Floyd Mayweather junior is more defined by all the top guys that he didn't fight.
Guerrero is a fantastic matchup. Elite guy in his prime. It's really too bad that Floyd didn't do these kinds of fights more often.
Unfortunately it's too late now, Floyd's too old. Someone's p!$$ing down your back and telling you it's raining if you honestly think Floyd is still in his prime anymore.
Well, I'm gonna go pull my wire to some 80s and 90s porn now, Keisha, Hyapatia Lee, Felecia, Tracey Adams,...
later, fellas...
Ray Robinson: Tell me who he beat who trumps the guys Floyd fought in his biggest fights?
Muhammad Ali: besides Frazier, Foreman and Liston (on the subject of those guys, tell me who they beat that made them so great), who did Ali beat that was so much better than Floyd's wins?
Willie Pep: Feather-fisted so called defensive master who was knocked out 6 times. What exactly did he do that was superior to what Floyd did? Who did he beat that was so hot, exactly? Floyd has adjusted to every tough opponent he's ever fought: how come Willie couldn't find an answer for Saddler (and if you're going to go on and say Saddler was greater than any of Floyd's opposition, please tell me why he was and who he beat to earn that kind of recognition)?
Joe Louis - FAMOUS for his "Bum of the Month" club. I guess whipping guys like Johnny Paycheck and Two Ton Tony is a lot more respectable than a prime JLC or Ricky Hatton.
And the others, tell me who they beat? Do you have a reason why they are top 10? Or is it just because you read they were really good?
Bigger man George, bigger punch!
Subscribe: Free online Classifieds and Business directory!
Hidden Content
Hey @Beanflicker - did you get a chance to read the above post with regard to Duran?
@Beanflicker - or this one? Interesting in hearing your responses.
Thanks for the input. It was by Doug Fisher in his most recent mailbag in the Golden Boy-owned Ring Magazine. I've also seen that boxing writers tend to somewhat universally feel that Floyd's legacy could use improving. I'm not sure I've encountered an "expert" that doesn't think that.
I believe the distinction is that the writer wasn't suggesting that Floyd "ducked" any of these guys. It was more that they were good-for-legacy fights that were missed. Floyd might well have beat all of the guys, and that isn't really the issue. It's more that he didn't face them.
Comparing 1983 Hagler to 2013, obviously you have to give the edge to Hagler. He was a monster in his prime who was killing everyone, whereas there are big questions now as to whether or not Martinez is on the decline. So who was the bigger challenge? You'd be a fool not to pick 1983 Hagler. He was a beast. I have no doubts about Duran's courage. He probably would have fought Holmes or Tyson if they let him. And while it was an admirable attempt, he did come up short. I could speculate all day about how Hagler probably underestimated him, but I'll stick with the facts. In terms of taking up challenges, Duran blows Mayweather away. I'm not saying Floyd was tougher than Duran, I'm just saying he was a better fighter.
In terms of Floyd's defining wins, in chronological order I would have to go with...
1. Genaro Hernandez
2. Deigo Corrales
3. Jose Luis Castillo
4. Arturo Gatti
5. De La Hoya
6. Ricky Hatton
Now keep in mind, these aren't the ones I necessarily think were the hardest, or even necessarily his best performances, just his most defining/important wins. For instance, obviously I think beating Shane Mosley, Cotto, Guerrero, ect is more impressive than Gatti, but it has to be acknowledged that the Gatti fight was a huge win for him in terms of getting his name over with the general public.
To clarify too, I'm not saying Floyd has fought better competition than anyone in the history of boxing. For instance, I think Leonard coming back after years absent and beating Hagler is more impressive than any of Floyd's wins.
What I'm saying is that Floyd's opposition has been solid enough to where you can't say he never fought anyone or took hard fights (arguments that have followed his fellow P4P great Roy Jones). He's faced enough adversity that we know he's tough, we know he can take a punch, and we know he can adapt to different opponents and styles, and we know he isn't one dimensional.
Watching his in-ring work, I've never seen a better fighter. It doesn't get any better than PBF. And it pains me to say, because I think he's a cocksucker.
If you want to put Floyd in the top 25 so be it but calling him the GOAT is a different story. In your world the fact that no footage exits for Robinson at 147 makes him ineligible for the list.
Same with Greb,Langford, Gans,Leonard and host of others. And how can you right off guys people fought when there is no tape to support it?
