Floyd vs All time great? hmm
it will be 10 times more boring than PBF - OScar
Floyd vs All time great? hmm
it will be 10 times more boring than PBF - OScar
Que Viva Puerto Rico
Hidden Content
Well i not saying it is because SRL beat Hagler he is better but VD said he rates PBF higher then SRL. And i can not see what PBF has done to make him go ahead of SRL because SRL held the same amount of belts in division and SRL unified as well to in welter and beat better competition so how does Floyd better then SRL well the answer is PBF does not rank higher then SRL so i just want to see what in gods name VD is seeing the rest of us are not so what is it VD. What is it that makes PBF better then SRL and i just want to see how you can give me a good answer to it.
I agree... When can you remember when he didn't adapt... Whenever he is "in trouble" the game plan switches. He never had to switch it against Oscar. Against Judah he did. The first 4 rounds Judah was giving him everything he could handle until he adapted. Thisnk back to the Castillo fights. Had he not adapted in those fights he would have surely lost.Originally Posted by CutMeMick
![]()
Hidden Content
"There's nothing special about him." -Sergiy Dzinziruk
Zab is not the same and neither is Castillo when we are talking about the competition wise with ALI, Leonard, and Robinson.
My point was not that but that his adaption is ranked higher then given credit for. The only point of reference is fights like those... When he fought through adversity. What else should I use?Originally Posted by Mr140
Hidden Content
"There's nothing special about him." -Sergiy Dzinziruk
I guess your right but his score is ok compared to the rest of the greats becasue he never had a legend in prime to fight against that he had to adapt to. Now if he fights Williams and beats have to change his style then i will have no problem changing his score hope you understand what i mean by that.
Yeah but who's Williams? Paul?Originally Posted by Mr140
Hidden Content
"There's nothing special about him." -Sergiy Dzinziruk
Well the thing is who are the other two i mean those two may never get to be hall a fame Williams might in the future he still young and we will see. But PBF would have to change his game with him way more then he had to with Zab and Castillo i mean that just a thought of mine but if you do not think it to be correct then tell me another person he would have to adjust to more maybe Cotto and that is about it no one else i can think of at the moment in time.
This is clearly the stupidest thing I've ever read. You clearly cannot rate any sport like this because it doesn't work, certain pieces are more important that others, and its bias. How does Robinson have high defensive values? He got hit all the time.Originally Posted by DIOS DOMINICANO
Originally Posted by Pernell "Sweet Pea" Whitaker
exctly why would you not rate Ali's boxing skills that high?....Because he was not conventional?...He was able to have a style that no one else could use to the effectiveness he did.....I can nsee not rating his defense that high due to the fact he was on the canvas quite a few times even if most were flash knockdowns but you have to judge boxing skill in an all around basis....if you are going textbook boxing then no man on the list is a 10 but Robinson
Hidden Content IN CASE THEY ALL FORGOT WHAT REAL HEAVYWEIGHT POWER WAS!!!
ahve u seen ali b4 he ahd his forced retirement--60's ali was lighting, he was accurate. unbeatable had the jab, very very skillfull---11 punches in 3 seconds. the 60's ali could beat anyother hw in history----now the 70's ali less skill- more chinOriginally Posted by Pernell "Sweet Pea" Whitaker
Textbook how was Robinson text book? He didn't bring his hands up on the ropes, his offensive skills were very good, but there are two parts involved with boxing skills and defensively he didn't all that much except for footwork. Mayweather is as textbook as it gets though his defence is little different from the norm, it would be wiser to say somebody like Winky Wright, Quartey, WW Duran, Holmes, Tyson, Holyfield have text book qualities because they fought how you teach fighters to fight. Watch Robinson in a few of his fights and he gets hit by a lot of punches(which to his credit he could take), he would throw multiple left hooks in a row which isn't textbook at all. Robinson and Ali are great fighters, but they are by no means textbook boxers. Also both of them had trouble against other boxers like Ali had many troubles with Norton who none of the other greats had troubles with because technically Ali made a lot of mistakes. Robinson had a few fights earlier on where it was said that he had troubles with guys who used footwork because it offset him.Originally Posted by Daxx Kahn
Originally Posted by Taeth
Robinson at WW was textbook...explain your defenition of textbook? because if you are thinking amateur style boxing with hands held high always step to the side never overlap the feet type crap then you have an outdated version
Winky Wright uses the shell defense that is not textbook,,,,
Floyd keeps his hands wayy to low and it is speed that compensate for it.....he lays on the ropes...that is not text book.....
Ray Robinson at WW had the style textbooks were written upon
Hidden Content IN CASE THEY ALL FORGOT WHAT REAL HEAVYWEIGHT POWER WAS!!!
Well Khan if you tack in the people they faced the titles they held and the competition they faced Khan it seems like a good way to compare.
Originally Posted by Mr140
When it comes to resumes there is no comparison....
Mayweathers best comp-
Corrales, Castillo, Corley, Judah, Mitchell and DLH
Robinsons--
Angott, Zivic, Servo, LaMotta, Armstrong, Bell, Gavilan, Turpin, Fullmer, Basilio, just to dent it
ALI--
Liston, Patterson, Frazier, Foreman, Ellis, Quarry, Folley, Chuvalo
Leonard--
Hearns, Duran, Hagler, Benitez,
Floyd has the weakest resume of the lot
Hidden Content IN CASE THEY ALL FORGOT WHAT REAL HEAVYWEIGHT POWER WAS!!!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks