Chavez & Mayweather

[Tuan_Jim]

This guy is either a troll or totally mentally retarded. You lot decide, I'm putting him on block.

[Cojimar 1946]

No, whats ironic is you accusing Maywether of having a cynical career and turning around and essentially saying that what he did is just how boxing works, except when Mayweather is concerned apparently.

[Cojimar 1946]

If other fighters like Lewis and Holyfield can take the path of least resistance (as you basically admit), then why is Mayweather criticized for doing the same? Holyfield and Lewis would have both been aware that the other fighter presented a bigger risk than the guys they were actually fighting. Lewis for example would have known that Holyfield was a bigger threat than Bruno, Tucker, Phil Jackson, etc. That can't be denied. If you want to argue that boxing is about making money and not taking big risks unless you have to then so be it. But this doesn't mean fighters can't be called out on it.

Lennox Lewis recently criticized Anthony Joshua for not fighting Deontay Wilder. It seems Lewis agrees that the best fighters in the division should fight each other in their primes. This is coming from an actual fighter who probably understands how boxing works. Should I message him on twitter to tell him he's got it wrong? That a champions actual job is to avoid risks and take the path of lesser resistance?

[Ambling Alp II]

This guy is either a troll or totally mentally retarded. You lot decide, I'm putting him on block.

I have long been undecided which is the case for him. We explain things every which way and he still never seems to get it. He must be trolling you would think. Then again 1 in 5 people think John Ruiz should be in the Hall of Fame so maybe there are simply people who just can't grasp things.

[Cojimar 1946]

I feel like Mayweather is being held to a double standard. It's unfortunate that he didn't fight Pacquiao earlier but people seem to be taking things too far when they claim this proves he avoided risks or would have ducked a great prime fighter.

This guy castigates Mayweather and then flips around to say Lewis and Holyfield fighting doesn't make sense because it would blow their chance at a big Tyson payday which seems hypocritical at least to me. This is clearly an example of avoiding a touch matchup in the hopes of a big payday, something Mayweather critics accuse him of doing.

[Cojimar 1946]

on an unrelated note I thought this clip was pretty neat.

[Ambling Alp II]

Does everything always have to be spelled out to you:

Look at the timelines:
1992 Holyfield fought Bowe
1993 Holyfield fought Bowe again
1994 Lewis lost to McCall. It was going to be awhile before a fight with him was going to be a big fight after that.
1995 Holyfield fought Bowe yet again
1996 Holyfield fought Tyson
1997 Holyfield fought Tyson again.
It made sense why Holyfield did not fight Lewis sooner.
Holyfield was taking on major challenges in major fights.

Mayweather was not taking on serious challenges like that. Please, don't bother bringing up the fighters Mayweather beat during this time and act like they were serious tests. We all know who he fought. He could have fought Pacquaio when it would have been a serious challenge. He had a long time to do. He didn't.

I don't know how I can make this any simpler for you to understand.

[chrisjs1985]

I'll say this about Mayweather; He had a 19 year career of which he spent 8 years being the biggest thing in the sport and it's main shot caller yet he never fought a great fighter or elite fighter close to their prime and with that many weight classes as opposed to previous years (thus easier to make) that's a legitimate gripe IMO. That would appear he was a fighter who safely navigated his way around the sport rather than took on all comers.

He's a great fighter though without question.

[Tuan_Jim]

I'll say this about Mayweather; He had a 19 year career of which he spent 8 years being the biggest thing in the sport and it's main shot caller yet he never fought a great fighter or elite fighter close to their prime and with that many weight classes as opposed to previous years (thus easier to make) that's a legitimate gripe IMO. That would appear he was a fighter who safely navigated his way around the sport rather than took on all comers.

He's a great fighter though without question.

Without question? We don't know that. There's a lot of questions about how he would handle seriously dangerous adversity. He preferred to avoid it, which says a lot about his heart and gives an indication about how he may have reacted had his heart been tested at top level.

[Cojimar 1946]

I think its perfectly reasonable for him to take two tough fights the same year especially given how infrequently he was fighting. I just don't see that as an excuse especially given how Joshua and Usyk have been matched. Joshua fought Parker and Povetkin back to back and is poised to take o. The Fury Wilder winner next.

