was getting at the end of his career.

also as you stated, pac had more dominant wins against hatton and de la hoya but by that time, both of those fighters were completely done. i think that the de la hoya fight was just a genius plan by roach. he knew that de la hoya would be completely weight drained at 147 and knew that pac would be a huge underdog and that that win would push him over the top. no way any version of pac beats the 154 pound version of de la hoya that fought floyd. pac may still beat a prime hatton but not that easily.

i think that pac has some better wins and probably better quality opposition slightly when it comes down to it but not really enough to be significant. floyd is a sure top 20 and probably top 15 of all time while pac is more of a top 30 maybe top 25 (although that is obviously my opinion).

Originally Posted by IamInuit

People need to stop using these phantom "p4p" numbers as if they have any relevance. They dont.Its an odd anagram for "favourite list" Its means about as much in these comparisons and silly compubox numbers do to the actual punch facts of a fight.

I would argue that p4p is the most relevant way to rank quality of opposition. If a guy is ranked p4p, even though it is subjective to a degree, we have to assume he is considered very good by experts and a top fighter at that moment. It really isn't a favorite list at all, as evidenced by Floyd remaining the #1 guy so long, despite the fact that many abhor him. Guess we will have to agree to disagree.

Drug testing...??

Originally Posted by powerpuncher

while i commend you for putting in the effort to do this, there are a few things i totally disagree with. but first off, i will say that head to head, pac probably had the tougher competition.

first, the de la hoya fight with floyd should 100% be on his top 5 list. that was a huge win. de la hoya was getting to the end up his career at the time but definitely wasnt done. it was a great win. to me, probably floyds best win. he even went up in weight to do it.

with pac, if you are saying that de la hoya was at the end of his career, then morales and barrera were both at the end of their careers too. i actually think that both of them were more on their way out than de la hoya was when he fought floyd. the morales that lost to pac was not at all a prime morales. barrera was still considered good but was getting at the end of his career.

also as you stated, pac had more dominant wins against hatton and de la hoya but by that time, both of those fighters were completely done. i think that the de la hoya fight was just a genius plan by roach. he knew that de la hoya would be completely weight drained at 147 and knew that pac would be a huge underdog and that that win would push him over the top. no way any version of pac beats the 154 pound version of de la hoya that fought floyd. pac may still beat a prime hatton but not that easily.

i think that pac has some better wins and probably better quality opposition slightly when it comes down to it but not really enough to be significant. floyd is a sure top 20 and probably top 15 of all time while pac is more of a top 30 maybe top 25 (although that is obviously my opinion).

Oscar: if u want to put him on Floyd's top 5 I can live with that. He was U ranked P4P at the time and hadn't had a meaningful/impressive win since Vargas YEARS before, but ok. I think that kind of drives home my point on quality of opposition.

Barrera: DEFINITELY NOT on the way out. He was at an all time high for their first fight, boxing better than ever and viewed by most as one of the top 3 fighters in the sport having just rattled off a series of impressive wins which included Hamed n Morales. Marcos went on to have a few more significant wins after the Manny beat down, so really I just think your statement is completely false.

Morales: First fight with Manny the guy had a disputed loss to Barrera on his record n that was it, n was recognized as a top fighter regardless of weight after beating IMPRESSIVE competition. Google his record n remind yourself of how great this guy was. He went up n lost to Raheem by decision prior to the rematch with Manny, but was still ranked P4P n not showing decline from his prime. After the two beatings Manny gave him, there was a definite deterioration, but a Manny broke him in the rematch n finished him in the rubber match. Remember, Erik was fighting well in the rematch n ahead on the cards before Manny broke through n stopped him.

Your final point on Pac not being capable beating 154 version of Oscar n having a harder time vs Hatton doesn't really fight in this discussion. You can only judge quality of opposition by who the guys fought n when. Oscar was done when he fought Manny n was pretty far gone vs Floyd. Hatton had one loss when Manny pancaked him and based on both guys styles I can't see how u can say that fight would've gone any different. Hatton was overwhelmed in the first round and the knockout shot obliterated him. It's not like Floyd beat him so bad that it took his punch resistance.

I think the steroids will be a blemish on Manny's career.

It's a record not a resume

My position has never been that one guy has fought better competition than the other, it's all subjective.
My thing is that anyone being truly objective should realize that the competition level that both guys fought is pretty similar. One guy might have a bit of a lead, maybe that's Pac, but the difference is relatively minuscule. I have no problem with people thinking Pac fought better opposition, but when people say things like "Pac was the better fighter because his opposition was that much better", I think that's pretty stupid.

