Then your clearly a fool and should be treated as such. I will skip over all of your posts from this day forwardhitman_hatton1 wrote:i don't buy the cherry picking argument.
D- Poor devil didn't clean out anyone in his own welt division in the 4 yrs he 1st grabbed his career standard issue WBC belt, not even his WBC mandatory, Berto, so how on God's green acres are do you propose to get him to fight elite all time HOFers much less beat them?hitman_hatton1 wrote:i think he'd outbox duran.Captain Hook wrote:He woud lose to Leonard, Duran, Pryor and Hearns IMO, but not by shut-out. No way.
hearns cos of size difference and long range style would have been tricky.
i think i would have tipped him against pryor.
and i'll sit on the fence with leonard. :>
Sorry Stu, but it doesn't resemble Leonard's at all imo. The crucial difference between the two is that Leonard actively sought the biggest fights out there for him and in his peak years the names on his record are way superior to Floyd's - Wilfed Benitez, Roberto Duran, Ayub Kalule and, of course, Hearns.stujones wrote:Okay, he's had a frustrating career - but it resembles Leonard's in alot of it. Does Leonard get condemmed for squeezing past a faded Hagler - nope. Does Floyd for DLH (bigger guy, ATG, faded) yep .
Hagler might have been faded, but prior the the bout, everyone though Leonard was going to get absolutely smashed to pieces, he'd been in retirement and was moving up to his opponent's weight as well. Hagler had lost a step, but he was still the undisputed champion.stujones wrote:It might be a rediculous thread, for me the closeness of the DLH fight - and the reasons WHY it was close means Floyd will never be GOAT (I think the 2 years wasted in retirement will be his downfall - he'll never gain those years).
However, I think the back lash against this thread starter is equally rediculous. I've heard it all now... Mark Breland is better than Floyd Mayweather - Prime v Prime Breland would have beaten him. Complete and utter tosh!.
Mayweather might have missed some of his most natural rivals. But lets see. He fought DLH at 154... DLH was the #1 in the devision at the time. Winky Wright had finished at 154 - so who was it... Corey Spinks? Verno Phillips? DLH was also, faded - possibly, but still among the top 5 P4P at the time.
Ricky Hatton - might not have been at his best at 147. But he was good enough to win a world title, beating a guy who was shafted by Berto recently. But, yep - Floyd got condemmed... remember, people are saying Floyd is naturally bigger than Marquez - yep he is... but most people at the time were saying Hatton's "Superior" Strength MIGHT be a factor. No, but then when Floyd did a number - it was Hatton's just a 140 fight, Floyd is a 154 fighter.
Then he fights P4P ers in Castillo and Marquez and gets criticised.
Okay, he's had a frustrating career - but it resembles Leonard's in alot of it. Does Leonard get condemmed for squeezing past a faded Hagler - nope. Does Floyd for DLH (bigger guy, ATG, faded) yep .
Quixall wrote:Great performance, but he has yet to fight
1. Pacquiao
2. Williams
3. Cotto
4. Mosley
At the moment, he is the best around and is a great fighter, who will go down in the annals of boxing history, but for me, to cement his position, he has to fight the opponents mentioned above. One fighter who he will struggle to eclipse is :
Sugar Ray Robinson
For me, the finest fighter to ever lace up a pair of gloves
I am amazed so many people bothered to sit up all night, never mind all those who spent good money going to the fight, if they knew Marquez didnt stand a chance. If I had known beforehand it was going to be a one sided shutout, I wouldnt have lost sleep. I thought Mayweather would win through size and weight advantage, but expected a much closer fight and many thousands of others must have thought so as well or they wouldnt have watched it on TV in the small hours, or gone to the fight. No Mayweather isnt the best ever but he has to be in the top 20 somewhere, and no matter who he fights in the future, he still wont satisfy everyone, how many fighters have.Autobarn wrote:are you joking?WildWaylon wrote:Who would have thought PBF could have dominated Marquez the way he did. We know he had the size and weight advantage but even so his speed and skills made him the master anyway. Is he the best at any weight, in boxings history, and if not who would you put above him.
marquez had no business at welterweight other than getting a lot of money. mayweather dominated a smaller man, and never even made the contracted weight, which would have perhaps made it a fairer fight. the fight has no p4p relevance because it turned out not to even be a "catchweight."
PAYweather showed fine skills but beat a 36 yo, fat, smaller man who had been in some epic (read, gruelling, punishing) fights already.
