Floyd Mayweather lashes out after being ranked behind Sugar Ray Leonard in list of best welterweights

[IKSRTFO]

Heanns is also great enough offensively to catch Floyd just like Shane did, except Hearns hits much harder and would finish him if hurt.

[oogiebe]

Heanns is also great enough offensively to catch Floyd just like Shane did, except Hearns hits much harder and would finish him if hurt.

I get it. You don't have to keep repeating yourself. We disagree. While Hearns could win, he wouldn't slaughter Floyd.

[Onetimeonly]

Tommy would beat Floyd like benitez. Close but clear.

[gilgamesh]

He can lash out, but the list ain't wrong. Leonard was a better Welterweight, and he had the better career in a pound for pound sense.

Leonard's biggest wins are bigger than Floyd's biggest wins, and they're over better fighters.

Floyd does have MORE wins so he's got that going for him in the argument at least.

He has more name wins on his record than Leonard does, but Leonard has the bigger individual wins of the two.

[jamesmcdonnell]

I think it more likely that Floyd goes the distance after taking a fairly one sided beating from Hearns. What I will also say is that Floyd, like all elite level fighters, has underrated toughness, he's been hurt before, but never looked close to being stopped. Having said all that, Hearns had the sort of power that if he caught you right, you could be going to sleep.

I think Floyd is the type who would rather finish the fight, than go for broke, it's just not his style.

[jamesmcdonnell]

He can lash out, but the list ain't wrong. Leonard was a better Welterweight, and he had the better career in a pound for pound sense.

Leonard's biggest wins are bigger than Floyd's biggest wins, and they're over better fighters.

Floyd does have MORE wins so he's got that going for him in the argument at least.

He has more name wins on his record than Leonard does, but Leonard has the bigger individual wins of the two.

Leonards win over Hearns trumps anything Floyd did.

His best win at Welter is probably over a young Canelo. The other big names were quite a way past their peaks, Mosley and DLH were not the fighters they were when they met in their respective primes. Marquez, totally outgunned, Pacquaio, still a good fighter, but not a natural WW, and definitely not the animal he was a few years prior.

Hearns was absolutely in his prime, and on a terrific run of form.

[Evander]

Wouldn't say Hearns was in his prime.
Leonards win was massive, and 15 scheduled.

[Thomastearns]

Floyd could lose to Hearns or SRR ,but he won't get "slaughtered," which is what I've been saying in response. All three are an elite level that makes it too hard to predict. to say 'stylewise' is a bit foolish. Floyd is an amazing fighter. What in his career shows you that Hearns would be able to outbox him in the first place?

Hearns was about the toughest fighter ever to outbox. That height, reach, speed, and elite jab/straight right were pretty much impossible to get the better of. The guy out-jabbed and out-boxed Virgil Hill at Lt. Heavyweight, for God's sake.

In order to beat him, you had to absorb the damage necessary (which is far easier said than done) to take him inside and turn it into a fire fight. Floyd didn't have the size, power, or combination punching Leonard possessed to make that route work for him.

Best case scenario is he loses a wide UD a la Benitez. Worst case is he goes for broke and gets KO'd.

You're right, especially as if in the early days when Tommy boxed in the 'Motor City Cobra' style. He was practically unbeatable at WW as great champions like Cuevas and Benitez both found out.

If, as in the later days, he wanted to play 'The Hit-Man' then all bets we're off. Almost anything could happen as we saw in the resulting carnage of the wars with Duran, Hagler, Roldan, Barkley etc

Always a difficult and formidable opponent was Hearns, whichever version you faced.

[banjo]

It's hilarious how Mayweather refers to Duran as a 'lightweight', as if Duran is a nothing fighter.

Duran was the best fighter of the 70s and he belongs in the conversation about who is the greatest lightweight of all-time.

He was also still very much in his prime and was comfortable at 147 despite being the 135 kingpin.

I know, Mayweather never fought anyone as good as Duran or Hearns or Hagler.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Wouldn't say Hearns was in his prime.
Leonards win was massive, and 15 scheduled.

