BoxRec

NateJR wrote:I agree Floyd isn't G.O.A.T, but he definitely belongs in the top 10 and arguably in the top 5 based on his longevity along with his overall accomplishments. Floyd could arguably be the greatest defensive fighter to ever lace them up (he undeniably belongs in the mix), or the most intelligent ring general with the ability to adapt to every style that was put in front of him.

I personally feel if Floyd were to lose a fight even at the age of 39, that loss would hold more weight than it actually should. To be fair, there isn't a fighter on any ones top 10 ATG list that was still fighting and winning at the same level Floyd continues to fight and win at. That isn't how people view Floyd though, they look for every little nick and cranny to scrutinize him not even taking into consideration Floyd spent the first 11 years of his career taking risks in the ring and eventually evolved his style to make fights easier as he got older (realizing his couldn't take those types of risks later on his career if he wanted to live a healthy life after retirement). Floyd chose to take the smart route and learn how to fight smarter, not harder which is the main reason he's been so successful this late in his career. Floyd payed his dues in the early part of his career, fought tough fighters and fought tough, taking risks and proving he was more than a pure boxer and that he could mix it up when he had to, those are the days that people tend to forget and tend to forget that Floyd is now 39 years old and is no longer the same fighter he was. It seems to me, everyone bases Floyds entire career on his last 7 years of his career and either don't know or have forgotten the road he took the first 11 years of his career.

Now to those saying Floyd deserves scrutiny at 39 years old for not fighting like he was 25 years old, just think about what you said for second. Floyd has been fighting in a safety first manner for the last 7 years of his career (with a few fights where he actually wasn't safety first, like against Hatton, Mosley, Ortiz and Madaina 1).. Now Floyd has a history of fighting this way, if you're willing to pay $100 for a Mayweather PPV with out knowing how Floyd Mayweather fights, how does Floyd deserve scrutiny due to other peoples ignorance? The truth of the matter is, everyone bought into the hype that Pacquiao, Alvarez etc. were the boogey men that were going to beat Floyd. People payed to see Floyd lose, but when it didn't happen, suddenly it's Floyd fault because they payed to see Floyd Mayweather win a fight the way Floyd Mayweather fights. Like I said, why does Floyd deserve scrutiny based on another persons ignorance?

stevedoc wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

world ranked wrote:Maybe the best defensive fighters of all time. And beat guys like Hernandez, Corrales, Castillo, Hatton, Mosley, Pacquaio, Cotto, Alvarez, etc

Yes the only real competition I can think of in my lifetime, is Pernell Whittaker. Similar fighters, though Pernell carried a little more pop.

Really, different styles and pernell couldn't punch at all Floyd has more power but doesn't chose to trade

MachoTime wrote:

NateJR wrote:Saying Floyd would have to move up to 160 (2 divisions above his naturalweight) and fight a prime Champion at the age of 39 to compare to Leonard beating Hagler is ludacris. These are the types of standards people hold Floyd to that i was talking about. As was mentioned Leonard was only 30 when he fought Hagler, plus Leonard was a bonafide Welterweight or bigger his entire career, Floyd is a former super featherweight. IMO floyd beating DLH, Cotto and Alvarez is more impressive than Leonard beating Hagler.

All of them guys your talking about DLH, Cotto and Alvarez would have been lit up by Leonard & Hagler. Is more impressive than beating Hagler, yeah sure.

KBB wrote:Notice the Pacquiao faithful won't even bother to get in this thread to give Floyd any credit at all, this is how you know how butthurt these IDIOTS are, they call themselves "boxing fans" and cannot even put their girlie hate emotions aside to give credit where credit is due.

It's funny whenever I read threads like these and someone will say that the ATG's fought better competition, I say go and get the records of these so called "ATGs" and do a side by side comparison to those on Mayweather's list and you'll see for yourself that many of the fighters on their lists barely measure up or are nowhere near far ahead but they only have a name for themselves based on who they lost to or beat.

