Floyd Mayweather jr vs The Fab Three @ 147

[gilgamesh]

Floyd lost 5 rounds against dlh, 4 against cotto, 5 against maidana, 4 judah, some to hatton....


He lost plentry rounds

Castillo beat him, everyone knows it

I definitely had Castillo winning their 1st bout for sure. Cotto often doesn't get credit for the good effort he put in against Floyd I'm glad you gave him some here.

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

Floyd was less effective at 135 than any other weight he ever competed at. He looked great against Ndou and mediocre in his 3 other fights at the weight.

Where did he crush corrales? 130?

Yes

He was completely dominant at 130.

My mistake

His best weight was 130

[Ambling Alp II]

I'm pretty confident he would've always beaten Pac. His style is bad for Pac.

The problems that Marquez always presented to Pacquiao, Mayweather presents those problems with greater speed and accuracy.

I'm not all. Pacquaio had nonstop, effective aggression. People are always confident with Mythical fights. When it is reality, people aren't so confident. Mayweather never had a win in real life remotely close to beating a prime Pacquiao. There was a reason that this fight didn't happen in the 5-6 span where it would have meant something.

[gilgamesh]

I'm pretty confident he would've always beaten Pac. His style is bad for Pac.

The problems that Marquez always presented to Pacquiao, Mayweather presents those problems with greater speed and accuracy.

I'm not all. Pacquaio had nonstop, effective aggression. People are always confident with Mythical fights. When it is reality, people aren't so confident. Mayweather never had a win in real life remotely close to beating a prime Pacquiao. There was a reason that this fight didn't happen in the 5-6 span where it would have meant something.

Whether or not Pacquiao could've beaten him in 2010 or 2011 we'll never know. But Pacquiao being able to have a competitive, and close fight with Mayweather in what was Pacquiao's 8th weight class compared to Mayweather's 4th. Says enough in my opinion. Pacquiao is a unique fighter. He's the Henry Armstrong of our time.

And while I know Alp knows what I mean when I say he's the Henry Armstrong of our time. Let me just make it clear for the younger fans who may not. What I'm saying is that Pacquiao could be expected to beat or at bare minimum compete legitimately with any man his various sizes at any point in time. He's a Legend in his own time. He's one of the best fighters we will ever live to see. There may be better fighters than him some day, but in all likelihood you won't live to see more than 2 or 3 of them if you're lucky. He's special.

And Mayweather beat him. So Mayweather is too.

[Cojimar 1946]

I'm not all. Pacquaio had nonstop, effective aggression. People are always confident with Mythical fights. When it is reality, people aren't so confident. Mayweather never had a win in real life remotely close to beating a prime Pacquiao. There was a reason that this fight didn't happen in the 5-6 span where it would have meant something.
[/quote]

Pacquiao was best at featherweight, nobody really rates him super high at welterweight.

And welterweight wasn't Floyd's best weight anyway

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

May vs pac would have been more competitive had pacquiao fought him prior to being knocked out cold by marquez

But mayweather is better at 147 and his style is tough for pacman at any point

[Ambling Alp II]

I'm pretty confident he would've always beaten Pac. His style is bad for Pac.

The problems that Marquez always presented to Pacquiao, Mayweather presents those problems with greater speed and accuracy.

I'm not all. Pacquaio had nonstop, effective aggression. People are always confident with Mythical fights. When it is reality, people aren't so confident. Mayweather never had a win in real life remotely close to beating a prime Pacquiao. There was a reason that this fight didn't happen in the 5-6 span where it would have meant something.

Whether or not Pacquiao could've beaten him in 2010 or 2011 we'll never know. But Pacquiao being able to have a competitive, and close fight with Mayweather in what was Pacquiao's 8th weight class compared to Mayweather's 4th. Says enough in my opinion. Pacquiao is a unique fighter. He's the Henry Armstrong of our time.

