Did Floyd cherry-pick, or was he just so good that he made his opponents look bad? Or both?
Printable View
Did Floyd cherry-pick, or was he just so good that he made his opponents look bad? Or both?
Floyd was good at the lower weights when he was pretty boy. He missed some good boxers like Frietas/Casamajor but who he fought were just as good Corrales. Missed out big legacy fights against Kostya and Hatton at light welterweight.
At welterweight he annoyed me by not taking on Margarito/Williams but chose Baldimor and Judah.
Made his money fights against Oscar, Manny Pac (way too late) and McGregor.
So Floyd was OK. Not TBE.
It would be hard for anybody in history to beat Floyd Mayweather. Not saying they couldn't do it, but it would be a monumental task. And I mean monumental
To give you an idea, people said he was better at the lighter weights, which makes sense. Younger, faster etcetera. But even at 147, coming out of retirement the P4P list had
1-Pac
2-JMM
3-Mosley
He fought them all AFTER COMING OUT OF RETIREMENT. And another fighter that was number 1 P4P for years in Canelo. This is his not as good portion of his career in many minds
To give you a comparison so you can understand how unfairly people look at his career. The great Monster Inoue is looked at as having a sterling CV and his best opponent is (by boxeoguide) number 32 pound for pound.
I can pull up people that absolutely hate him, like Oscar Delahoya for example saying “you have to look at what he’s done, he might be the best ever”.
I’m not saying he is, but Diego Corrales was a killing machine when Floyd fought him, and made him look easy. When doing his “after coming out of retirement” bit I left off HOF fighters! That’s how great he was
He was so good people still talk about a sparring session he lost, his first day back in the gym against a fight ready fighter. A fricking sparring session, 1!
floyd was very good but his record has glaring holes & some of his wins look better on paper than in reality
Floyd took off time many times in his career even in the early days and these retirements should not mean he was better than he really was. They may have been managerial and promotional related but taking on a blown up welterweight in JMM and not bothering to make weight shows his class.
Technically excellent and best defensive fighter ever.
Never took any risks with opponents. That's not to say they weren't decent opponents though.
Floyd varies opinions like no other boxer. And I’m not saying he was TBE. But he has every right to put his name up for it.
Look at his career and tell me a fight he didn’t win COMFORTABLY. Yes he had a moment in the Moseley fight, yes Maidana made a nuisance of himself with him. But I don’t think there was a fight where he got a decision he shouldn’t have got.
So with all that in mind, there was probably more left in the tank.
Btw, people say that future P4Per Canelo was a boy when they fought, but he was a 23 year old with over 40 fights under his belt. And Floyd was 37 ffs! Who else does what he does at 37?
Deserves respect even by the haters.
In my opinion, Floyd was great. He was that rare athlete who was naturally gifted but also an extremely hard worker who had phenomenal skills and ring IQ. I’m not sure if you were asking how “good” his skills were or how “good” his career was, but for me the answer to both is “great”.
Floyd started at 130 and was not a big man (Chico Corrales was much larger at 130), yet he went up and won vs elite 147/154 pounders. He was able to accomplish this through speed, stamina, and because he was so much better/ more skilled over everyone else. Starting with his career, he had some great wins over Chico (unified a portion of the belts and cleaned out 130 since Freitas and Casamayor weren’t in a rush to fight him), won the lineal title at 135 from a very tough/formidable Jose Luis Castillo, stopped the undefeated Ricky Hatton, and beat Oscar, Shane, Canelo, and Manny. I don’t hold his lack of knockouts at the higher weights against Floyd, I feel he was like Sweet Pea Whitaker in that he moved up way past his ideal weight and still dominated but didn’t have the pop to knock the much larger men out.
As great as Floyd’s career was, I feel his skills inside the ring were even more impressive. Watch his fights vs Chico and Hatton and try and name one thing Floyd didn’t do masterfully. Great jab. Great footwork. Great counters. Great work to the body. Great defense (multi-layered with head movement, slipping, parrying, blocking…etc.). Good punching power. Great footwork. Fighting inside and outside, off the ropes and center of the ring, and dictating pace, distance, and location of the fight. Boxing IQ that allowed him to make adjustments and completely take over competitive fights.
I can see the arguments against Floyd. While I don’t agree with them, I can see how people have come to those perspectives, especially considering the emotional reaction to the Money Maywesther/TBE schtick he moved to later in his career. I think Floyd was very much like Ali and Ric Flair in that he understood the heel/bad guy creates more passion and therefore sells more tickets. Floyd was a great fighter, was a great promoter ( of himself), and is a successful businessman.
What if Floyd fought and beat Casamayor and Freitas at 130, Dorin and Spadafora at 135, Hatton at 140, prime Pacquiao in 2011, Bradley in 2012, and Canelo without a catchweight in 2013?
Where would he rank all-time? Top 10? Even beating prime Pacquiao and Canelo without a catchweight would dramatically increase his ATG standing. I think doing all of the above would give him the best resume since SRL.
He was that good. Why do we have to ask this question? What more do we need? He beat everyone put in front of him. I knew he was special when he beat Corrales...Quote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
I think the prime PAC fight would have helped push his case higher. Floyd beat Hatton at 147 but they were the same size and that is the exact fight it would’ve been at 140, so he gets full credit for that one in my book. Freitas and Casamayor would have been good wins- but both of those guys were around Corrales’s level and wouldn’t have added much at all. Dorrin and Paul Spadafora were average fighters on the level of Angel Manfredy, Jesus Chavez, Famoso Hernandez…etc., they become footnotes like the others Floyd beat at their level. I would’ve liked to have seen the Bradley fight but again, what could he have done against Floyd to win? It would have been interesting but Floyd was levels better.Quote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
I can see a case for ranking Floyd in the top 10 of ATGs. Difficult for me personally to rank him over Ali, Robinson, Armstrong, Leonard…etc., but he accomplished so much that I can’t see how he couldn’t be top 15.
I can't see Bradley beating Floyd, or even having any real success. Everything Bradley does well, Floyd does better.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI think the prime PAC fight would have helped push his case higher. Floyd beat Hatton at 147 but they were the same size and that is the exact fight it would’ve been at 140, so he gets full credit for that one in my book. Freitas and Casamayor would have been good wins- but both of those guys were around Corrales’s level and wouldn’t have added much at all. Dorrin and Paul Spadafora were average fighters on the level of Angel Manfredy, Jesus Chavez, Famoso Hernandez…etc., they become footnotes like the others Floyd beat at their level. I would’ve liked to have seen the Bradley fight but again, what could he have done against Floyd to win? It would have been interesting but Floyd was levels better.Quote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
I can see a case for ranking Floyd in the top 10 of ATGs. Difficult for me personally to rank him over Ali, Robinson, Armstrong, Leonard…etc., but he accomplished so much that I can’t see how he couldn’t be top 15.