SRL waited until Hagler was long in the tooth before he took that bout, he never faced Pryor. It was Manny Pacquiao's fault that the fight didn't happen in 2010 so anyone still stupid enough to blame that on Floyd obviously doesn't know what they are talking about.

Floyd is definitely one of the ATGs, by the time it's said and done (assuming he breaks Marciano's record) he will easily sit in the Top 10 whether the hater here like it or not.

NateJR wrote:Saying Floyd would have to move up to 160 (2 divisions above his naturalweight) and fight a prime Champion at the age of 39 to compare to Leonard beating Hagler is ludacris. These are the types of standards people hold Floyd to that i was talking about. As was mentioned Leonard was only 30 when he fought Hagler, plus Leonard was a bonafide Welterweight or bigger his entire career, Floyd is a former super featherweight. IMO floyd beating DLH, Cotto and Alvarez is more impressive than Leonard beating Hagler.

NateJR wrote:Leonard s physical prime was at 147, Floyds physical prime was somewhere around 130 and 135. this isn't because Leonard was that much better than Floyd and could beat up bigger men.. its because Leonard was a naturally bigger man.

davie wrote:

NateJR wrote:Leonard s physical prime was at 147, Floyds physical prime was somewhere around 130 and 135. this isn't because Leonard was that much better than Floyd and could beat up bigger men.. its because Leonard was a naturally bigger man.

Floyd is however now a fully established welter, he's been there and above since 2005/2006.
If you were to put the best Welterweight Floyd in with the best welterweight SRL, who would you pick to come out on top?

NateJR wrote:

As far as floyd vs. Leonard at 147 lets say both in their prime as far as campaingning in thatg division, I personally think its a pick'em fight.. regardless who I believe would win the fight still wouldn't mean SRl was a all around better fighter. if I pick Floylyd I have afeeling you'd say something along the lines of SRLbeat guys like Hearns who would have knocked Floyd unconsious, no way Floyd beats him..

davie wrote:

NateJR wrote:

As far as floyd vs. Leonard at 147 lets say both in their prime as far as campaingning in thatg division, I personally think its a pick'em fight.. regardless who I believe would win the fight still wouldn't mean SRl was a all around better fighter. if I pick Floylyd I have afeeling you'd say something along the lines of SRLbeat guys like Hearns who would have knocked Floyd unconsious, no way Floyd beats him..

I wouldn't.
I'm in agreement with you, I'd struggle to pick a winner prime vs prime at welter.
Floyd at his best was virtually impossible to get at but if anyone could find a way SRL would likely be the man to do it.

SRL did fight better fighters but was privelaged to have lived in one of the greatest era in the history of the sport. (Other than Ali/Frazier/Foreman/Norton there's no-one else in the hostory of boxing who can lay claim to having faced such strong competition.)
That doesn't automatically make him the better fighter, who's to say Floyd couldn't have won those fights?

The more impressive level of opponent does, in my opinion, place him slightly higher than Floyd on the ATG list but doesn't neccesarily mean he beats him (although I am inclined to lean slightly towards SRL but that could just be my bias for my preffered fighter)

caldo2025 wrote: Don't tell me Hatton because he was nothing but Eurotrash.

davie wrote:

NateJR wrote:

As far as floyd vs. Leonard at 147 lets say both in their prime as far as campaingning in thatg division, I personally think its a pick'em fight.. regardless who I believe would win the fight still wouldn't mean SRl was a all around better fighter. if I pick Floylyd I have afeeling you'd say something along the lines of SRLbeat guys like Hearns who would have knocked Floyd unconsious, no way Floyd beats him..

I wouldn't.
I'm in agreement with you, I'd struggle to pick a winner prime vs prime at welter.
Floyd at his best was virtually impossible to get at but if anyone could find a way SRL would likely be the man to do it.