And while I know Alp knows what I mean when I say he's the Henry Armstrong of our time. Let me just make it clear for the younger fans who may not. What I'm saying is that Pacquiao could be expected to beat or at bare minimum compete legitimately with any man his various sizes at any point in time. He's a Legend in his own time. He's one of the best fighters we will ever live to see. There may be better fighters than him some day, but in all likelihood you won't live to see more than 2 or 3 of them if you're lucky. He's special.

And Mayweather beat him. So Mayweather is too.

I was with you until the last line. That fight didn't mean much. It was just for $. Mayweather was past his best and Pacquaio was further past his. sort of like Leonard-Duran III. You can argue for Mayweather being great, but it's not because of that fight.

Pacquaio would have fit right in during the 30s and 40s. He would have fought several quality fighters multiple times. He would have had occasional losses but would have been one of the top guys.

[gilgamesh]

He had already proven he was great prior to fighting Pacquiao, but beating Pacquiao further solidified his legacy. I still don't know if I'd wind up rating him above Pacquiao overall when I break it all down for Pac, but the win over Pac wasn't meaningless. Wasn't as meaningful as it would've been 6 years earlier, yes I agree, but it wasn't meaningless.

Better late than never is what we got there.

[Ambling Alp II]

better late than never? Not really. A boring fight that proved nothing.

[gilgamesh]

better late than never? Not really. A boring fight that proved nothing.

It proved that Mayweather was better than Pacquiao while Keith Thurman who was the #1 Welterweight years later after Floyd had retired couldn't prove the same thing.

It was pretty boring as were a lot of Floyd's fights, but it has its moments of sporadic action. Many high level boxing matches wind up being kinda tedious like that honestly. There's a lot at stake for all involved.

Pacquiao is still a good fighter now. Against all odds. 10 years after the Floyd loss, he's fighting draws with current World Titleholders. He's not a great fighter now, but he's a good one. So you can't tell me that he was just completely shot to pieces and hopeless 10 years ago.

[Ambling Alp II]

Yeah, it proved that at the time, Mayweather was better than Pacquaio. And Pacquaio was better than Keith Thurman. So what?

No, he wasn't completely shot. But he was what 80% of the fighter that he once was? Even that is pushing it. He had a ton of wear and terror with all those big fights he over the years. Mayweather-Pacquaio would probably have been a great fight had it happened way before it did. It the fight out there for several years. It not happening really hurt boxing.

I honestly didn't even know Pacquaio is still fighting. Have not heard anything about any of his fights in a long time.

Most guys don't go from their absolute best to shot overnight. Ray Robinson was past his best by 1951. He was still great for a few more years. Then just very good for a while, and then just good by the time he retired in 1965.

The amount of credit his opponent should get for beating is less as less the further he got past his prime. Robinson himself obviously beat a lot of great fighters. As he himself said, when he beat Armstrong he didn't beat a prime Armstrong.

[gilgamesh]

It proves that Mayweather at an older age was still recording some of his most noteworthy wins. After the age of 34 Mayweather picked up wins against Miguel Cotto, Marcos Maidana 2x, Canelo Alvarez and Manny Pacquiao among others.

Ray Leonard picked up 2 losses against Terry Norris and Hector Camacho

Duran past the age of 34 has the win over Barkley, a solid win over Jorge Castro, and a lot of other losses against the other decent fighters he fought during that run, and a lot of wins against Journeymen.

Hearns past the age of 34 never got another significant win in his career.

Aside from his continued success as he aged. Floyd also has more Championship wins than any 2 of the "Fab 3" combined.

Duran and Leonard combined have 24 Championship wins to his 26. Leonard and Hearns combined have 23.

Give Mayweather credit. Whether or not you think he can beat these men or not. He absolutely deserves to be considered to be in their class, and in the conversation with them.

[Ambling Alp II]

Some problems here. You think that beating a name means something. It doesn't always. You can't always just go age. Leonard was clearly past his best. He had not fought in over a year when he fought Norris. Norris was pretty good.
The Camacho fight? Seriously?

Leonard had wins over Benitez, Duran, Hearns and Hagler. All but Halger were in their prime. And Hagler was not far past his, and was closer to his prime than Leonard was. Leonard had not fought in 3 years. And it was Hagler's weight class. And Leonard still won.