And it's telling that Spadafora is more known for giving Floyd trouble in sparring than for anything he did in his pro career. He went life and death with Sosa and Dorin. Floyd gets criticized for "ducking" Spadafora, but I don't think anyone would realistically pick Spadafora to beat him. I doubt even Spadafora himself believes he would have beaten Floyd.
jose luis castillo one? i give floyd huge respect for the immediate rematch with el temible. floyd could have probably beaten anyone on his night, the jose luis rematch for example but i can't give him credit for fights he never fought. for me after jose luis there was never a challenge that was close to fifty fifty going inQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo Carnera
I thought Castillo won the first fight. I give Floyd a ton of credit for the immediate rematch as well. I feel like the Mosley fight and Hatton fight were both 50/50. Mosley was coming off the destruction or Margo and ranked #3 p4p. Hatton was unified champ at 140, undefeated, and ranked p4p. Those were good wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICjose luis castillo one? i give floyd huge respect for the immediate rematch with el temible. floyd could have probably beaten anyone on his night, the jose luis rematch for example but i can't give him credit for fights he never fought. for me after jose luis there was never a challenge that was close to fifty fifty going inQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo Carnera
There really weren’t many threats to Floyd who stayed relevant long enough to hype the fight. Judah had hype after destroying Spinks, but then lost to Baldomir. Margo had hype and lost to Paul Williams and then was blown out by Shane. Paul Williams had hype and then lost to Quintana and Martinez. Manny was the one available prime fighter he never fought. Full disclosure, I’m team Manny, but even with tHat I don’t think Floyd ducked Manny. I feel like both fighters negotiated themselVes out of the biggest fight of their generation. It was past its sell by date when THEY got back around to it.
shane was years removed from his days at one thirty five, yes he did have the win over antonio but personally i think the miguel cotto fight took more out of antonio than is realized. rivky was champion at one forty & technically undefeated but had already been shown up at welter by luis collazo. those were good wins but not close to fifty fifty in my opinion. there were threats but the fights never came to fruition for whatever reasons. joel & acelino would have been better than jesus & carlos. paul & leonard would have been better than victoriano & phillip. kostya would have been better than anyone floyd fought at one forty & floyd should have fought miguel or antonio instead of retiring & leaving them to fight each other. there was also winky where a deal was in place but floyd pulled out & sergio at one sixty for the middleweight championship. don't get me wrong floyd probably beats them all but i can't give floyd credit for fights he didn't fight. floyd had the ability to actually be tbe but unfortunately he missed the opportunities to do so in the ringQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI thought Castillo won the first fight. I give Floyd a ton of credit for the immediate rematch as well. I feel like the Mosley fight and Hatton fight were both 50/50. Mosley was coming off the destruction or Margo and ranked #3 p4p. Hatton was unified champ at 140, undefeated, and ranked p4p. Those were good wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICjose luis castillo one? i give floyd huge respect for the immediate rematch with el temible. floyd could have probably beaten anyone on his night, the jose luis rematch for example but i can't give him credit for fights he never fought. for me after jose luis there was never a challenge that was close to fifty fifty going inQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo Carnera
There really weren’t many threats to Floyd who stayed relevant long enough to hype the fight. Judah had hype after destroying Spinks, but then lost to Baldomir. Margo had hype and lost to Paul Williams and then was blown out by Shane. Paul Williams had hype and then lost to Quintana and Martinez. Manny was the one available prime fighter he never fought. Full disclosure, I’m team Manny, but even with tHat I don’t think Floyd ducked Manny. I feel like both fighters negotiated themselVes out of the biggest fight of their generation. It was past its sell by date when THEY got back around to it.
Appreciate your opinions on this but the last part really gets me. The fight was agreed. And Manny backed out. For people to then blame both sides is again simply not fair to Floyd.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI thought Castillo won the first fight. I give Floyd a ton of credit for the immediate rematch as well. I feel like the Mosley fight and Hatton fight were both 50/50. Mosley was coming off the destruction or Margo and ranked #3 p4p. Hatton was unified champ at 140, undefeated, and ranked p4p. Those were good wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICjose luis castillo one? i give floyd huge respect for the immediate rematch with el temible. floyd could have probably beaten anyone on his night, the jose luis rematch for example but i can't give him credit for fights he never fought. for me after jose luis there was never a challenge that was close to fifty fifty going inQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo Carnera
There really weren’t many threats to Floyd who stayed relevant long enough to hype the fight. Judah had hype after destroying Spinks, but then lost to Baldomir. Margo had hype and lost to Paul Williams and then was blown out by Shane. Paul Williams had hype and then lost to Quintana and Martinez. Manny was the one available prime fighter he never fought. Full disclosure, I’m team Manny, but even with tHat I don’t think Floyd ducked Manny. I feel like both fighters negotiated themselVes out of the biggest fight of their generation. It was past its sell by date when THEY got back around to it.
That fight was never going to trouble Floyd, he had better legs in 2010 to better set Manny up and he was always going to set Manny up. But that is opinion. The fight didn’t happen in March of 2011 because Manny backed out, that is fact.
You’re supposed to judge fighters on who they did fight. In 20 years as a pro and 5 weight divisions of course you can’t fight everyoneQuote:
Originally Posted by TICshane was years removed from his days at one thirty five, yes he did have the win over antonio but personally i think the miguel cotto fight took more out of antonio than is realized. rivky was champion at one forty & technically undefeated but had already been shown up at welter by luis collazo. those were good wins but not close to fifty fifty in my opinion. there were threats but the fights never came to fruition for whatever reasons. joel & acelino would have been better than jesus & carlos. paul & leonard would have been better than victoriano & phillip. kostya would have been better than anyone floyd fought at one forty & floyd should have fought miguel or antonio instead of retiring & leaving them to fight each other. there was also winky where a deal was in place but floyd pulled out & sergio at one sixty for the middleweight championship. don't get me wrong floyd probably beats them all but i can't give floyd credit for fights he didn't fight. floyd had the ability to actually be tbe but unfortunately he missed the opportunities to do so in the ringQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI thought Castillo won the first fight. I give Floyd a ton of credit for the immediate rematch as well. I feel like the Mosley fight and Hatton fight were both 50/50. Mosley was coming off the destruction or Margo and ranked #3 p4p. Hatton was unified champ at 140, undefeated, and ranked p4p. Those were good wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICjose luis castillo one? i give floyd huge respect for the immediate rematch with el temible. floyd could have probably beaten anyone on his night, the jose luis rematch for example but i can't give him credit for fights he never fought. for me after jose luis there was never a challenge that was close to fifty fifty going inQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo Carnera
There really weren’t many threats to Floyd who stayed relevant long enough to hype the fight. Judah had hype after destroying Spinks, but then lost to Baldomir. Margo had hype and lost to Paul Williams and then was blown out by Shane. Paul Williams had hype and then lost to Quintana and Martinez. Manny was the one available prime fighter he never fought. Full disclosure, I’m team Manny, but even with tHat I don’t think Floyd ducked Manny. I feel like both fighters negotiated themselVes out of the biggest fight of their generation. It was past its sell by date when THEY got back around to it.
i am judging floyd on what he did in the ring. i never said he had to fight everyone, just listed potential threats to floyd is response to the previous postQuote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonYou’re supposed to judge fighters on who they did fight. In 20 years as a pro and 5 weight divisions of course you can’t fight everyoneQuote:
Originally Posted by TICshane was years removed from his days at one thirty five, yes he did have the win over antonio but personally i think the miguel cotto fight took more out of antonio than is realized. rivky was champion at one forty & technically undefeated but had already been shown up at welter by luis collazo. those were good wins but not close to fifty fifty in my opinion. there were threats but the fights never came to fruition for whatever reasons. joel & acelino would have been better than jesus & carlos. paul & leonard would have been better than victoriano & phillip. kostya would have been better than anyone floyd fought at one forty & floyd should have fought miguel or antonio instead of retiring & leaving them to fight each other. there was also winky where a deal was in place but floyd pulled out & sergio at one sixty for the middleweight championship. don't get me wrong floyd probably beats them all but i can't give floyd credit for fights he didn't fight. floyd had the ability to actually be tbe but unfortunately he missed the opportunities to do so in the ringQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI thought Castillo won the first fight. I give Floyd a ton of credit for the immediate rematch as well. I feel like the Mosley fight and Hatton fight were both 50/50. Mosley was coming off the destruction or Margo and ranked #3 p4p. Hatton was unified champ at 140, undefeated, and ranked p4p. Those were good wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICjose luis castillo one? i give floyd huge respect for the immediate rematch with el temible. floyd could have probably beaten anyone on his night, the jose luis rematch for example but i can't give him credit for fights he never fought. for me after jose luis there was never a challenge that was close to fifty fifty going inQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo Carnera
There really weren’t many threats to Floyd who stayed relevant long enough to hype the fight. Judah had hype after destroying Spinks, but then lost to Baldomir. Margo had hype and lost to Paul Williams and then was blown out by Shane. Paul Williams had hype and then lost to Quintana and Martinez. Manny was the one available prime fighter he never fought. Full disclosure, I’m team Manny, but even with tHat I don’t think Floyd ducked Manny. I feel like both fighters negotiated themselVes out of the biggest fight of their generation. It was past its sell by date when THEY got back around to it.
Floyd was running round in circles but if he stood and fight, toe to toe, he gets knocked out old
When you compare the ATG you have to look at what they did not do but should have done to separate them. Floyd has gaps and does not compare to the true greats.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICi am judging floyd on what he did in the ring. i never said he had to fight everyone, just listed potential threats to floyd is response to the previous postQuote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonYou’re supposed to judge fighters on who they did fight. In 20 years as a pro and 5 weight divisions of course you can’t fight everyoneQuote:
Originally Posted by TICshane was years removed from his days at one thirty five, yes he did have the win over antonio but personally i think the miguel cotto fight took more out of antonio than is realized. rivky was champion at one forty & technically undefeated but had already been shown up at welter by luis collazo. those were good wins but not close to fifty fifty in my opinion. there were threats but the fights never came to fruition for whatever reasons. joel & acelino would have been better than jesus & carlos. paul & leonard would have been better than victoriano & phillip. kostya would have been better than anyone floyd fought at one forty & floyd should have fought miguel or antonio instead of retiring & leaving them to fight each other. there was also winky where a deal was in place but floyd pulled out & sergio at one sixty for the middleweight championship. don't get me wrong floyd probably beats them all but i can't give floyd credit for fights he didn't fight. floyd had the ability to actually be tbe but unfortunately he missed the opportunities to do so in the ringQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI thought Castillo won the first fight. I give Floyd a ton of credit for the immediate rematch as well. I feel like the Mosley fight and Hatton fight were both 50/50. Mosley was coming off the destruction or Margo and ranked #3 p4p. Hatton was unified champ at 140, undefeated, and ranked p4p. Those were good wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICjose luis castillo one? i give floyd huge respect for the immediate rematch with el temible. floyd could have probably beaten anyone on his night, the jose luis rematch for example but i can't give him credit for fights he never fought. for me after jose luis there was never a challenge that was close to fifty fifty going inQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo Carnera
There really weren’t many threats to Floyd who stayed relevant long enough to hype the fight. Judah had hype after destroying Spinks, but then lost to Baldomir. Margo had hype and lost to Paul Williams and then was blown out by Shane. Paul Williams had hype and then lost to Quintana and Martinez. Manny was the one available prime fighter he never fought. Full disclosure, I’m team Manny, but even with tHat I don’t think Floyd ducked Manny. I feel like both fighters negotiated themselVes out of the biggest fight of their generation. It was past its sell by date when THEY got back around to it.
The goal of boxing is to hit and not get hit, and perhaps no other fighter better understood this than Floyd.
Sweat Pea did it better.Quote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
Well if that is the case, dare I suggest it’s pretty smart not to fight toe to toe? Or should he just get knocked out to please you. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by NoSavingByTheBell
Yes he was extremely smart. I said very clearly that nobody in history would have an easy time beating him at his weights. Just pointing out that he was lacking that aspect which rounded out great fighters like Henry Armstrong and sugar Ray Robinson who could run around in circles but then also slug it out unlike Floyd, but by no means should he stand there and get knocked out just because I want him to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraWell if that is the case, dare I suggest it’s pretty smart not to fight toe to toe? Or should he just get knocked out to please you. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by NoSavingByTheBell
What a convenient way to be completely biased. He didn’t fight Henley Hinckley and I think Henley Hinkler would have beat him so I will mark him down. It’s nonsense. You judge on what they did do, the only thing that isn’t opinion. But facts, what happened doesn’t suit your narrative so go ahead with your fallacy. Can’t prove a negative so you win right? Flying Spaghetti Monster logicQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterWhen you compare the ATG you have to look at what they did not do but should have done to separate them. Floyd has gaps and does not compare to the true greats.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICi am judging floyd on what he did in the ring. i never said he had to fight everyone, just listed potential threats to floyd is response to the previous postQuote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonYou’re supposed to judge fighters on who they did fight. In 20 years as a pro and 5 weight divisions of course you can’t fight everyoneQuote:
Originally Posted by TICshane was years removed from his days at one thirty five, yes he did have the win over antonio but personally i think the miguel cotto fight took more out of antonio than is realized. rivky was champion at one forty & technically undefeated but had already been shown up at welter by luis collazo. those were good wins but not close to fifty fifty in my opinion. there were threats but the fights never came to fruition for whatever reasons. joel & acelino would have been better than jesus & carlos. paul & leonard would have been better than victoriano & phillip. kostya would have been better than anyone floyd fought at one forty & floyd should have fought miguel or antonio instead of retiring & leaving them to fight each other. there was also winky where a deal was in place but floyd pulled out & sergio at one sixty for the middleweight championship. don't get me wrong floyd probably beats them all but i can't give floyd credit for fights he didn't fight. floyd had the ability to actually be tbe but unfortunately he missed the opportunities to do so in the ringQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI thought Castillo won the first fight. I give Floyd a ton of credit for the immediate rematch as well. I feel like the Mosley fight and Hatton fight were both 50/50. Mosley was coming off the destruction or Margo and ranked #3 p4p. Hatton was unified champ at 140, undefeated, and ranked p4p. Those were good wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICjose luis castillo one? i give floyd huge respect for the immediate rematch with el temible. floyd could have probably beaten anyone on his night, the jose luis rematch for example but i can't give him credit for fights he never fought. for me after jose luis there was never a challenge that was close to fifty fifty going inQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo Carnera
There really weren’t many threats to Floyd who stayed relevant long enough to hype the fight. Judah had hype after destroying Spinks, but then lost to Baldomir. Margo had hype and lost to Paul Williams and then was blown out by Shane. Paul Williams had hype and then lost to Quintana and Martinez. Manny was the one available prime fighter he never fought. Full disclosure, I’m team Manny, but even with tHat I don’t think Floyd ducked Manny. I feel like both fighters negotiated themselVes out of the biggest fight of their generation. It was past its sell by date when THEY got back around to it.
When you are comparing the ATG you have to separate them and that is one factor you use in the discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonWhat a convenient way to be completely biased. He didn’t fight Henley Hinckley and I think Henley Hinkler would have beat him so I will mark him down. It’s nonsense. You judge on what they did do, the only thing that isn’t opinion. But facts, what happened doesn’t suit your narrative so go ahead with your fallacy. Can’t prove a negative so you win right? Flying Spaghetti Monster logicQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterWhen you compare the ATG you have to look at what they did not do but should have done to separate them. Floyd has gaps and does not compare to the true greats.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICi am judging floyd on what he did in the ring. i never said he had to fight everyone, just listed potential threats to floyd is response to the previous postQuote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonYou’re supposed to judge fighters on who they did fight. In 20 years as a pro and 5 weight divisions of course you can’t fight everyoneQuote:
Originally Posted by TICshane was years removed from his days at one thirty five, yes he did have the win over antonio but personally i think the miguel cotto fight took more out of antonio than is realized. rivky was champion at one forty & technically undefeated but had already been shown up at welter by luis collazo. those were good wins but not close to fifty fifty in my opinion. there were threats but the fights never came to fruition for whatever reasons. joel & acelino would have been better than jesus & carlos. paul & leonard would have been better than victoriano & phillip. kostya would have been better than anyone floyd fought at one forty & floyd should have fought miguel or antonio instead of retiring & leaving them to fight each other. there was also winky where a deal was in place but floyd pulled out & sergio at one sixty for the middleweight championship. don't get me wrong floyd probably beats them all but i can't give floyd credit for fights he didn't fight. floyd had the ability to actually be tbe but unfortunately he missed the opportunities to do so in the ringQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI thought Castillo won the first fight. I give Floyd a ton of credit for the immediate rematch as well. I feel like the Mosley fight and Hatton fight were both 50/50. Mosley was coming off the destruction or Margo and ranked #3 p4p. Hatton was unified champ at 140, undefeated, and ranked p4p. Those were good wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICjose luis castillo one? i give floyd huge respect for the immediate rematch with el temible. floyd could have probably beaten anyone on his night, the jose luis rematch for example but i can't give him credit for fights he never fought. for me after jose luis there was never a challenge that was close to fifty fifty going inQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo Carnera
There really weren’t many threats to Floyd who stayed relevant long enough to hype the fight. Judah had hype after destroying Spinks, but then lost to Baldomir. Margo had hype and lost to Paul Williams and then was blown out by Shane. Paul Williams had hype and then lost to Quintana and Martinez. Manny was the one available prime fighter he never fought. Full disclosure, I’m team Manny, but even with tHat I don’t think Floyd ducked Manny. I feel like both fighters negotiated themselVes out of the biggest fight of their generation. It was past its sell by date when THEY got back around to it.
Try this for separating ATG’sQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterWhen you are comparing the ATG you have to separate them and that is one factor you use in the discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonWhat a convenient way to be completely biased. He didn’t fight Henley Hinckley and I think Henley Hinkler would have beat him so I will mark him down. It’s nonsense. You judge on what they did do, the only thing that isn’t opinion. But facts, what happened doesn’t suit your narrative so go ahead with your fallacy. Can’t prove a negative so you win right? Flying Spaghetti Monster logicQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterWhen you compare the ATG you have to look at what they did not do but should have done to separate them. Floyd has gaps and does not compare to the true greats.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICi am judging floyd on what he did in the ring. i never said he had to fight everyone, just listed potential threats to floyd is response to the previous postQuote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonYou’re supposed to judge fighters on who they did fight. In 20 years as a pro and 5 weight divisions of course you can’t fight everyoneQuote:
Originally Posted by TICshane was years removed from his days at one thirty five, yes he did have the win over antonio but personally i think the miguel cotto fight took more out of antonio than is realized. rivky was champion at one forty & technically undefeated but had already been shown up at welter by luis collazo. those were good wins but not close to fifty fifty in my opinion. there were threats but the fights never came to fruition for whatever reasons. joel & acelino would have been better than jesus & carlos. paul & leonard would have been better than victoriano & phillip. kostya would have been better than anyone floyd fought at one forty & floyd should have fought miguel or antonio instead of retiring & leaving them to fight each other. there was also winky where a deal was in place but floyd pulled out & sergio at one sixty for the middleweight championship. don't get me wrong floyd probably beats them all but i can't give floyd credit for fights he didn't fight. floyd had the ability to actually be tbe but unfortunately he missed the opportunities to do so in the ringQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI thought Castillo won the first fight. I give Floyd a ton of credit for the immediate rematch as well. I feel like the Mosley fight and Hatton fight were both 50/50. Mosley was coming off the destruction or Margo and ranked #3 p4p. Hatton was unified champ at 140, undefeated, and ranked p4p. Those were good wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICjose luis castillo one? i give floyd huge respect for the immediate rematch with el temible. floyd could have probably beaten anyone on his night, the jose luis rematch for example but i can't give him credit for fights he never fought. for me after jose luis there was never a challenge that was close to fifty fifty going inQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo Carnera
There really weren’t many threats to Floyd who stayed relevant long enough to hype the fight. Judah had hype after destroying Spinks, but then lost to Baldomir. Margo had hype and lost to Paul Williams and then was blown out by Shane. Paul Williams had hype and then lost to Quintana and Martinez. Manny was the one available prime fighter he never fought. Full disclosure, I’m team Manny, but even with tHat I don’t think Floyd ducked Manny. I feel like both fighters negotiated themselVes out of the biggest fight of their generation. It was past its sell by date when THEY got back around to it.
1. A 37 year old beating a 23 year old 43-0 world champion heavier than him , who would go on to be P4P #1.
OR
2. A 34 year old getting beat by an ex LHW , with 7 pro fights and a 6-0-1 record due to a draw with Scott Le Doux in a 10 rounder.
So there you have it, one can use whatever bullshit they like to prove their point , but it never tells the whole story.
A boxer in their 30’s in 1970’s was older in “boxing terms” than those in Floyd's era. Ali had much more fights and the competition greater.
Not true. Yes , Ali had more fights. No, the competition wasn’t necessarily greater. And Spinks was in his 8th pro fight! I suppose that “in the 70’s” that meant he was a seasoned pro nowadays? Keep spinning how you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I never said Floyd was above Ali. But I did say Floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there.
Why do you need to constantly, irrationally disrespect Floyd’s record?
What I said about Floyd's record is true but yes I do not like him at all. He claims he is TBE and he is not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNot true. Yes , Ali had more fights. No, the competition wasn’t necessarily greater. And Spinks was in his 8th pro fight! I suppose that “in the 70’s” that meant he was a seasoned pro nowadays? Keep spinning how you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I never said Floyd was above Ali. But I did say Floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there.
Why do you need to constantly, irrationally disrespect Floyd’s record?
i'm just commenting on the floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there part. anyone can say & think what they want, however that doesn't automatically make it true. i have said in this thread that floyd probably beats anyone around his weights on his night. i don't rate fighters on probably so i can only rate him on what he actually did in the ring. for me i don't think he had a true fifty fifty challenge or a fight where he was the underdog after the jose luis castillo rematch. floyd can say he's up there & i'd agree that he is an all time great, although i'd struggle to put him among my top twenty all time greats, he might squeeze into my top thirtyQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNot true. Yes , Ali had more fights. No, the competition wasn’t necessarily greater. And Spinks was in his 8th pro fight! I suppose that “in the 70’s” that meant he was a seasoned pro nowadays? Keep spinning how you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I never said Floyd was above Ali. But I did say Floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there.
Why do you need to constantly, irrationally disrespect Floyd’s record?
Not arguing or poking holes in your statement, genuinely interested to hear who the 20-29 fighters you would rank ahead of Floyd, and what weighted criteria you use to come up with your rankings. I have a difficult time justifying Keeping Floyd out of my top 15, and I can see a solid case for top 10. In my opinion, Ali, Robinson, Leonard, Duran…etc., best better competition so they are ranked higher on my ATG list. I see rankings with Salvadore Sanchez, Roy Jones jr., Carlos Monzon, Marvin Hagler…etc., ranked higher, but I feel like Floyd either beat better competition or dominated more weight classes so I can’t rank them higher. Joe Louis and Ali had the greater historical impact, so I tend to rank them higher. For me ATG is based on historical impact, quality of competition, won/loss, intangibles, weight classes dominated, length of time at the top, and blowout losses during prime (Lennox Lewis is hurt on my list due to this criteria). Interested in what you weight and how you weight the categories.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICi'm just commenting on the floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there part. anyone can say & think what they want, however that doesn't automatically make it true. i have said in this thread that floyd probably beats anyone around his weights on his night. i don't rate fighters on probably so i can only rate him on what he actually did in the ring. for me i don't think he had a true fifty fifty challenge or a fight where he was the underdog after the jose luis castillo rematch. floyd can say he's up there & i'd agree that he is an all time great, although i'd struggle to put him among my top twenty all time greats, he might squeeze into my top thirtyQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNot true. Yes , Ali had more fights. No, the competition wasn’t necessarily greater. And Spinks was in his 8th pro fight! I suppose that “in the 70’s” that meant he was a seasoned pro nowadays? Keep spinning how you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I never said Floyd was above Ali. But I did say Floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there.