[Cojimar 1946]

If the biggest critique people can offer Mayweather is that he didn't face Pacquiao early enough than that seems like a pretty minor complaint. Many fighters have missed out on numerous worthy opponents altogether.
Sugar Ray Robinson didn't face Charley Burley, Dave Sands, Billy Graham, and Cocoa Kid for instance all of whom would have been among the best he could have faced.

Also, I'm not really convinced by this idea that a fighters motivations and schedule are paramount to analyzing their record. A big part of someone's legacy is facing the best of their era and even if they don't deliberately duck people failing to face their best contemporaries should impact their legacy.

[Ambling Alp II]

If the biggest critique people can offer Mayweather is that he didn't face Pacquiao early enough than that seems like a pretty minor complaint. Many fighters have missed out on numerous worthy opponents altogether.
Sugar Ray Robinson didn't face Charley Burley, Dave Sands, Billy Graham, and Cocoa Kid for instance all of whom would have been among the best he could have faced.

Also, I'm not really convinced by this idea that a fighters motivations and schedule are paramount to analyzing their record. A big part of someone's legacy is facing the best of their era and even if they don't deliberately duck people failing to face their best contemporaries should impact their legacy.

Do you really not get this? It's not a minor complaint. It's a big deal. Then you go to say yourself that it hurts a fighter's legacy for failing to fight their best contemporaries. Guess what, Mayweather did not do that. He waited for several years until it was a meaningless fight.

As for Robinson, that is a totally different situation for a couple of key reasons.
1. In his case, there happened to be a ton of great fighters for him to fight. He couldn't fight them all even if he wanted to and they wanted to. Schedules conflict. Look who he was fighting: LaMotta 6 X, Zivic multiple times, Gavilan twice, Angott, twice, it just goes on and on. You could make a case that he fought the best competition of any fighter who ever lived. Comparing Mayweather's victim list to him is a joke.

If there a ton of great fighters around and you only fight some of them, that is one thing. When there is one guy that everyone wants you to fight, (Mayweather and Pacquiao) and you don't that is another.

2. Look at the overlap. Burley moved up to middleweight after he and Robinson were ranked as welterweights for only a year. Burley moved up to middle in 1942. They were each fighting great competition. Nobody was saying either was ducking each other at the time. The other guys were similar situations.
It's not like people were screaming for Robinson to fight any other these guys at the time. They were all fighting tough competition. There just happened to be a lot of good-great welterweights and middleweights at the time.

Mayweather and Pacquiao was the fight every real boxing fan wanted to see for several years.

[Cojimar 1946]

The problem for Robinson is that some of the guys he didn't fight were better than virtually anyone he did beat. If you fail to fight somebody who is just some average contender who never climbs beyond a ranking of five or so then it's not an issue. But a number of these guys proved themselves exceptional hence not fighting them should impact his legacy. Billy Graham for example was exceptional enough that we cant dismiss him as just another average contender that Robinson might somehow overlook. He would have been the best or second best welterweight Robinson ever fought.

[Ambling Alp II]

No. He beat Kid Gavilan twice, one of the best welterweights ever.
He also beat LaMotta multiple times when he was just a welterweight and LaMotta was a middleweight.
Countless other wins over fighters at least as good as the one s you have named.

[Cojimar 1946]

I think many would disagree with that argument. I don't think Robinson ever beat a middleweight as good as Burley and Dave Sands is probably better than anyone he beat bar perhaps Fullmer. I think you would have a very difficult time reasonably arguing that he beat many opponents at that level. Billy Graham is better than any welterweight he beat bar perhaps Gavilan.

Its also inaccurate I think to say that there was no perception at the time that guys like Burley were being ducked. A number of fighters of that period like Marshall, Williams, Burley seem to have been ducked and unjustly denied title shots as well as avoided by the other contenders. There was certainly public interest in a match between Robinson and Burley.

[Ambling Alp II]

Well I disagree with you.
You can make a serious argument that Ray Robinson fought the best competition of any fighter whoever lived. So yes, lets start ripping him.

You also have to look at the time frames and who these guys were fighting at the time. You have to ask yourself when these fights that did not happen could have realistically taken place. Then you have to use common sense.

[Cojimar 1946]

Well, that depends on what someone is being criticized for. Fighters don't have time to fight everyone that is active in their era and virtually every champion has missed out on some contenders. But they certainly can choose to prioritize fighting the best fighters.