You also don't seem to be factoring in that Leonard missed some of his best time because of the detached retna. He had one fight in 5 years following that. He never the same after that.

Mayweather doesn't have a win remotely close to these. His best is against Cotto. who moved up two weight classes to fight Mayweather.
Leonard did not need to have the judges bail him out with BS decisions to get wins. Mayweather did. In his prime.

I really don't care if one guy is better than another when they are both well past their best. It's like comparing baseball players going by Old Timers games. Don't care.

Have seen plenty of Mayweather and Leonard on video.
No, Mayweather was not as good as Leonard. He doesn't deserve to be in the conversation with him.

[gilgamesh]

Mayweather's biggest wins aren't as big as Leonard's biggest wins. Mayweather overall had a better career than Leonard.

He has more achievements than Leonard in almost every measurable category. He even has more Championship wins at Welterweight than Leonard does even though Welterweight was Leonard's primary weight class, while it was the 4th for Mayweather. He beat more Hall of Famers than Leonard. He has more wins total than Leonard. He has more KO wins than Leonard. He has more EVERYTHING than Leonard.

Mayweather never had to take years off in the middle of his career for a detached retina because he never suffered one. He did have to win fights with damaged hands though, and he succeeded.

I don't think Mayweather beats Leonard head to head in their prime, but I know for a fact that he had a better career than Leonard because the proof is there to see, and as for who I think would've won in a mythical fight well...maybe I'm wrong.

[gilgamesh]

P4P
1. Evander Holyfield - 869 points
2. Naoya Inoue - 666 Points
3. Floyd Mayweather Jr. - 656 Points
4. Ray Leonard - 602 Points
5. Oscar De La Hoya - 540 Points
6. Roy Jones Jr. - 524 Points
7. Oleksandr Usyk - 447 points
8. Michael Spinks - 418 points
9. Naseem Hamed - 385 points

That's the names as they stand right now that I've watched every fight of in recent months, and how they stack up. Not many people are going to be joining Ray in the 600 point club. I still haven't measured the other 3 of the 4 Kings, but I'm working on it.

Soon I'm gonna take a break from all the Classic Boxing, but I wanted to get some names onto the list to establish a base for the people that are generally held in the highest regard

[tiny_acres]

Some problems here. You think that beating a name means something. It doesn't always. You can't always just go age. Leonard was clearly past his best. He had not fought in over a year when he fought Norris. Norris was pretty good.
The Camacho fight? Seriously?

Leonard had wins over Benitez, Duran, Hearns and Hagler. All but Halger were in their prime. And Hagler was not far past his, and was closer to his prime than Leonard was. Leonard had not fought in 3 years. And it was Hagler's weight class. And Leonard still won.

You also don't seem to be factoring in that Leonard missed some of his best time because of the detached retna. He had one fight in 5 years following that. He never the same after that.

Mayweather doesn't have a win remotely close to these. His best is against Cotto. who moved up two weight classes to fight Mayweather.
Leonard did not need to have the judges bail him out with BS decisions to get wins. Mayweather did. In his prime.

I really don't care if one guy is better than another when they are both well past their best. It's like comparing baseball players going by Old Timers games. Don't care.

Have seen plenty of Mayweather and Leonard on video.
No, Mayweather was not as good as Leonard. He doesn't deserve to be in the conversation with him.

Cotto did not move up 2 weight classes to face Mayweather. Cotto had been fighting at 154 since he lost to Pacquioa ove 3 years before.

[gilgamesh]

Some problems here. You think that beating a name means something. It doesn't always. You can't always just go age. Leonard was clearly past his best. He had not fought in over a year when he fought Norris. Norris was pretty good.
The Camacho fight? Seriously?

Leonard had wins over Benitez, Duran, Hearns and Hagler. All but Halger were in their prime. And Hagler was not far past his, and was closer to his prime than Leonard was. Leonard had not fought in 3 years. And it was Hagler's weight class. And Leonard still won.