Well, he was neither green, not on the slide, and was spanking everyone put in front of him at WW at the time.

He was giving Leonard a boxing lesson, and it took Leonard to abandon his usual style to win, something that truly great fighters do.

[jamesmcdonnell]

It's hilarious how Mayweather refers to Duran as a 'lightweight', as if Duran is a nothing fighter.

Duran was the best fighter of the 70s and he belongs in the conversation about who is the greatest lightweight of all-time.

He was also still very much in his prime and was comfortable at 147 despite being the 135 kingpin.

I know, Mayweather never fought anyone as good as Duran or Hearns or Hagler.

Or Benitez arguably - who on his roster was as good as the version of Benitez when Leonard beat him?

I think Mayweather was at his most impressive at super featherweight, he still possessed the punchpower to be aggressive, and went looking for his opponents.

[gilgamesh]

He can lash out, but the list ain't wrong. Leonard was a better Welterweight, and he had the better career in a pound for pound sense.

Leonard's biggest wins are bigger than Floyd's biggest wins, and they're over better fighters.

Floyd does have MORE wins so he's got that going for him in the argument at least.

He has more name wins on his record than Leonard does, but Leonard has the bigger individual wins of the two.

Leonards win over Hearns trumps anything Floyd did.

His best win at Welter is probably over a young Canelo. The other big names were quite a way past their peaks, Mosley and DLH were not the fighters they were when they met in their respective primes. Marquez, totally outgunned, Pacquaio, still a good fighter, but not a natural WW, and definitely not the animal he was a few years prior.

Hearns was absolutely in his prime, and on a terrific run of form.

His best win at Welterweight is Pacquiao. The Canelo fight was a Jr. Middleweight catchweight bout.

[gilgamesh]

Wouldn't say Hearns was in his prime.
Leonards win was massive, and 15 scheduled.

Wouldn't say Hearns was in his prime? Based on what?

He was undefeated, he was beating the sh*t out of everybody except Leonard, and he was at least even money to beat Leonard if not the slight favorite.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Leonards win over Hearns trumps anything Floyd did.

His best win at Welter is probably over a young Canelo. The other big names were quite a way past their peaks, Mosley and DLH were not the fighters they were when they met in their respective primes. Marquez, totally outgunned, Pacquaio, still a good fighter, but not a natural WW, and definitely not the animal he was a few years prior.

Hearns was absolutely in his prime, and on a terrific run of form.

His best win at Welterweight is Pacquiao. The Canelo fight was a Jr. Middleweight catchweight bout.

Yeah, unfortunately pacquiao wasn't really the same guy he'd been 5 years before. He seemed to lose something once he became a megastar. You're possibly right though.

[gilgamesh]

His best win at Welterweight is Pacquiao. The Canelo fight was a Jr. Middleweight catchweight bout.

Yeah, unfortunately pacquiao wasn't really the same guy he'd been 5 years before. He seemed to lose something once he became a megastar. You're possibly right though.

I'll give it to you that it wasn't the very best Pacquiao we'd ever seen.

But it also wasn't the very best Floyd we'd ever seen.

Nevertheless they are the 2 best fighters of their era, and easily the 2 biggest megastars in the sport up to this point in 21st century Boxing, and therefore the fight between the two has to be the biggest thing in Floyd's career pretty much.

People can say all they want "Oh Pac was past his prime"...yeah, well it's 5 years later, and he has a World Title right f*cking now. He is 2 years younger than Floyd.

So yeah, it meant a lot to beat him.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Yeah, unfortunately pacquiao wasn't really the same guy he'd been 5 years before. He seemed to lose something once he became a megastar. You're possibly right though.

I'll give it to you that it wasn't the very best Pacquiao we'd ever seen.

But it also wasn't the very best Floyd we'd ever seen.

Nevertheless they are the 2 best fighters of their era, and easily the 2 biggest megastars in the sport up to this point in 21st century Boxing, and therefore the fight between the two has to be the biggest thing in Floyd's career pretty much.

People can say all they want "Oh Pac was past his prime"...yeah, well it's 5 years later, and he has a World Title right f*cking now. He is 2 years younger than Floyd.