For example I don't think Robinson missing out on say Tony Pellone, Willie Joyce, Johnny Greco, or Ronnie Delaney is necessarily a huge deal. These guys were legitimate contenders but they weren't noticeably better than many of the guys Robinson did beat such as Charley Fusari or Tommy Bell. However, I think it is fair to criticize him for not facing guys who stood out as more exceptional and distinguished themselves from the rest like Burley and Graham.

There is also the question of quality vs quantity, many old-timers have resumes that absolutely bury Ray Leonard's in terms of depth. However, I suspect you would argue Leonard was great because the quality of his wins count for more than sheer numbers.

[Ambling Alp II]

You have to take things by a case by case basis, look at the time frames, and compare apples to apples.

No it's not fair to criticize Robinson for not fighting Burley and Graham. There is very little overlap there.
The only time Robinson and Burley were ranked in the same division at the same time was 1941.
This was Robinson's 2nd year as a pro. During this time, he was really a lightweight/super welterweight. He weighed in the 135-141 range at this time.
Burley was really a jr middleweight had it existed at the time. He weighed in the 149-155 range at the time.

To criticize Robinson for not fighting a great fighter in such a short window of time, in his second year as a pro, when the other guy outweighed him by about 15 pounds, is just plain stupid.

With Graham, 1950 was the only year where he and Robinson were in the top 10 in the same weight class. That is also a very short window of time.
Robinson was fighting a lot. His opponents ranged from good to very good to great. You can't expect anyone to only fight great opponents.

As for Ray Leonard, he did have a short career. However during that time, he managed to jam in a lot of quality wins. Take his top 4 victims and compare them to the top 4 of of the other all time greats. There are very few (less than 10) in the history of the sport that can match it.

He is actually very underrated by many people. If he had 20 meaningless wins over guys that nobody ever heard of, he would be ranked several spots higher.

[Cojimar 1946]

A match between Burley and Robinson could have happened anytime from 1944 to 1950. From 1944 onwards Robinson was regularly fighting at middleweight and a match would have made sense. He fought LaMotta, Abrams, Henry Brimm, Artie Levine, etc so why not Burley?

[Ambling Alp II]

Now you are criticizing a welterweight for not fighting enough middleweights.

[Cojimar 1946]

He's not just a welterweight if the majority of his fights are at middleweight. In many of those years the majority of his fights were at middleweight against other middleweights. You have a strange definition of weight divisions if you are prepared to say someone is not part of a division in which they have the majority of their fights.

Also, regardless of whether you think he was a middleweight or not during the period in question he was fighting numerous middleweights. So why not fight Burley? He fought many middleweights including some who were top contenders. A fight was planned for May 1946 but Robinson pulled out because he felt he wasn't getting paid enough which kind of torpedoes the idea that the fight didn't happen because of timing.

[Ambling Alp II]

I tried. You are hopeless.

[Cojimar 1946]

the majority of his fights at middleweight in 1944, 1945, 1946, 1947, 1948, 1949, and 195
You also haven't offered any explanation as to why he didn't fight Dave Sands.
Ring Magazine rated Robinson at middleweight in 1949 and 1950 and Robinson himself mentions in his autobiography he had been pursuing a shot at the middleweight title for years. Is Robinson lying?
If Floyd Mayweather dropped down to 140 periodically would that mean he was not really a welterweight and thus not required to face the top contenders at that weight?

John L Sullivan never fought Peter Jackson
James Jeffries didn't defend against Jack Johnson
Jack Johnson didn't defend against Sam Langford
Jack Dempsey didn't defend against Harry Greb or Harry Wills
Lennox Lewis didn't face Mike Tyson or Evander Holyfield in their primes
Lennox Lewis didn't fight Riddick Bowe
Anthony Joshua didn't face Alexander Povetkin in 2016 when Povetkin was still prime
Tyson Fury didn't face Wladimir Klitschko in 2012/13/14 when Wladimir was still prime

Boxing is full of great fights that never happened or didn't happen when they should have happened.

I decided to look up all the guys rated in the top 4 that Robinson failed to face at welterweight and middleweight. I will soon do an analysis for other fighters. The ranking shows the highest rating they received if we include the champion in the ratings
welterweight (1942-1950)
Freddie Cochrane (1)
Leo Rodak(4)
Johnny Greco(4)
Tippy Larkin(3)
Beau Jack(4)
Gene Burton(2)
Frankie Fernandez(3)
Billy Graham(1)