You also don't seem to be factoring in that Leonard missed some of his best time because of the detached retna. He had one fight in 5 years following that. He never the same after that.

Mayweather doesn't have a win remotely close to these. His best is against Cotto. who moved up two weight classes to fight Mayweather.
Leonard did not need to have the judges bail him out with BS decisions to get wins. Mayweather did. In his prime.

I really don't care if one guy is better than another when they are both well past their best. It's like comparing baseball players going by Old Timers games. Don't care.

Have seen plenty of Mayweather and Leonard on video.
No, Mayweather was not as good as Leonard. He doesn't deserve to be in the conversation with him.

Cotto did not move up 2 weight classes to face Mayweather. Cotto had been fighting at 154 since he lost to Pacquioa ove 3 years before.

Cotto began his career at 140 while Mayweather began his career at 130. Cotto also won the Middleweight Championship while Mayweather never competed at Middleweight at all. Cotto was the bigger man by a little bit than Mayweather.

[tiny_acres]

Some problems here. You think that beating a name means something. It doesn't always. You can't always just go age. Leonard was clearly past his best. He had not fought in over a year when he fought Norris. Norris was pretty good.
The Camacho fight? Seriously?

Leonard had wins over Benitez, Duran, Hearns and Hagler. All but Halger were in their prime. And Hagler was not far past his, and was closer to his prime than Leonard was. Leonard had not fought in 3 years. And it was Hagler's weight class. And Leonard still won.

You also don't seem to be factoring in that Leonard missed some of his best time because of the detached retna. He had one fight in 5 years following that. He never the same after that.

Mayweather doesn't have a win remotely close to these. His best is against Cotto. who moved up two weight classes to fight Mayweather.
Leonard did not need to have the judges bail him out with BS decisions to get wins. Mayweather did. In his prime.

I really don't care if one guy is better than another when they are both well past their best. It's like comparing baseball players going by Old Timers games. Don't care.

Have seen plenty of Mayweather and Leonard on video.
No, Mayweather was not as good as Leonard. He doesn't deserve to be in the conversation with him.

Cotto did not move up 2 weight classes to face Mayweather. Cotto had been fighting at 154 since he lost to Pacquioa ove 3 years before.

Cotto began his career at 140 while Mayweather began his career at 130. Cotto also won the Middleweight Championship while Mayweather never competed at Middleweight at all. Cotto was the bigger man by a little bit than Mayweather.

I agree.

[Ambling Alp II]

Mayweather's biggest wins aren't as big as Leonard's biggest wins. Mayweather overall had a better career than Leonard.

He has more achievements than Leonard in almost every measurable category. He even has more Championship wins at Welterweight than Leonard does even though Welterweight was Leonard's primary weight class, while it was the 4th for Mayweather. He beat more Hall of Famers than Leonard. He has more wins total than Leonard. He has more KO wins than Leonard. He has more EVERYTHING than Leonard.

Mayweather never had to take years off in the middle of his career for a detached retina because he never suffered one. He did have to win fights with damaged hands though, and he succeeded.

I don't think Mayweather beats Leonard head to head in their prime, but I know for a fact that he had a better career than Leonard because the proof is there to see, and as for who I think would've won in a mythical fight well...maybe I'm wrong.

Except those "achievements" don't mean very much in comparison to beat 4 of the Top 50 fighters of all time, when they were still great, which is what counts. How many fighters have done this? Less than 10.
Mayweather has zero wins that compare to those 4.
Leonard had injured hands during his career as well.

What you don't get about the detached retina is that it forced Leonard out of the sport during his prime. Fighters don't come back as good as they once were after long layoffs like this. He was better than expected when he came back, but clearly not as good. And that almost always happens to fighters who came back after that kind of layoff.

Mayweather would have losses to non-great fighters in his prime if it was not for corrupt judges. Leonard did have that.
total wins? Seriously? Total wins means virtually nothing in boxing. You can always find a stiff to beat. Do we really need to go through names of guys who were not that good that had more wins than Mayweather?

The proof is that Leonard had the better career.