So yeah, it meant a lot to beat him.

Fair dos.

[margaret thatcher]

Floyd always would've beat son of jinky and it rates as a very good win for sure still, but his skillful style aged better than Pac's super intense fast paced style based on overwhelming. Doesn't matter that he's older than Pac, don't be a newb who doesn't know that fighters age differently. Bit of a Hop-RJ thing.

[gilgamesh]

Floyd always would've beat son of jinky and it rates as a very good win for sure still, but his skillful style aged better than Pac's super intense fast paced style based on overwhelming. Doesn't matter that he's older than Pac, don't be a newb who doesn't know that fighters age differently. Bit of a Hop-RJ thing.

I'm not sure if Floyd could come back and win a title right now.

I'm fully aware that fighters age differently. It's just stupid to act as if an older fighter "waited out" a younger fighter which is what a lot of people act like Floyd did.

[Evander]

Ray Leonard was a great fighter but Floyd Mayweather can sometimes be harshly criticized.
It should be remembered that Ray Leonard spent a lot of time out of the ring during his career, he was out of action from February 82 to May 84, from May 84 to April 87 and from February 91 to March 97.
Apart from the Kevin Howard fight Ray Leonard spent just over 11 years out of the sport, that stuff should be taken into account.
Floyd Mayweather never had layoffs that long.
Sure you could argue the toss on who was a better Welterweight all day long, I just think it should be remembered and put into context just who was a more active fighter during their careers.
People love to hate on Floyd, most I'm sure just don't like his personality, but you'd be very hard pushed to make a case on him not being one of the greatest fighters of the modern era, sorry but it's just not luck that gets you to 50-0.

[Evander]

Wouldn't say Hearns was in his prime.
Leonards win was massive, and 15 scheduled.

Wouldn't say Hearns was in his prime? Based on what?

He was undefeated, he was beating the sh*t out of everybody except Leonard, and he was at least even money to beat Leonard if not the slight favorite.

I'd say Hearns was pretty close to prime, however the fact that he blasted out Duran in 2 in 84 was monumental for him, it help set up the war with Hagler less than a year later.

[Evander]

Wouldn't say Hearns was in his prime.
Leonards win was massive, and 15 scheduled.

Well, he was neither green, not on the slide, and was spanking everyone put in front of him at WW at the time.

He was giving Leonard a boxing lesson, and it took Leonard to abandon his usual style to win, something that truly great fighters do.

I won't argue the toss on that statement, however he lost didn't he and blew Duran out way easier in spectacular fashion less than 3 years later.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Styles make fights.

[IKSRTFO]

Ray Leonard was a great fighter but Floyd Mayweather can sometimes be harshly criticized.
It should be remembered that Ray Leonard spent a lot of time out of the ring during his career, he was out of action from February 82 to May 84, from May 84 to April 87 and from February 91 to March 97.
Apart from the Kevin Howard fight Ray Leonard spent just over 11 years out of the sport, that stuff should be taken into account.
Floyd Mayweather never had layoffs that long.
Sure you could argue the toss on who was a better Welterweight all day long, I just think it should be remembered and put into context just who was a more active fighter during their careers.
People love to hate on Floyd, most I'm sure just don't like his personality, but you'd be very hard pushed to make a case on him not being one of the greatest fighters of the modern era, sorry but it's just not luck that gets you to 50-0.

Floyd Mayweather never had a detached retina either. He took long layoffs on his own merit while the divisions around him were hot.

[world ranked]

Floyd always would've beat son of jinky and it rates as a very good win for sure still, but his skillful style aged better than Pac's super intense fast paced style based on overwhelming. Doesn't matter that he's older than Pac, don't be a newb who doesn't know that fighters age differently. Bit of a Hop-RJ thing.

Still don't down play the fact that both were not in prime. If either lost the prime argument could be made.

[margaret thatcher]

There was more change in Pac, he lost a lot of intensity and his style relied more on that raw explosiveness and heat. Floyd being a bit older doesnt change any of that . Naturally the more sound and skillful boxer has a style that ages better.