There was no-one out there really for Oscar to fight to clean out the devision. Wright was fighting at Light Heavy. I aint saying Oscar ever had the intention... but would fights Spinks etc enhanced his legacy at Light Middle.jamesmcdonnell wrote:Hagler might have been faded, but prior the the bout, everyone though Leonard was going to get absolutely smashed to pieces, he'd been in retirement and was moving up to his opponent's weight as well. Hagler had lost a step, but he was still the undisputed champion.stujones wrote:It might be a rediculous thread, for me the closeness of the DLH fight - and the reasons WHY it was close means Floyd will never be GOAT (I think the 2 years wasted in retirement will be his downfall - he'll never gain those years).
However, I think the back lash against this thread starter is equally rediculous. I've heard it all now... Mark Breland is better than Floyd Mayweather - Prime v Prime Breland would have beaten him. Complete and utter tosh!.
Mayweather might have missed some of his most natural rivals. But lets see. He fought DLH at 154... DLH was the #1 in the devision at the time. Winky Wright had finished at 154 - so who was it... Corey Spinks? Verno Phillips? DLH was also, faded - possibly, but still among the top 5 P4P at the time.
Ricky Hatton - might not have been at his best at 147. But he was good enough to win a world title, beating a guy who was shafted by Berto recently. But, yep - Floyd got condemmed... remember, people are saying Floyd is naturally bigger than Marquez - yep he is... but most people at the time were saying Hatton's "Superior" Strength MIGHT be a factor. No, but then when Floyd did a number - it was Hatton's just a 140 fight, Floyd is a 154 fighter.
Then he fights P4P ers in Castillo and Marquez and gets criticised.
Okay, he's had a frustrating career - but it resembles Leonard's in alot of it. Does Leonard get condemmed for squeezing past a faded Hagler - nope. Does Floyd for DLH (bigger guy, ATG, faded) yep .
Hagler had cleaned out 160 virtually, the same cannot be said of Oscar at 154, he was never the proven king of the division.
You really think Don Curry had anything that would have troubled leonard, come on Stu.stujones wrote:There was no-one out there really for Oscar to fight to clean out the devision. Wright was fighting at Light Heavy. I aint saying Oscar ever had the intention... but would fights Spinks etc enhanced his legacy at Light Middle.jamesmcdonnell wrote:Hagler might have been faded, but prior the the bout, everyone though Leonard was going to get absolutely smashed to pieces, he'd been in retirement and was moving up to his opponent's weight as well. Hagler had lost a step, but he was still the undisputed champion.stujones wrote:It might be a rediculous thread, for me the closeness of the DLH fight - and the reasons WHY it was close means Floyd will never be GOAT (I think the 2 years wasted in retirement will be his downfall - he'll never gain those years).
However, I think the back lash against this thread starter is equally rediculous. I've heard it all now... Mark Breland is better than Floyd Mayweather - Prime v Prime Breland would have beaten him. Complete and utter tosh!.
Mayweather might have missed some of his most natural rivals. But lets see. He fought DLH at 154... DLH was the #1 in the devision at the time. Winky Wright had finished at 154 - so who was it... Corey Spinks? Verno Phillips? DLH was also, faded - possibly, but still among the top 5 P4P at the time.
Ricky Hatton - might not have been at his best at 147. But he was good enough to win a world title, beating a guy who was shafted by Berto recently. But, yep - Floyd got condemmed... remember, people are saying Floyd is naturally bigger than Marquez - yep he is... but most people at the time were saying Hatton's "Superior" Strength MIGHT be a factor. No, but then when Floyd did a number - it was Hatton's just a 140 fight, Floyd is a 154 fighter.
Then he fights P4P ers in Castillo and Marquez and gets criticised.
Okay, he's had a frustrating career - but it resembles Leonard's in alot of it. Does Leonard get condemmed for squeezing past a faded Hagler - nope. Does Floyd for DLH (bigger guy, ATG, faded) yep .
Hagler had cleaned out 160 virtually, the same cannot be said of Oscar at 154, he was never the proven king of the division.
The inactivity of Leonard and the drab display in his comeback played a massive part in why he was such an underdog.
Deserter - for whatever reason, Leonard missed out on some key fights in his career. There was a certain P4P fighter by the name of Don Curry who leonard didn't fight. Arron Pyror, Arguello, McCory, McCallum - all tremendous fighters (to name a few).
