How good is Mayweather historically?
For the younger fans how would a prime Floyd compare to a "Sweat Pea" Whitaker, or a mid career Roberto Duran fare against the pretty girl?
He say's he'll retire after one more fight. For all of those who are still buying that, is his legacy secured?
what's his real historical status against the greats after what he's accomplished so far?
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
sadly he`ll be forgotten about a year or so...right after he retires...yes he is talented...but he can't brawl at all...all the great fighter we remember never ran against anyone way slower then they was...if it was sugar ray robinson in there against baldomir he`d go for a k.o...pretty boy should of done that. you guys notice floyd try to brawl for a sec but if his awfull in anything his awfull in brawling...plus floyd got hit more often then usual in that fight...he still was quick but he seem hesitant to pull trigger...I never knew baldomir could have both hands down and walk right up to floyd but not get tag...hbo was horrible to say baldomir lost every round...floyd wasn't even dominating that much...it was a boring fight...just like floyds whole career...winning belts being talented is nothing compare to a warrior that wins abd brawl or simply put ends to any oppenents hyped...before floyd can be remember all time great he gotta put an end to the hypes of hatton margorito cotto etc...great fighter shut downs every hype around his...its not just about winning belts being fast elusive you gotta have a dominant attitude hunger to stop any doubts that's why greats like ali fought everyone around...ali lost fights but he fought on and beat great fighters not the likes of zab gatti corrales castillo baldomir...if floyd wants to be remember he gotta fight anyone anytime no more tune up fights like sharmba...your considered p4p king go stop cotto or hatton call them out atleast...floyd is very dissapointing...your not a fighter your a business man...that's how he`ll be remembered...
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
To be the best, you have to beat the best.
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
Quote:
Originally Posted by a harmful of swallows
For the younger fans how would a prime Floyd compare to a "Sweat Pea" Whitaker, or a mid career Roberto Duran fare against the pretty girl?
He say's he'll retire after one more fight. For all of those who are still buying that, is his legacy secured?
what's his real historical status against the greats after what he's accomplished so far?
I think floyd vs whitaker would be a draw, every single round 10-10! Duran vs Mayweather would be impossible to predict.
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
as it stands now he wont be remembered as a great if you ask me. great fights make great fighters and to me if he retired any time soon he would be a bit like roy jones jr in that he had never had a truly great fight and when his name is mentioned years later in the pub we won't be talkin about the time he faught whoever and how that was an awesome fight.
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
Mayweather will be remembered.
Right now the boxing community is a bit short sighted & unappreciative of it's fighters & heroes as compared to the one's back in the day.
For some reason everyone forgets the fact that Floyd stopped & dfeated some of the best fighters out there on his way to the top.
Names like Hernandez, Manfredy, N'dou, Sosa, Corrales, and Castillo are all written off now...but when Mayweather totally annihilated or humiliated them...they were something.
Of late Mayweather has fought big names too...but he's taken on a boatload of criticism for not fighting Hatton or not fighting Margarito...but I encourage you all to take a look of both of those names.
Sit down & compare apples to apples & look at there records beside Mayweathers.
People just love to hate Floyd. It's that simple.
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
So far he hasnt beaten any great names or been in any great fights. He's basically cruised through his career without ever being pushed but before he retires he needs to prove he can prevail through adversity .
The challenges will come and then we'll see where PBF will be ranked in history . If he carries out his threat and retires after 1 more fight it would be a huge waste of talent .
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
well he has won many titles but he hasnt really faced any proper competition yet. hopefully he stops being a fool and fights a fighter that could maybe beat him. eg, de la hoya, margarito. i could name more but cant be bothered :)
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
I think Floyd has the talent to be great but lacks the opposition right now....he needs someone to challenge him...we also have to wait and see how good baldomir, JLC, Chico, and the rest turn out to be and then we can say he was good because he whupped those guys.
But his victories are due to his speed, stamina, and the gigantic ring he always has!!!
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
People just love to hate Floyd. It's that simple.
I will always cc yah buddie. But we always differ on this issue.