Why do you need to constantly, irrationally disrespect Floyd’s record?
these type of lists are subjective so there is no need to argue. weight classes dominated can depend on the era, i don't fault someone like marvin hagler for remaining at one sixty. i like quality of opposition, longevity, how they won or lost, historical impact can also be incorporated with my own preferences & favourites. here's a list of twenty guys in no real order that i'd put before floyd. ray robinson, henry Armstrong, muhammad ali, joe louis, willie pep, harry greb, ezzard charles, benny leonard, roberto duran, ray leonard, pernell whitaker, sam Langford, joe gans, jimmy wild, rocky marciano, archie moore, mickey walker, stanley Ketchel, carlos monzon, julio cesar chavez. i could list more, guys like ike williams, emile griffith, carlos ortiz, sandy saddler, i'm probably forgetting a few. i think i'd even have evander holyfield & bernard hopkins ahead of floydQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodNot arguing or poking holes in your statement, genuinely interested to hear who the 20-29 fighters you would rank ahead of Floyd, and what weighted criteria you use to come up with your rankings. I have a difficult time justifying Keeping Floyd out of my top 15, and I can see a solid case for top 10. In my opinion, Ali, Robinson, Leonard, Duran…etc., best better competition so they are ranked higher on my ATG list. I see rankings with Salvadore Sanchez, Roy Jones jr., Carlos Monzon, Marvin Hagler…etc., ranked higher, but I feel like Floyd either beat better competition or dominated more weight classes so I can’t rank them higher. Joe Louis and Ali had the greater historical impact, so I tend to rank them higher. For me ATG is based on historical impact, quality of competition, won/loss, intangibles, weight classes dominated, length of time at the top, and blowout losses during prime (Lennox Lewis is hurt on my list due to this criteria). Interested in what you weight and how you weight the categories.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICi'm just commenting on the floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there part. anyone can say & think what they want, however that doesn't automatically make it true. i have said in this thread that floyd probably beats anyone around his weights on his night. i don't rate fighters on probably so i can only rate him on what he actually did in the ring. for me i don't think he had a true fifty fifty challenge or a fight where he was the underdog after the jose luis castillo rematch. floyd can say he's up there & i'd agree that he is an all time great, although i'd struggle to put him among my top twenty all time greats, he might squeeze into my top thirtyQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNot true. Yes , Ali had more fights. No, the competition wasn’t necessarily greater. And Spinks was in his 8th pro fight! I suppose that “in the 70’s” that meant he was a seasoned pro nowadays? Keep spinning how you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I never said Floyd was above Ali. But I did say Floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there.
Why do you need to constantly, irrationally disrespect Floyd’s record?
Normally respect your views but Roy Jones should be higher than Floyd.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodNot arguing or poking holes in your statement, genuinely interested to hear who the 20-29 fighters you would rank ahead of Floyd, and what weighted criteria you use to come up with your rankings. I have a difficult time justifying Keeping Floyd out of my top 15, and I can see a solid case for top 10. In my opinion, Ali, Robinson, Leonard, Duran…etc., best better competition so they are ranked higher on my ATG list. I see rankings with Salvadore Sanchez, Roy Jones jr., Carlos Monzon, Marvin Hagler…etc., ranked higher, but I feel like Floyd either beat better competition or dominated more weight classes so I can’t rank them higher. Joe Louis and Ali had the greater historical impact, so I tend to rank them higher. For me ATG is based on historical impact, quality of competition, won/loss, intangibles, weight classes dominated, length of time at the top, and blowout losses during prime (Lennox Lewis is hurt on my list due to this criteria). Interested in what you weight and how you weight the categories.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICi'm just commenting on the floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there part. anyone can say & think what they want, however that doesn't automatically make it true. i have said in this thread that floyd probably beats anyone around his weights on his night. i don't rate fighters on probably so i can only rate him on what he actually did in the ring. for me i don't think he had a true fifty fifty challenge or a fight where he was the underdog after the jose luis castillo rematch. floyd can say he's up there & i'd agree that he is an all time great, although i'd struggle to put him among my top twenty all time greats, he might squeeze into my top thirtyQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNot true. Yes , Ali had more fights. No, the competition wasn’t necessarily greater. And Spinks was in his 8th pro fight! I suppose that “in the 70’s” that meant he was a seasoned pro nowadays? Keep spinning how you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I never said Floyd was above Ali. But I did say Floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there.
Why do you need to constantly, irrationally disrespect Floyd’s record?
I can see the case for Roy being ranked higher, and at times I’ve had him higher than Floyd and can likely be swayed to do so again. Similar to your argument against Floyd, I penalize him for quality of opposition and missed fights that should have been made. The other factor that really hurts Roy with me is the knockout losses so close to his prime. He had a great career and was the most talented fighter in history. If you rate the win over Ruiz extremely high and give him full credit for his extended time at the top of most p4p lists I can see why you rank him higher.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterNormally respect your views but Roy Jones should be higher than Floyd.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodNot arguing or poking holes in your statement, genuinely interested to hear who the 20-29 fighters you would rank ahead of Floyd, and what weighted criteria you use to come up with your rankings. I have a difficult time justifying Keeping Floyd out of my top 15, and I can see a solid case for top 10. In my opinion, Ali, Robinson, Leonard, Duran…etc., best better competition so they are ranked higher on my ATG list. I see rankings with Salvadore Sanchez, Roy Jones jr., Carlos Monzon, Marvin Hagler…etc., ranked higher, but I feel like Floyd either beat better competition or dominated more weight classes so I can’t rank them higher. Joe Louis and Ali had the greater historical impact, so I tend to rank them higher. For me ATG is based on historical impact, quality of competition, won/loss, intangibles, weight classes dominated, length of time at the top, and blowout losses during prime (Lennox Lewis is hurt on my list due to this criteria). Interested in what you weight and how you weight the categories.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICi'm just commenting on the floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there part. anyone can say & think what they want, however that doesn't automatically make it true. i have said in this thread that floyd probably beats anyone around his weights on his night. i don't rate fighters on probably so i can only rate him on what he actually did in the ring. for me i don't think he had a true fifty fifty challenge or a fight where he was the underdog after the jose luis castillo rematch. floyd can say he's up there & i'd agree that he is an all time great, although i'd struggle to put him among my top twenty all time greats, he might squeeze into my top thirtyQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNot true. Yes , Ali had more fights. No, the competition wasn’t necessarily greater. And Spinks was in his 8th pro fight! I suppose that “in the 70’s” that meant he was a seasoned pro nowadays? Keep spinning how you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I never said Floyd was above Ali. But I did say Floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there.
Why do you need to constantly, irrationally disrespect Floyd’s record?