Leonard jumped weights as much as Floyd. It was alot easier to clean up. Leonard longest reign consisted of just 8 title fights (7 wins 1 defeat). Remember there was only the WBA and WBC to consider for the most part. Its like if Floyd fought the Pacquiao vs Cotto winner, there would always be calls that Mosley is really the man, or maybe Berto, or Williams, etc. There is much more chances in this era to have the "there is always another one" - that Lewis/Calzaghe mentioned at the end of their careers.
But as bad as the ommision of Tszyu is for Mayweather, Curry is for Leonard.
- Jimmy, Jimmy, Jimmy, pity you have me on ignore to skip your proper education, you're a troubled lad you are.jamesmcdonnell wrote: You really think Don Curry had anything that would have troubled leonard, come on Stu.
Stu, you say for whatever reason yet everyone, including you, knows the reason - Leonard had a detached retina that forced his retirement in 82. The fact he came back to beat Hagler was astonishing, but doesn't change the fact that he was nothing like the boxer he was prior to that injury. If you ignore the abortive Kevin Howard return he didn't fight for nearly five years.stujones wrote: Deserter - for whatever reason, Leonard missed out on some key fights in his career. There was a certain P4P fighter by the name of Don Curry who leonard didn't fight. Arron Pyror, Arguello, McCory, McCallum - all tremendous fighters (to name a few).
Rubbish - I'm sorry, but Leonard beat Hagler comprehensively, I've watched the fight many many times, there's nothing controversal about it.BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:- Jimmy, Jimmy, Jimmy, pity you have me on ignore to skip your proper education, you're a troubled lad you are.jamesmcdonnell wrote: You really think Don Curry had anything that would have troubled leonard, come on Stu.
Don't really get the Mr. Moneybags/Leonard comparison, but as far as Curry goes, a Leonard/Curry fight was being proposed. Curry like many Leonard peers seems to have a great resentment against him for making him jump through hoops as it were, wanting him to defend his welt belt one more time before supposedly granting him a crack at 154. That was the infamous Honeyghan bout where he's comprehensively outboxed and upset, claiming to be too tight at the weight.
Leonard in his pomp was pretty much the real deal, with some favorable judges and refs thrown in, the Benitez scoring and stoppage for example. After his eye injury he cherry picked legacy bouts to fluff his career. He never truly "beat" Hagler and wouldn't face a prime champ in their weight class until Norris, an embarrassment for him. Then Camacho who was hardly prime and way over his best weight.
Curry was one of the best peak welts in history, more than a match against anyone. Had he moved up to 154 one bout earlier, perhaps his story would be different. I know that even in his damaged state he probably could've take Leonard at that point. That's where the Mr. Money comparison comes in I guess. Leonard simpley wouldn't fight prime contenders and champs in his comeback, and why should he? Networks were showering him with gold for the Hearns and Duran matches as they creamed their shorts over him. Easy Money as Mr. Money said post JMM, though Hearns surprised Leonard with a great performance in spite of being battleworn.
agreed, mostly. Curry was exceptional and he proved it in very tough company - McCrory, Jones, Starling.stujones wrote:Don Curry in his pomp, yes. He was P4P #1 after Leonards day. Even if you don't think he would have - to "ignore" him from Leonards resume and say Leonard fought EVERYONE is rediculous. He dominated Starling and destroyed McCory. He had a 400-4 amateur record.
Drugs and weight problems KO'd his longevity, but for 2-3 years. He could have hung with anyone. The man had a dynamite punch. Milton McCory had a hell of a chin.
I would tip Leonard to find away based on hindsight - but at the time of Leonard's exile. I think Curry would have started as a slight favourite.
Much more intriguing fight than Kostya vs Floyd.
yeah it is going round and it is maddening.bengulnaci1 wrote:This thread is going in circles, can we just agree to disagree?
Some think Mayweather has done more than enough to be regarded as an ATG, some think he has not done anything like enough.
Agree with all of that, though a bit harsh on Hearns IMO. Curry's economy of movement and shot selection during his prime were just immaculate - absolute efficiency of the type that I've rarely seen in a ring.Autobarn wrote:For 3 years Curry was brilliant, shone very brightly and then sadly burned out. Far more compact and crisp than the gangling, powerful but physically weak Hearns. I would say more correct technically than Leonard also. I don't want to agree with Broughton, and don't want to make a case for Curry over the more proven Hearns and Leonard; I just want to bring up how effing good Curry was until it went wrong for him. The man who outworked slick Marlon Starling, blew out Milton McCrory and slashed up Colin Jones was a remarkable fighter who would box, punch, break guys down and also work for 15 rounds. If there was a prime Don Curry at welter today, Mayweather would not be a welter, that is for sure.