SRL did fight better fighters but was privelaged to have lived in one of the greatest era in the history of the sport. (Other than Ali/Frazier/Foreman/Norton there's no-one else in the hostory of boxing who can lay claim to having faced such strong competition.)
That doesn't automatically make him the better fighter, who's to say Floyd couldn't have won those fights?

The more impressive level of opponent does, in my opinion, place him slightly higher than Floyd on the ATG list but doesn't neccesarily mean he beats him (although I am inclined to lean slightly towards SRL but that could just be my bias for my preffered fighter)

davie wrote:

caldo2025 wrote: Don't tell me Hatton because he was nothing but Eurotrash.

That's the second time you've used that term today.
Do you have a problem with Europeans?

NateJR wrote:

davie wrote:

NateJR wrote:

As far as floyd vs. Leonard at 147 lets say both in their prime as far as campaingning in thatg division, I personally think its a pick'em fight.. regardless who I believe would win the fight still wouldn't mean SRl was a all around better fighter. if I pick Floylyd I have afeeling you'd say something along the lines of SRLbeat guys like Hearns who would have knocked Floyd unconsious, no way Floyd beats him..

I wouldn't.
I'm in agreement with you, I'd struggle to pick a winner prime vs prime at welter.
Floyd at his best was virtually impossible to get at but if anyone could find a way SRL would likely be the man to do it.

SRL did fight better fighters but was privelaged to have lived in one of the greatest era in the history of the sport. (Other than Ali/Frazier/Foreman/Norton there's no-one else in the hostory of boxing who can lay claim to having faced such strong competition.)
That doesn't automatically make him the better fighter, who's to say Floyd couldn't have won those fights?

The more impressive level of opponent does, in my opinion, place him slightly higher than Floyd on the ATG list but doesn't neccesarily mean he beats him (although I am inclined to lean slightly towards SRL but that could just be my bias for my preffered fighter)

Fair enough, I honestly feel Floyd belongs slightly higher than Sugar Ray Leonard for the fact he has remained undefeated, his longevity along with what are IMO comparable accomplishments as far as beating the best fighters of his era. I'm not going to disagree that Hearns, Duran and Hagler are more than likely better than anyone Floyd has faced, but IMO Floyd has proven enough against the great fighters of his era. Cotto, Alvarez, DLH, Pacquiao, Marquez, Corrales, Mosley, Hatton, Hernadez etc. are not names to sneeze at in Floyds defense and to be fair there's no other fighter on the planet from 154 to 130 that could have beaten that studded list of fighters while staying undefeated. SRL is among one of the ATGs in my opinion and can I always find a spot for him on my top 10 ATG lists, but I feel as a whole, Floyd has accomplished more.

caldo2025 wrote:

davie wrote:

caldo2025 wrote: Don't tell me Hatton because he was nothing but Eurotrash.

That's the second time you've used that term today.
Do you have a problem with Europeans?

I consider Eurotrash to be an overrated, blowhard boxer that all the European fans think is the greatest ever while never doing anything in the ring. They call out everyone and their brother but never get in the ring with them and if they do, they lay a fart and blame excuses.

I love Brook and Degale. These guys can back up the yapping and are fantastic. I don't mind them singing those stupid songs for these guys but there are some that are just trash. I'm talking more about British fans and boxers. They just talk so much shiit without doing anything to back it up.

caldo2025 wrote:
I love Brook and Degale. These guys can back up the yapping and are fantastic. I don't mind them singing those stupid songs for these guys.

caldo2025 wrote:SRL vs Floyd in their prime, my money would be on SRL. No one can match the heart SRL had in there and he took the toughest fights out there ALL the time. When he took on Tommy Hearns in their first fight in 1981, Hearns was considered the baddest man on the planet. Not many favored SRL. Hearns was knocking everyone out in spectacular fashion. No one thought Sugar would win much less knock out Hearns late in the fight when he needed a knockout for the win.