Both guys are the absolute biggest stars in boxing, and you don't become a big star in boxing fighting lame fights that nobody gives a shit about.

Both guys had a similar career (although obviously Pac remained in obscurity a lot longer due to a number of factors). Both guys were young, hungry up and comers at one point who were trying in vain to get big fights, both guys took big risks and came out on top when it mattered (for the most part, in Pac's case).

So to say one is head and shoulders above the other in terms of competition is just being disingenuous or ignorant.

When you narrow a 18 or 20 year career down to 5 fights, I think it really misses the big picture too.

Floyd beat Genaro Hernandez, 130lb champ, in October of 1998, and has fought nothing but top 10 guys ever since. When we start disregarding victories and consistency like that because the opponent isn't a HOFer or doesn't have a well known name, I think we really start missing the point (that goes for Pac too, who has beat a lot of quality guys who aren't HOFers or big names)

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

When you narrow a 18 or 20 year career down to 5 fights, I think it really misses the big picture too.

Floyd beat Genaro Hernandez, 130lb champ, in October of 1998, and has fought nothing but top 10 guys ever since. When we start disregarding victories and consistency like that because the opponent isn't a HOFer or doesn't have a well known name, I think we really start missing the point (that goes for Pac too, who has beat a lot of quality guys who aren't HOFers or big names)

No, you're taking that completely out of context. I named most if not all of the big fights each guy fought, I just focused on the 5 biggest because to break it down fight by fight would take forever. Now, I disagree with u wholeheartedly, and I think if u r honest u look at the prime HOF guys Manny fought, think about how many times he fought those guys, and it becomes obvious that Manny faced tougher competition. It isn't to say Floyd isn't an ATG, or ducked anyone, or didn't have some really impressve wins, but Manny fought better competition.

If u want to say that Floyd had greater all around performances or is the better fighter, I would agree with u. Manny is a phenom, like Roy, who just overwhelms guys. Floyd is an athletic phenom, but he knows the sport inside and out. All of that being said, Manny is a fighter who dared to be great and fight the toughest guys possible. I feel he is in the lead with quality of opposition and I think I presented a pretty solid case as to why.

Originally Posted by mikeeod

I feel he is in the lead with quality of opposition and I think I presented a pretty solid case as to why.

Well that's your opinion and like I said I have no problem with anyone saying Manny fought better competition. It's not something I agree with necessarily but whatever, to each their own.

But when people say that Manny's competition was so much greater that he will go down as a better fighter than Floyd (I can't remember if you said that but I know a few people did), I think that's where it gets pretty foolish.

Floyd beat Hernandez in '98 and has been fighting nothing but top ranked guys for 16 of his 18 year career without a loss. Same can be said for Manny from 2001 or so onward, but obviously Pac has his stumbles whereas Floyd was never outclassed in the ring (even if JLC did deserve the win in the first fight, it was by a very slim margin).

Put it this way: there's nobody that Pac has on his resume that I wouldn't pick Floyd to have beaten handily. If MAB or Morales were to fight Floyd at 130 (or Floyd could have dropped to 125) they would have gotten dominated.

And to say things like "Manny dared to be great" and "dared to take hard fights" like Floyd didn't is just foolish.

People choose to remember Floyd as he is today, but either don't know, forget, or choose not to remember that at one point Floyd was a boogeyman in the sport that none of the top guys would get in the ring with because he was so good but a virtual unknown (high risk, low reward). Floyd was calling out DLH back when Floyd was at 130 and DLH was 154.

Originally Posted by mikeeod

Originally Posted by IamInuit

People need to stop using these phantom "p4p" numbers as if they have any relevance. They dont.Its an odd anagram for "favourite list" Its means about as much in these comparisons and silly compubox numbers do to the actual punch facts of a fight.

I would argue that p4p is the most relevant way to rank quality of opposition. If a guy is ranked p4p, even though it is subjective to a degree, we have to assume he is considered very good by experts and a top fighter at that moment. It really isn't a favorite list at all, as evidenced by Floyd remaining the #1 guy so long, despite the fact that many abhor him. Guess we will have to agree to disagree.

How so? They are both doctored and meaningless. Its like saying Justin Beiber is the best musician based on record sales or popularity. P4p meant something when a guys like Armstrong weighed 133 for a 147 title fight or Greb 160 fir a 175 fight in an eight division world. Today we have 17 and inventing another every time a famous Beiber wants a catch.When you take all things into context and take an objective look forgetting which side you are supposed to be on, these two represent equality.