How would you rate it?
Printable View
How would you rate it?
Hopefully its not finished yet.
Floyd will always have haters over his resume and so did JC.
His resume speaks for itself.
It will bever be enough for some people.
Remember all those years ago when everyone said corroles would steamroll floyd?
Have we ever seen an A* floyd...he fights at the level of his opponents.
If there's a better one out there I would like to see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
Incredible resume.
20 years of undefeated pro boxing. 18 years as a champion, fighting other champions and world class opposition.
Who has done that? When has that ever happened?
Solid resume. Not the best resume ever but definitely one of the best in boxing right now.
Best response to give.Quote:
Originally Posted by g3org3If there's a better one out there I would like to see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
It's solid IMO.
You can't really argue with it (his resume) but for me it could have been much better given his talent.
Floyd has a great resume, just not an ATG resume. The Chico, Castillo, and Hatton fights were his best performances, in my opinion. Chico and Hatton were undefeated when he fought them, and both were p4p guys that he stopped. Castillo was just hitting his groove and a very underrated and outstanding champ who probably should've won the first fight, but was dominated in the rematch.
The Canelo, Baldomir, and Pac wins were all very good wins. Canelo was a much larger man, but his lack of experience keeps this out of the great category for me. Baldy was a lineal champ and was HUGE for 147, while Floyd was coming up and much smaller. Baldy was a limited guy however, so Floyd boxing to a decision wasn't great or unexpected. I feel like the Apache fight is the same whenever they fight, but Pacs deterioration keeps that win out of the great category for me.
The Genaro/Famoso Hernandez, Angel Manfredy, Gatti, Oscar, Judah, Maidana, Jesus Chavez, Cotto and Mosely fights were all solid performances and wins. I thought the Bruseles and JMM fights were classless displays, and I feel the Berto fight on PPV is a joke. Over all that is a great resume.
I don't think Floyd will ever be a top 10 ATG, no matter what he does.
The top 10 ATG list is pretty much set in stone at this point.
Lack of experience? He had 43 fights, he was the champion of the division for over 2 years, had defended his title 6 or 7 times, had gone the full 12 round distance 5 times.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
He had seen a ton of different styles from a lot of grizzled vets, had been in there with an ATG in Mosley (a washed up Mosley, yes, but Mosley) and just had a tough battle where he had to dig deep against a slick southpaw who had just beat the hell out of Miguel Cotto.
Canelo had a TON of experience for his age.
And right after the Floyd loss, Canelo rose back up to the #1 position in the division by beating Lara, a guy who was considered one of the best talents in boxing and a guy people accused Floyd of ducking.
By weak-minded sheep who get their information spoon-fed to them, sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
For people who actually like to think critically about the sport, nothing is ever set in stone.
I think most boxing fans just blindly parrot what they've read or heard.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerBy weak-minded sheep who get their information spoon-fed to them, sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
For people who actually like to think critically about the sport, nothing is ever set in stone.
Was just about to say the same thing. As you know I dont like Floyd but how he can be outside anyones top 10 list is beyond me. No doubt most of these guys have guys in there top 10 that theyve seen fight once or twice at most.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerBy weak-minded sheep who get their information spoon-fed to them, sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
For people who actually like to think critically about the sport, nothing is ever set in stone.
His CV is good but lets not drool over it. For what he earns he should have fought GGG by now.
Canelo lack of experience and pacs deterioration...what a load of bollocks!Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
GGG is nothing special until he steps up and beats ward rather than picking on the small guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Floyd is tiny and has proved that taking punishment is for rocky fans and being smart and skilled keeps you winning.
Sorry guys,
But give me a highlight reel that compares to this one.
Even the music sounds good..
This is all you need to know about this man.
No other fighter makes these fighters look this easy.