You can call Floyd the goat but it is not a fact.It's an opinion. I can think of several people that could have beaten him in every weight class he has fought in. As far as those you mentioned;
Robinson was undefeated as an amateur and went 85/0 with 40 first round knockouts. He beat 18 world champions and 11 hall of famers and reached a peak of 128-1-2. I don't even think Floyd could carry his activity pace.
Ali fought in the toughest most competitive heavyweight division in history so if he does not qualify then no heavyweight does. Do I think he's the Goat? No.
Louis was undefeated for close to 12 years and destroyed the field.
Pep. How can anyone admire Floyds defensive prowess and not admire Willies. Lots of fighters are featherfisted and compared to the punchers of the world Floyd is. That light punching pale man went on to claim 230 victories. He had a peak record of 135/1/1 which is a ratio of winning that will never be touched. And speaking of Saddler he was one of the biggest punchers of his day as well as history who was also dirty. He would not get away with the stuff he pulled today but much of it was subtle and he beat Willie the same way Castillo beat errrrr almost beat Floyd the first time. Saddler would have been a handful for any feather at any time including Floyd. Saddler had Peps number like Norton had Ali's or Forrest had Shanes. And again lets see Floyd fight even half as frequently as Pep and see if he remains undefeated instead of like 3 times in 5 years. In addition the Saddler fights came after the plane crash and at a time when Willie was on the slide. There are plenty of featherweights that would have beaten Floyd whether they make some list that he's on or not. I think Sanchez would have wrecked him. So would Armstrong. Its to bad Floyd has never fought the likes of those two.
Lets have a look at Hank. Held the feather/light/welter championships at the same time and in a sport with 8 divisions and only 1 title per division. And if not for the Garcia robbery he would have added the middle weight title. All done by a man who would drink a barrel of water in order to look bigger at weigh ins. He went on a rampage in 1937 scoring 27 straight knockouts. That’s more then half of Floyds total output in one year. When Amber nicked it out in the rematch Armstrong streak ended with 46 fights and 39 ko's. He then moved to welterweight where he made 19 title defenses which is still a record today.
Greb fought over 300 times including 49 times in one year and only lost about 12 times depending on the source. He was only stopped twice, once because of a broken arm. As a middle he beat around 7 light heavyweight champions including future hev champ Tunney his first and only loss. He beat Walker and Gibbons and fought all over the place weight wise. He beat about ten contending heavyweights and even Dempsey avoided him.
Floyd could not even sort out a 50 million dollar pay cheque with Manny whereas Duran and Leonard fought twice in 6 months. Perhaps he's a victim of his own success but that won’t translate to legacy 25 years from now.
Look Floyd is a great fighter and I don't expect to change your mind about fighters from the past as we have been here before. Imo there are plenty of fighters from 126 to 147 that could have beaten him and you believe there isn't. I believe he probably beats many all time greats and you believe he beats all of them.
Floyds the GOAT at making money w/o doubt as most of those mentioned died penniless. Hannibal was one hell of a soldier and military strategist and I don't need any film footage.
@Beanflicker - I believe we're getting to the same page. Correct me if I'm wrong, but what you're saying is that you rank Mayweather Head-to-Head in a p4p sense, very highly. You're not saying that his body of work compares favorably to the top guys of all-time. In other words, you are not making the argument that Floyd's best wins are better than the top guys' best work. Rather, you're making the argument Floyd would beat many of the top guys Head-To-Head.
I have to think about where I come out on that statement, but my initial response is how do we know how good he is Head-To-Head if he never faced a top level of competition. For example, at welterweight, he never faced Leonard, like Duran did, which demonstrates how good Duran was head-to- head. At the same time, Mayweather has looked sublime against good competition.
I should also point out that I'm not saying that Floyd's body of work is poor by any stretch of the imagination; it's only when we compare it with the best of all-time that we it appears not quite as good. If we were discussing Martinez, and while I think he is very good, and a Hall of Famer, can never be compared to the best middleweights/ junior middleweights of all-time with regard to resume.
I think another point you make that I agree with is that Mayweather had had the chance to take the same risks that Duran did in going up to fight Iran Barkley and Marvin Hagler etc., but he hasn't done it. It's frustrating, and probably makes people underrate him. I think what a lot of people want from an all-time great is the willingness to take risks, and for some reason, that isn't there to the same extent as the best did, with Mayweather.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks