Quote Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote Originally Posted by smashcrusher
Quote Originally Posted by Violent Demise
Ah, no.
Thank you. Williams is good but why is it when someone comes off a win, everyone immediately thinks they can beat the best who's in their division? DLH beats Mayorga and everyone on this board is saying he'll slay everyone, Mosley beats Vargas and all the sudden he's the second coming of Tommy Hearns. And now Williams beats Antonio Margarito 8 rounds to 4 so he's gonna beat Floyd Mayweather I don't think so.
Fair point, I'm not saying Williams is the best fighter in the world I'm just putting the question out there as to how stylistically would Floyd solve the Williams puzzle.

In recent fights Floyd has one by staying on the outside and relying on his superior speed to pick of his opponents with single shot combinations.

How does he possibly stay on the outside of a man who's practically got a whole extra arm's length in wingspan to him?

Oscar WAS able to back up Floyd early and apply pressure but he tired late on and Floyd took over. We just saw against Margarito that Williams doesn't gas and unlike Oscar who got punch shy in the final rounds Williams was just a whirlwind from start to finish.

If you going to even make a post saying Williams loses end of, at least tell us how what strategy you think Floyd will adopt and HOW he will win.

This isn't just a yes or no poll I want reasons and opinions as to HOW this fight would pan out
Regardless of "Reach" they have the same length of arms 26'. Second Mayweather knew Oscar was going to tire so he kept the fight closer. Third Oscar is still a better fighter than Williams, and he has faster hands.

Have you seen how faster Mayweather can move if he wants? He could easily keep the distance if he wanted to. I think he will have more a problem with pressure from Hatton who gets in quicker than with Williams because if Mayweather keeps moving a lot Williams won't be able to throw punches especially if he has to worry about Mayweather's sharp counters.