No one can could hate on this video..
http://youtu.be/bQYeSXpC244
one of the best resumes I've seen or read about wins over guys like Maidaina, who isn't classed as a good win for Floyd is a guy like Khan's best win. Wins over guys like Corrales, Gatti and Hatton are great wins let alone Cotto, Mosley, Canelo and Pac it's a true standout resume and to do it all with no loses is amazing. moving up five weight classes is a great accomplishment that very few match with the exception of Pac an amazingly talented fighter like Glolovkin is weary to move up one. another classic boxer like Rigo has only moved up what two or three?
People say Floyd has never fought an ATG in their prime. Well, other than Pacquiao, what ATGs were there? Margarito? Cintron? Clottey? Williams?
A ton of experience FOR HIS AGE. Canelo struggled with both Trout and Lara due to their speed, boxing ability and slickness. In other words, he was made for Floyd stylistically. As for experience, there is a difference between fighting a lot of fights vs questionable opposition, and fighting at the world class level. Canelo is still pretty green. Compare him to Oba Carr during his prime years. Buddy McGirt during his prime years. If you are honest you admit that he was very young and limited and it showed in the ring vs Floyd. Again, keep it in perspective that I label this a very good win, just not a great one. No way can you compare Floyd's beat down of Chico, a truly great win, to his decision over a gun shy Canelo.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerLack of experience? He had 43 fights, he was the champion of the division for over 2 years, had defended his title 6 or 7 times, had gone the full 12 round distance 5 times.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
He had seen a ton of different styles from a lot of grizzled vets, had been in there with an ATG in Mosley (a washed up Mosley, yes, but Mosley) and just had a tough battle where he had to dig deep against a slick southpaw who had just beat the hell out of Miguel Cotto.
Canelo had a TON of experience for his age.
And right after the Floyd loss, Canelo rose back up to the #1 position in the division by beating Lara, a guy who was considered one of the best talents in boxing and a guy people accused Floyd of ducking.
Are you insinuating that Pac was in his prime when they fought?!?!? You're saying the 2015 Pac was the same as the 2008-2012 Pac?!?!? Talk about a Floyd chugger...Quote:
Originally Posted by impCanelo lack of experience and pacs deterioration...what a load of bollocks!Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
How much experience did he need before he went up against Floyd, though? He had championship level experience, like I said he went the 12 round distance 5 times, and was in there with some grizzled vets and an ATG in Shane Mosley. What more experience did he need?Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
When it comes to Floyd people say "oh all he did is fight old guys past their prime." In Canelo he beat a 23 year old guy in his physical prime who had a lot of experience and 25 plus pounds on Floyd on fight night, and that's not a great win?
If outboxing Canelo is so easy, how come Erislandy Lara couldn't? He's considered one of the greatest pure boxers in the sport, he's much bigger than Floyd, he's taller, he has a bigger reach, he has more power... yet he couldn't beat Canelo. Even if people think Lara deserved the nod, it was still a razor close fight. Floyd didn't edge Canelo, he dominated and embarrassed him.
Dot think it was, I say it's a very good win for Floyd. Was Canelos first big fight at that level and as I said, he was young and inexperienced at that level and it showed in the fight. Doesn't compare to where Chico, Hatton and Castillo were when Floyd fought them. Those guys were ready and at their Zenith, Canelo is still learning as rising. Also, I remember the Lara fight being extremely close and Canelo looking equally awkward and ineffective in that one, so I don't think that really makes ur point for u.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerHow much experience did he need before he went up against Floyd, though? He had championship level experience, like I said he went the 12 round distance 5 times, and was in there with some grizzled vets and an ATG in Shane Mosley. What more experience did he need?Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
When it comes to Floyd people say "oh all he did is fight old guys past their prime." In Canelo he beat a 23 year old guy in his physical prime who had a lot of experience and 25 plus pounds on Floyd on fight night, and that's not a great win?
If outboxing Canelo is so easy, how come Erislandy Lara couldn't? He's considered one of the greatest pure boxers in the sport, he's much bigger than Floyd, he's taller, he has a bigger reach, he has more power... yet he couldn't beat Canelo. Even if people think Lara deserved the nod, it was still a razor close fight. Floyd didn't edge Canelo, he dominated and embarrassed him.
1. What shortcomings Canelo displayed in that fight would you attribute to inexperience as opposed to the skill-level difference, and at what point would Canelo be "experienced" enough to fight Mayweather (how many years, how many fights, who would he have to fight, ect)?Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
2. "Also, I remember the Lara fight being extremely close and Canelo looking equally awkward and ineffective in that one, so I don't think that really makes ur point for u."
Yeah, if you re-read my post you'll see I acknowledged it was razor close. My point was that the much larger master boxer Lara was unable to cleanly outbox Canelo as Floyd did, so it illustrates my point quite well.
I am not a Floyd fan but considering his strategies and the climb from division to division and the fact that he did his homework and the champions he fought at this particular time his resume is good. The only thing that ruins a fighter's resume and style is that he is not what everyone expects him to be. I do not feel as though he is an all time great. He has done great things and that is the difference. He is always in reasonable shape when he is not in training and his personality at least 89% of the time sucks rotten eggs which has nothing to do with his abilities and so far unless his spending habits outside the ring fucks him and his accomplishments are forgotten his resume has good names. Has he ever had to fight hard? Ask Castillo, ask Cotto and for a few good round ask Maidana just as a couple of examples no one has easy nights all the time but face it you only have so many good opponents. The reason I shy away from ATG is the definition has left the term long ago because when someone is great, he has no comparison. Competition is what this is about and new methods to an old sport brought by the next so called ATG. I am not going to beat around the bush. I was in a classroom with a motivator once and he said, "When you think you have arrived look over your shoulder." I purposely left out a few words at the end because you guys are intelligent and you analyze it all the time Loyd's resume has to be looked at closer to appreciate it and he is good but I am not a fan but his fights interest me and his style is definitely one to be studied or he can cure your insomnia.
Tszyu, maybe Wright (he walked away from that fight) :(, Hopkins, Ward, Martinez at a stretchQuote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
It's not that he never fought ATG's, he never cleaned out divisions or dared to challenge himself :p Freitas, Casamayor at 130, Spadafora, Dorin at 135, Tszyu at 140, Spinks, Cotto, Margaritio, Williams, Pacquiao at 147 (when it mattered) :p, Martinez was creaming for a fight ;) just like Golovkin is now ;)
Mayweather can't be blamed for all those fights not happening but some have them should have :mad: when your the best fighter in the world you should seek the best challenges. Especially if you have the nerve to call yourself TBE :-X
Mayweather's refusal to challenge himself at 160 or above; when other great fighters who started out at lower weights than him have done so is all you need to know to see his claim to TBE is total bogus :-X
It's his own faults, he put that TBE cap on his head and made outrageous claims. If he hadn't of done that know one would give a sh-t. He is a great fighter just not TBE ;D
Floyd's career has been very carefully maneuvered :-X
Quote:
Originally Posted by La Cucaracha
Said it before, will say it again: Floyd did not come into the world of boxing holding all the cards.
For the vast majority of his career, he was an ultra talented guy with very little name value, who couldn't draw jack shit, which meant most fighters were not in a hurry to fight him. He didn't have the pull to make these guys fight him.
He called out the majority of the guys you mentioned. He called out a 154lb Oscar when he was fighting at 135 - Oscar turned it down, saying he had nothing to gain taking that fight. He called out Mosley at 135 - Shane chose instead to move up to 147 and fight Oscar for the big money. Can't blame Mosley for doing that, and can't blame Floyd for the fight not happening.
Little known fact as well: Floyd was scheduled to fight Spadafora at MSG but the New York Athletic Commission put the kibosh on that after Paul was charged with shooting his pregnant finance.