[Ambling Alp II]

Some problems here. You think that beating a name means something. It doesn't always. You can't always just go age. Leonard was clearly past his best. He had not fought in over a year when he fought Norris. Norris was pretty good.
The Camacho fight? Seriously?

Leonard had wins over Benitez, Duran, Hearns and Hagler. All but Halger were in their prime. And Hagler was not far past his, and was closer to his prime than Leonard was. Leonard had not fought in 3 years. And it was Hagler's weight class. And Leonard still won.

You also don't seem to be factoring in that Leonard missed some of his best time because of the detached retna. He had one fight in 5 years following that. He never the same after that.

Mayweather doesn't have a win remotely close to these. His best is against Cotto. who moved up two weight classes to fight Mayweather.
Leonard did not need to have the judges bail him out with BS decisions to get wins. Mayweather did. In his prime.

I really don't care if one guy is better than another when they are both well past their best. It's like comparing baseball players going by Old Timers games. Don't care.

Have seen plenty of Mayweather and Leonard on video.
No, Mayweather was not as good as Leonard. He doesn't deserve to be in the conversation with him.

Cotto did not move up 2 weight classes to face Mayweather. Cotto had been fighting at 154 since he lost to Pacquioa ove 3 years before.

Cotto began his career at 140 while Mayweather began his career at 130. Cotto also won the Middleweight Championship while Mayweather never competed at Middleweight at all. Cotto was the bigger man by a little bit than Mayweather.

Sorry I mean Marquez, not Cotto.

[Sweet Dick Willie]

Old time feelings are great but Mayweather would have beaten Leonards and Duran, maybe even Hearns.

[gilgamesh]

Mayweather's biggest wins aren't as big as Leonard's biggest wins. Mayweather overall had a better career than Leonard.

He has more achievements than Leonard in almost every measurable category. He even has more Championship wins at Welterweight than Leonard does even though Welterweight was Leonard's primary weight class, while it was the 4th for Mayweather. He beat more Hall of Famers than Leonard. He has more wins total than Leonard. He has more KO wins than Leonard. He has more EVERYTHING than Leonard.

Mayweather never had to take years off in the middle of his career for a detached retina because he never suffered one. He did have to win fights with damaged hands though, and he succeeded.

I don't think Mayweather beats Leonard head to head in their prime, but I know for a fact that he had a better career than Leonard because the proof is there to see, and as for who I think would've won in a mythical fight well...maybe I'm wrong.

Except those "achievements" don't mean very much in comparison to beat 4 of the Top 50 fighters of all time, when they were still great, which is what counts. How many fighters have done this? Less than 10.
Mayweather has zero wins that compare to those 4.
Leonard had injured hands during his career as well.

What you don't get about the detached retina is that it forced Leonard out of the sport during his prime. Fighters don't come back as good as they once were after long layoffs like this. He was better than expected when he came back, but clearly not as good. And that almost always happens to fighters who came back after that kind of layoff.

Mayweather would have losses to non-great fighters in his prime if it was not for corrupt judges. Leonard did have that.
total wins? Seriously? Total wins means virtually nothing in boxing. You can always find a stiff to beat. Do we really need to go through names of guys who were not that good that had more wins than Mayweather?

The proof is that Leonard had the better career.

Other than Ali I don't know if anyone has 3 bigger wins than Leonard. And if the comparison stopped at simply their 3 biggest wins then Leonard would be well ahead.

It doesn't though.

For the record though. I would favor Leonard in a head to head mythical fight.

[keithmoonhangover]

Old time feelings are great but Mayweather would have beaten Leonards and Duran, maybe even Hearns.

What would be his tactic to beat Leonard?

[Sweet Dick Willie]

Old time feelings are great but Mayweather would have beaten Leonards and Duran, maybe even Hearns.

What would be his tactic to beat Leonard?

Taking advantage of Leonards aggression with that philly shell defence and counter with that shoulder roll uppercut. Leonard was aggressive when he had no other options and I do believe that Floyd would have frustrated the hell out of him.

[Sweet Dick Willie]

(Sorry for the short reply as I'm working)