This interesting and I completely agree that these lists are subjective so no need to argue them- very respectable list and we have many of the same names ahEad of Floyd. Just curious, what are some of your reasons for ranking Rocky Marciano higher than Floyd? I’m also interested in your thoughts on Ketchel, Mickey Walker, and Harry Greb- they were all tough fighters but the quality of the sport and opposition was much lower then.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICthese type of lists are subjective so there is no need to argue. weight classes dominated can depend on the era, i don't fault someone like marvin hagler for remaining at one sixty. i like quality of opposition, longevity, how they won or lost, historical impact can also be incorporated with my own preferences & favourites. here's a list of twenty guys in no real order that i'd put before floyd. ray robinson, henry Armstrong, muhammad ali, joe louis, willie pep, harry greb, ezzard charles, benny leonard, roberto duran, ray leonard, pernell whitaker, sam Langford, joe gans, jimmy wild, rocky marciano, archie moore, mickey walker, stanley Ketchel, carlos monzon, julio cesar chavez. i could list more, guys like ike williams, emile griffith, carlos ortiz, sandy saddler, i'm probably forgetting a few. i think i'd even have evander holyfield & bernard hopkins ahead of floydQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodNot arguing or poking holes in your statement, genuinely interested to hear who the 20-29 fighters you would rank ahead of Floyd, and what weighted criteria you use to come up with your rankings. I have a difficult time justifying Keeping Floyd out of my top 15, and I can see a solid case for top 10. In my opinion, Ali, Robinson, Leonard, Duran…etc., best better competition so they are ranked higher on my ATG list. I see rankings with Salvadore Sanchez, Roy Jones jr., Carlos Monzon, Marvin Hagler…etc., ranked higher, but I feel like Floyd either beat better competition or dominated more weight classes so I can’t rank them higher. Joe Louis and Ali had the greater historical impact, so I tend to rank them higher. For me ATG is based on historical impact, quality of competition, won/loss, intangibles, weight classes dominated, length of time at the top, and blowout losses during prime (Lennox Lewis is hurt on my list due to this criteria). Interested in what you weight and how you weight the categories.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICi'm just commenting on the floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there part. anyone can say & think what they want, however that doesn't automatically make it true. i have said in this thread that floyd probably beats anyone around his weights on his night. i don't rate fighters on probably so i can only rate him on what he actually did in the ring. for me i don't think he had a true fifty fifty challenge or a fight where he was the underdog after the jose luis castillo rematch. floyd can say he's up there & i'd agree that he is an all time great, although i'd struggle to put him among my top twenty all time greats, he might squeeze into my top thirtyQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNot true. Yes , Ali had more fights. No, the competition wasn’t necessarily greater. And Spinks was in his 8th pro fight! I suppose that “in the 70’s” that meant he was a seasoned pro nowadays? Keep spinning how you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I never said Floyd was above Ali. But I did say Floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there.
Why do you need to constantly, irrationally disrespect Floyd’s record?
After Ruiz the drop/decline was all there to see in dramatic fashion but what he did during his time at the top beating great boxers like B Hop and Toney tops everything for that particular generation.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI can see the case for Roy being ranked higher, and at times I’ve had him higher than Floyd and can likely be swayed to do so again. Similar to your argument against Floyd, I penalize him for quality of opposition and missed fights that should have been made. The other factor that really hurts Roy with me is the knockout losses so close to his prime. He had a great career and was the most talented fighter in history. If you rate the win over Ruiz extremely high and give him full credit for his extended time at the top of most p4p lists I can see why you rank him higher.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterNormally respect your views but Roy Jones should be higher than Floyd.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodNot arguing or poking holes in your statement, genuinely interested to hear who the 20-29 fighters you would rank ahead of Floyd, and what weighted criteria you use to come up with your rankings. I have a difficult time justifying Keeping Floyd out of my top 15, and I can see a solid case for top 10. In my opinion, Ali, Robinson, Leonard, Duran…etc., best better competition so they are ranked higher on my ATG list. I see rankings with Salvadore Sanchez, Roy Jones jr., Carlos Monzon, Marvin Hagler…etc., ranked higher, but I feel like Floyd either beat better competition or dominated more weight classes so I can’t rank them higher. Joe Louis and Ali had the greater historical impact, so I tend to rank them higher. For me ATG is based on historical impact, quality of competition, won/loss, intangibles, weight classes dominated, length of time at the top, and blowout losses during prime (Lennox Lewis is hurt on my list due to this criteria). Interested in what you weight and how you weight the categories.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICi'm just commenting on the floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there part. anyone can say & think what they want, however that doesn't automatically make it true. i have said in this thread that floyd probably beats anyone around his weights on his night. i don't rate fighters on probably so i can only rate him on what he actually did in the ring. for me i don't think he had a true fifty fifty challenge or a fight where he was the underdog after the jose luis castillo rematch. floyd can say he's up there & i'd agree that he is an all time great, although i'd struggle to put him among my top twenty all time greats, he might squeeze into my top thirtyQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNot true. Yes , Ali had more fights. No, the competition wasn’t necessarily greater. And Spinks was in his 8th pro fight! I suppose that “in the 70’s” that meant he was a seasoned pro nowadays? Keep spinning how you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I never said Floyd was above Ali. But I did say Floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there.
Why do you need to constantly, irrationally disrespect Floyd’s record?