Like I said Floyd is not to blame for all those fights not happening, the Wright fight was all but signed then he wanted more money and bailed on Arum :( Floyd was going to jump from 140 to face Wright who had just beaten Trinidad at a catch weight of 154 ;) that would have been a fantastic move :D
The Cotto fight, he should have done everything to make that fight instead of retiring :-\ sure there is talk that Cotto didn't want it then but flash the right price and the fight gets made no doubt ;)
Pacquiao :-\ didn't want testing? F-ck him, most thought Floyd would have beaten him but they were the 2 best in the sport at the time. Fight him, beat him and the rest is history :)
Martinez, Ward and Golovkin made ridiculous offers to drop weight for an opportunity but Floyd need to secure victories over the Ortiz', Guerrero's and Berto's of the game :-X
No one is saying Floyd ain't great but some one should tell him to take that cap off his head cause the dude is just playing himself ;D All the money in the world won't change the fact that he will never be TBE :-X
A lot of people say that, but they never give any good reasons as to why that is.Quote:
Originally Posted by La Cucaracha
Given Floyd's skill set, ring intelligence and resume, I've never read a good reason as to why he's not at least in the discussion.
People talk about this fight and that fight that could have happened, but the reality is there's no champ in history who fought every tough fight he could have. Ray Robinson never fought Murder's Row and the many tough black fighters that had no connections and couldn't get past the smokers.
No matter what reason you are given, it will never be good enough. Those that rank him out of the top 5 or so do that because of quality of opposition and historical significance. Floyd hasn't beaten the prime HOFers that Ray Robinson did. He never had fights as significant to the WORLD as Ali did, and Ali put on GREAT performances/fights vs Frazier (x2) and Foreman. Floyd is extremely skilled and an ATG, no doubt. But his record doesn't translate to TBE or GOAT.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerA lot of people say that, but they never give any good reasons as to why that is.Quote:
Originally Posted by La Cucaracha
Given Floyd's skill set, ring intelligence and resume, I've never read a good reason as to why he's not at least in the discussion.
People talk about this fight and that fight that could have happened, but the reality is there's no champ in history who fought every tough fight he could have. Ray Robinson never fought Murder's Row and the many tough black fighters that had no connections and couldn't get past the smokers.
People give me reasons, but they are always pretty weak.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
First of all, the Ali example is pretty silly. Floyd has had some of the biggest fights in the history of boxing. The fights against Frazier and Foreman were so good because Ali took ferocious punishment (and paid the price for it after he retired). So being in close fights and taking a lot of damage makes you a great fighter? Someone needs to explain that to me. Would Floyd be a greater fighter if he laid on the ropes vs Hatton, took a ferocious pounding to the head and body, and came back to win? Or is he a better fighter because he took very little damage and finished with a great KO?
People are shitting on Floyd for choosing to fight Berto, but to be real, the majority of SRR's opponents couldn't hold Berto's jockstrap. And of course I'm not talking about guys like Lamotta, Armstrong, Zivic, ect. But if you look at the fights between the quality opponents, there is a TON of filler: guys that had no business being in the ring with one of the greatest fighters to ever live. And of course people will try to stick up for the competition and say things like "oh it was a different time, records weren't important, great fighters had bad records, ect". BULLSHIT. A 46-23 fighter coming off of 4 straight losses had no more business being in the ring with a champ than he would today.
And we talk about Floyd fighting guys past their primes, but we give credit to SRR for beating a guy like Henry Armstrong, who was in his mid 30s and 2 or 3 years removed from being a champion or even a contender. Or Frankie Zivic, who was also past his championship days and had been beaten by 26 other guys when he fought SRR.
But no, Pacquiao was old and stunk (even though he was top #3 p4p at the time), Mosley was old and stunk (even though he was top #3 p4p at the time), Hatton was garbage, Corrales was mediocre... those guys could never compare to a Frankie Zivic. How dare I even suggest that? After all, Zivic is in the Hall of Fame!
What a fuckin joke!
Robinson fought is a different era where they fought often in order to get paid. Today's fighters do not fight as often and with TV every fight will be watched.