Actually Wacko, I HATE to hate on Floyd.
So much that I actually DO HOPE he retires so we can all stop talking about him.
As I said before he only represents himself, not boxing.
"I'll tax that *ss too." -Floyd... I couldn't get a better quote, Thanks Floyd. ;D
Sure if he actually had a challenging matchup as of recently, then
I could give your boy some lovin'. heheh The props kind of love.
But he won't shut me up when he tries to fight another Baldomir, Gatti, N'Dou, Brussels, Sharmba, ooh gawd the list goes on these days. Corely and Judah are his best competition these YEARS and those dudes had a loss
coming into the fight.
Hey, my favorite fighter is going to get KO'd this weekend. Why?
Because he actually fights the best around his division. Where more
than A FEW respectable boxing fanatics think he has a chance to lose or be
competitive.
But Mayweather fans don't understand what I said. There mind is made up.
I'm critical to EVERY boxer. It just so happens that Mayweather is taking
advantage of the system which is HBO to get him paid and take the easiest route, WHILE talking shyte about every other boxer.
As I said, no Mayweather fan understands.
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
I'm a big fan of Floyd's boxing ability, without a doubt the best in the sport right now.
But the point has been well made that he hasn't yet fought a really tough opponent.
I ask myself this question. Is there a single opponent who Floyd has fought who Oscar De La Hoya wouldn't have beaten?
I don't think there is. I reckon Mosely would have beaten every single opponent Floyd has faced so far as well.
Floyd is a great fighter but for him to be considered as an all time great he needs to beat De La Hoya and Shane Mosely in my opinion. If he does that, then we can give him his props, if he doesn't he will retire as a 'could have been great' type of fighter.
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
Pep would beat him at 126
Armstrong would beat him at 130
Duran would beat him at 135
Leonard would beat him at 140
Robinson would destroy him at 147
Hearns would kill him at 147
Whittaker, Mosley, De la Hoya, Pryor, Taylor, Chavez, Arguello, Nelson, would all give him a tough go
....The BEST fighters on his record have proven that they are weak, either they don't make weight or are weight drained, they are technically flawed, most are only good in one area and PBF is well rounded enough to chose which way he wants to beat them....that wouldn't fly vs the BEST EVER
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
I think that any boxing fan can tell that Floyd is extremely talented. I don't think anybody would say he's overrated. I do believe that he has to get Mosley, De La Hoya, and Winky under his belt before he retires if he wants to be an all-time great. If he can beat all three of these men, I have no problem saying that Floyd is the best to ever do it. Floyd technically can do it in 2007. If Shane stops listening to his wife and comes off of "vacation" and Oscar approves (which he won't), Floyd could take Mosley, then Oscar, then Winky.
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
Lyle your list is full of crap, the only person on there who would have chance, and probably owuld beat Mayweather is Hearns... Floyd isn't just extremely talented and skilled he is perhaps the greatest combination of both to EVER fight. He is so fast he doesn't need to set up any of his punches, and his defense is comparable to Whitaker. His offense is like ROy's at LHW, but he doesn't have ROy's power so he can't dominate the fight like Roy however, with his speed and if he had ROys power p4p he would beat any boxer up to 160 IMO he just that much better than a greatly talented crop of fighters at middleweight and below, and he is alot better than WInky, but right now he may be outmuscled by Winky.
Re: How good is Mayweather historically?
Quote:
Originally Posted by a harmful of swallows
For the younger fans how would a prime Floyd compare to a "Sweat Pea" Whitaker, or a mid career Roberto Duran fare against the pretty girl?
He say's he'll retire after one more fight. For all of those who are still buying that, is his legacy secured?
what's his real historical status against the greats after what he's accomplished so far?
After this next fight he would have fought one great, a handful of good and the rest chumps. Don't stop PBF. Win or lose vs ODLH he should keep going. Mosely, Cotto, Margarito. Try to get Trinidad and Hopkins out of retirement. He has to stop being a pussy about his opponents, cause he has the talent to compete with all the above. (Maybe not beat everyone of them.)