I wonder about the dramatic decline after Ruiz. Roy always had trouble with long southpaws and I think Tarver was always a bad match up. That being said, he seemed just as fast and athletic throughout both fights until he got caught in the second round of the rematch. Ali, Holmes, Evander, Pernell, BHOP…etc., all had gradual declines and never suffered blowouts so close to their primes. I’m not saying I’m right, just saying, that is how I weight that aspect.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterAfter Ruiz the drop/decline was all there to see in dramatic fashion but what he did during his time at the top beating great boxers like B Hop and Toney tops everything for that particular generation.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI can see the case for Roy being ranked higher, and at times I’ve had him higher than Floyd and can likely be swayed to do so again. Similar to your argument against Floyd, I penalize him for quality of opposition and missed fights that should have been made. The other factor that really hurts Roy with me is the knockout losses so close to his prime. He had a great career and was the most talented fighter in history. If you rate the win over Ruiz extremely high and give him full credit for his extended time at the top of most p4p lists I can see why you rank him higher.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterNormally respect your views but Roy Jones should be higher than Floyd.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodNot arguing or poking holes in your statement, genuinely interested to hear who the 20-29 fighters you would rank ahead of Floyd, and what weighted criteria you use to come up with your rankings. I have a difficult time justifying Keeping Floyd out of my top 15, and I can see a solid case for top 10. In my opinion, Ali, Robinson, Leonard, Duran…etc., best better competition so they are ranked higher on my ATG list. I see rankings with Salvadore Sanchez, Roy Jones jr., Carlos Monzon, Marvin Hagler…etc., ranked higher, but I feel like Floyd either beat better competition or dominated more weight classes so I can’t rank them higher. Joe Louis and Ali had the greater historical impact, so I tend to rank them higher. For me ATG is based on historical impact, quality of competition, won/loss, intangibles, weight classes dominated, length of time at the top, and blowout losses during prime (Lennox Lewis is hurt on my list due to this criteria). Interested in what you weight and how you weight the categories.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICi'm just commenting on the floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there part. anyone can say & think what they want, however that doesn't automatically make it true. i have said in this thread that floyd probably beats anyone around his weights on his night. i don't rate fighters on probably so i can only rate him on what he actually did in the ring. for me i don't think he had a true fifty fifty challenge or a fight where he was the underdog after the jose luis castillo rematch. floyd can say he's up there & i'd agree that he is an all time great, although i'd struggle to put him among my top twenty all time greats, he might squeeze into my top thirtyQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNot true. Yes , Ali had more fights. No, the competition wasn’t necessarily greater. And Spinks was in his 8th pro fight! I suppose that “in the 70’s” that meant he was a seasoned pro nowadays? Keep spinning how you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I never said Floyd was above Ali. But I did say Floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there.
Why do you need to constantly, irrationally disrespect Floyd’s record?
We agree on the Toney win- that was superb and he dominated a great, prime fighter who was undefeated and ranked #2 p4p at the time of the fight. I respectfully disagree on the BHOP fight- Bernard was still green at that point and nowhere near the fighter he became in the late 90s and early 2000s. I don’t give full credit to Roy for his win over BHOP early just like I don’t give BHOP credit for his win over a past his prime Roy later. Roy’s best wins to me were Toney, Tarver, Montell Griffin, Virgil Hill, and John Ruiz. Those were good wins but I’m not sure they are better than Floyd’s best (Toney being the best of either but Floyd fighting more and better overall challengers). Again, I’m not saying I’m right or trying to convince you, I’m mainly explaining how I came to my rankings. I can see your case for Roy and respect your opinion on it.
all these guys are all time greats & it can be unfair to rank them against each other due to era's. as i said this list isn't in order just names that came to mind. rocky could be a guy i could push further back towards thirty but floyd's whole thing about the tbe ever is based on his beating rocky's record. the record for me is only relevant because rocky is the only heavyweight champion to retire undefeated. other fighters have been passed that record but lost further down the track. as for stanley, mickey & harry i think you are being a bit unfair in saying the quality was much lower. there were many tough good fighters around & those guys pretty much fought them all. i believe mickey started around lightweight & went on to face heavies, massively outweighed at times. in that era there was allegedly mob involvement in bouts, i think there was talk of jack sharkey carrying mickey & almost losing the decision. from what i have read mickey sounds like a functioning alcoholic & to me that is impressive to be performing at the level he did. stanley looks raw from what i have seen but based on what historians say & his record he is another guy that fought almost everyone & carried big time power. he was also fighting some twenty & thirty odd rounds. harry's body of work alone is amazing & other all time greats gave high high accolades. different times though, these guys had to fight constantly to make a living, they didn't have the luxury of jack dempsey type pursesQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodThis interesting and I completely agree that these lists are subjective so no need to argue them- very respectable list and we have many of the same names ahEad of Floyd. Just curious, what are some of your reasons for ranking Rocky Marciano higher than Floyd? I’m also interested in your thoughts on Ketchel, Mickey Walker, and Harry Greb- they were all tough fighters but the quality of the sport and opposition was much lower then.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICthese type of lists are subjective so there is no need to argue. weight classes dominated can depend on the era, i don't fault someone like marvin hagler for remaining at one sixty. i like quality of opposition, longevity, how they won or lost, historical impact can also be incorporated with my own preferences & favourites. here's a list of twenty guys in no real order that i'd put before floyd. ray robinson, henry Armstrong, muhammad ali, joe louis, willie pep, harry greb, ezzard charles, benny leonard, roberto duran, ray leonard, pernell whitaker, sam Langford, joe gans, jimmy wild, rocky marciano, archie moore, mickey walker, stanley Ketchel, carlos monzon, julio cesar chavez. i could list more, guys like ike williams, emile griffith, carlos ortiz, sandy saddler, i'm probably forgetting a few. i think i'd even have evander holyfield & bernard hopkins ahead of floydQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodNot arguing or poking holes in your statement, genuinely interested to hear who the 20-29 fighters you would rank ahead of Floyd, and what weighted criteria you use to come up with your rankings. I have a difficult time justifying Keeping Floyd out of my top 15, and I can see a solid case for top 10. In my opinion, Ali, Robinson, Leonard, Duran…etc., best better competition so they are ranked higher on my ATG list. I see rankings with Salvadore Sanchez, Roy Jones jr., Carlos Monzon, Marvin Hagler…etc., ranked higher, but I feel like Floyd either beat better competition or dominated more weight classes so I can’t rank them higher. Joe Louis and Ali had the greater historical impact, so I tend to rank them higher. For me ATG is based on historical impact, quality of competition, won/loss, intangibles, weight classes dominated, length of time at the top, and blowout losses during prime (Lennox Lewis is hurt on my list due to this criteria). Interested in what you weight and how you weight the categories.Quote:
Originally Posted by TICi'm just commenting on the floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there part. anyone can say & think what they want, however that doesn't automatically make it true. i have said in this thread that floyd probably beats anyone around his weights on his night. i don't rate fighters on probably so i can only rate him on what he actually did in the ring. for me i don't think he had a true fifty fifty challenge or a fight where he was the underdog after the jose luis castillo rematch. floyd can say he's up there & i'd agree that he is an all time great, although i'd struggle to put him among my top twenty all time greats, he might squeeze into my top thirtyQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNot true. Yes , Ali had more fights. No, the competition wasn’t necessarily greater. And Spinks was in his 8th pro fight! I suppose that “in the 70’s” that meant he was a seasoned pro nowadays? Keep spinning how you like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I never said Floyd was above Ali. But I did say Floyd has earned the right to say he was and to say he’s up there.
Why do you need to constantly, irrationally disrespect Floyd’s record?