I guess it was in the top 15 best wins being Hatton, Jlc, Chico and Oscar i think kinda lacks. Hatton will most likly be forgotten and resume is pretty easy to shred. Jlc damn near most people say he won the first fight Mayweater won the a close rematch then comes Oscar who was at the end of his career. I ll say top 15 because it can be torn apart the same way as most guys i would put in top 10. I mean if you look at a Leonard he has Duran,Hearns,Benitaz and Hagler the only one that did not do anything after is Hagler but till the fight was on biggest roll he has been on. Ali, Evander, Lennox, and Leonard i felt beat better guys the Mayweather put his resume with Jones few great wins and a lot of solid wins but not really many atg fighters after that were in there prime really.
If you can't look at Robinsons record and pick out the number of PRIME HOFers he beat, you don't want to see it. If you are going to sit there and pretend that Floyd vs Oscar and Manny, his two biggest events, were even close to the excitement or historical relevance of Ali vs Frazier (1&3) and Foreman, there is no point discussing the subject with you. Ali made boxing a global sport, and win or lose, people came away from those fights LOVING the sport of boxing and life long fans. You can't say the same for Floyd as both the Oscar and Manny fights turned people off. Not what ATGs do.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerPeople give me reasons, but they are always pretty weak.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
First of all, the Ali example is pretty silly. Floyd has had some of the biggest fights in the history of boxing. The fights against Frazier and Foreman were so good because Ali took ferocious punishment (and paid the price for it after he retired). So being in close fights and taking a lot of damage makes you a great fighter? Someone needs to explain that to me. Would Floyd be a greater fighter if he laid on the ropes vs Hatton, took a ferocious pounding to the head and body, and came back to win? Or is he a better fighter because he took very little damage and finished with a great KO?
People are shitting on Floyd for choosing to fight Berto, but to be real, the majority of SRR's opponents couldn't hold Berto's jockstrap. And of course I'm not talking about guys like Lamotta, Armstrong, Zivic, ect. But if you look at the fights between the quality opponents, there is a TON of filler: guys that had no business being in the ring with one of the greatest fighters to ever live. And of course people will try to stick up for the competition and say things like "oh it was a different time, records weren't important, great fighters had bad records, ect". BULLSHIT. A 46-23 fighter coming off of 4 straight losses had no more business being in the ring with a champ than he would today.
And we talk about Floyd fighting guys past their primes, but we give credit to SRR for beating a guy like Henry Armstrong, who was in his mid 30s and 2 or 3 years removed from being a champion or even a contender. Or Frankie Zivic, who was also past his championship days and had been beaten by 26 other guys when he fought SRR.
But no, Pacquiao was old and stunk (even though he was top #3 p4p at the time), Mosley was old and stunk (even though he was top #3 p4p at the time), Hatton was garbage, Corrales was mediocre... those guys could never compare to a Frankie Zivic. How dare I even suggest that? After all, Zivic is in the Hall of Fame!
What a fuckin joke!
Let's take Ray Leonard now. He beat a prime Hearns, Duran, Benitez, and the monster that was Hagler (I thought Marvin won but Ray got the decision n that was a bold move to even fight the guy). Name Floyd's equivalents to those fights/accomplishments.
You are correct when you say that not all of the missed fights falling through were Floyd's fault. Doesn't change the fact that he didn't beat that level of competition. I personally think Ricardo Lopez would've been top 10 ATG if he had the requisite comp at his weight class. He didn't, so he isn't.
I would argue that Manny fought tougher competition in his career, although not by that much. Oscar definitely fought better and tougher comp, but lost numerous times. Floyd is a top 15 or lower ATG fighter, which is phenomenal. I have home top ten, personally. But to say that he has a claim for GOAT, I just don't see a realistic case at all.
I thought I gave some good reasons :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerA lot of people say that, but they never give any good reasons as to why that is.Quote:
Originally Posted by La Cucaracha
Given Floyd's skill set, ring intelligence and resume, I've never read a good reason as to why he's not at least in the discussion.
People talk about this fight and that fight that could have happened, but the reality is there's no champ in history who fought every tough fight he could have. Ray Robinson never fought Murder's Row and the many tough black fighters that had no connections and couldn't get past the smokers.
Sure Floyd is an excellent fighter but he never really took a risk after leaving lightweight :( Martinez was the middleweight champ and said he would drop in weight, GGG even recently said he'd go to 154 for Floyd, you could also add Ward to that list ;)
Armstrong started at 126 and won the middleweight championship, Kid Gavilan, Jose Napoles and Duran started below feather and challenged themselves at 160 or higher ;) Mayweather doesn't have to go to 160 but those fights I mentioned were possible and Floyd was the superstar he is, so anything he said would have got done ;) if he wanted those fights you can bet your a$$ they would have got made :p
See how can I take someone seriously who says something like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by La Cucaracha
Never took a risk? :roll eyes:
It's incredible how jaded people become as fans when people can look at guys Floyd fought in the last 10 years and say there was no risk involved. My lord.
Worst thing Floyd ever did for hardcore/sensible fans is crown himself TBE. Ignoring the haters and flomos - all of a sudden a terrific record becomes a "yeah but" one.
When you consider things like Armstrong, Gavilan, Napoles and Duran started at a lighter weight than Floyd yet challenged for the middleweight title, then what's the big deal that Floyd won titles at several weights?
Why don't you enlighten me then? Tell me SRR's best wins, and tell me exactly why those guys are so above and beyond Floyd's best wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
I don't give a fuck about "excitement" and "historical significance". We're talking about a guy's worth in the ring. Were Floyd's fights as big as Ali's vs Frazier and Foreman? I have no idea, I wasn't alive back then and it was before the era of PPV. All I know is Mayweather/Pac sold 4.4 MILLION PPV's at $100 a piece, so it was a pretty big fight. Big as Ali's? Who knows, who gives a fuck. Why does it matter?
Ray Leonard had a great career, but when I bring up the NO MAS thing I was always told that Duran was passed his prime by then, as his prime was at LW.
You can take Hearns and say "prime Hearns", but you can also say "green Hearns", a 22 year old kid who didn't yet know how to pace himself and didn't know how to protect himself and survive when he was hurt.
Bringing up Hagler (which I still feel is one of the greatest victories in boxing history), Ray admitted himself that he decided to fight Hagler because, when having dinner with Hagler, Marvin (then mid 30s) confided in him that he was worn down and thinking about retiring. And of course, Ray demanded the special stipulation of 12 rounds instead of 15.
Now I consider all of those great wins, I'm just saying if you can poke holes in anything in you choose to scrutinize it that way. People choose to scrutinize Floyd's wins harshly, then give passes to whichever other greats he's compared to.
When you claim to be the best ever then you have to stand to some scrutiny.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerWhy don't you enlighten me then? Tell me SRR's best wins, and tell me exactly why those guys are so above and beyond Floyd's best wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
I don't give a fuck about "excitement" and "historical significance". We're talking about a guy's worth in the ring. Were Floyd's fights as big as Ali's vs Frazier and Foreman? I have no idea, I wasn't alive back then and it was before the era of PPV. All I know is Mayweather/Pac sold 4.4 MILLION PPV's at $100 a piece, so it was a pretty big fight. Big as Ali's? Who knows, who gives a fuck. Why does it matter?
Ray Leonard had a great career, but when I bring up the NO MAS thing I was always told that Duran was passed his prime by then, as his prime was at LW.
You can take Hearns and say "prime Hearns", but you can also say "green Hearns", a 22 year old kid who didn't yet know how to pace himself and didn't know how to protect himself and survive when he was hurt.
Bringing up Hagler (which I still feel is one of the greatest victories in boxing history), Ray admitted himself that he decided to fight Hagler because, when having dinner with Hagler, Marvin (then mid 30s) confided in him that he was worn down and thinking about retiring. And of course, Ray demanded the special stipulation of 12 rounds instead of 15.
Now I consider all of those great wins, I'm just saying if you can poke holes in anything in you choose to scrutinize it that way. People choose to scrutinize Floyd's wins harshly, then give passes to whichever other greats he's compared to.