Floyd has no equivalent challenge in his career. Floyd didn't have a Hearns, Duran or Hagler. He could have but he chose not to fight Manny until they both had hair growing out their ears. Another knock against Floyd and his GOAT claim is his lack of knockout power. You can't be the greatest if you never knock anyone out. Yes, he knocked out Corrales 14 years ago but hasn't had a significant KO since then. Don't tell me Hatton because he was nothing but Eurotrash. SRL not only knocked out the P4P best in his prime but made a hall of famer quit in the ring because he was so damn good.

If you want to say that Floyd's the greatest defensive fighter of all time, i'll agree. But don't be giving me this GOAT boxer. I feel he could have been the GOAT because his skills are amazing but he fought the way he conducted his career, safety first without risks. The GOAT says anyone, anytime..anywhere. Floyd says not him, when i'm ready and it must be at MGM. Not the GOAT.

NateJR wrote:

caldo2025 wrote:SRL vs Floyd in their prime, my money would be on SRL. No one can match the heart SRL had in there and he took the toughest fights out there ALL the time. When he took on Tommy Hearns in their first fight in 1981, Hearns was considered the baddest man on the planet. Not many favored SRL. Hearns was knocking everyone out in spectacular fashion. No one thought Sugar would win much less knock out Hearns late in the fight when he needed a knockout for the win.

Floyd has no equivalent challenge in his career. Floyd didn't have a Hearns, Duran or Hagler. He could have but he chose not to fight Manny until they both had hair growing out their ears. Another knock against Floyd and his GOAT claim is his lack of knockout power. You can't be the greatest if you never knock anyone out. Yes, he knocked out Corrales 14 years ago but hasn't had a significant KO since then. Don't tell me Hatton because he was nothing but Eurotrash. SRL not only knocked out the P4P best in his prime but made a hall of famer quit in the ring because he was so damn good.

If you want to say that Floyd's the greatest defensive fighter of all time, i'll agree. But don't be giving me this GOAT boxer. I feel he could have been the GOAT because his skills are amazing but he fought the way he conducted his career, safety first without risks. The GOAT says anyone, anytime..anywhere. Floyd says not him, when i'm ready and it must be at MGM. Not the GOAT.

First thing is, with the list of fighters Floyd has faced.. The "no risk" argument doesn't sell, give me another fighter that could have faced that stiff of competition and remained undefeated in his era? And to be fair, aside from Tsyzu, I honestly can't name a fighter that Floyd truly missed that would have truly mattered in the final scheme of things. I wish I could have seen Floyd face Casamayor, Freitas, Paul Williams and Margarito.. But instead we got him against Coralles who starched both Casamayor and Freitas and Castillo who also trumped Casamayor. Instead of getting Williams and Margarito, we got DLH, Ricky Hatton and Shane Mosley.

Anyone in Floyds position would have chosen DLH over either fighter for financial reasons alone (and ultimately is the fight that put Floyd in the position to become the recognized PPV and P4P king).

Hatton who was a undefeated fighter on a tare and the guy who ultimately dethroned the long time reigning champion TSYZU.. That was a huge fight at the time that most all boxing enthusiasts were clamoring for.

Then we have Mosley who sparked the boogey man Margarito and was at the time the #2 ranked WW in the world only behind Floyd himself..

I even feel at the time Marquez was a great scalp, considering Floyd was coming off of a long lay off and Floyd wanted to prove a point against Pacquiaos kryptonite because Pacquiao wanted to act like a flake over random testing.

To be fair, Williams was simply not on Floyds radar for obvious reasons, first reason is he had Quintana problems, secondly he didn't really stick around the WW division for very long and shortly after leaving the WW division for good had Martinez and Lara problems.

Hatton was in fact a crude fighter, with limited skill. I don't think anyone is going to argue that, or anyone say that Hatton was a P4P king pin. But Hatton was as tough and tumble as they come and had a very tough style to cope with when he was at his best (and I'm confident saying Hatton was at his best when he fought Floyd, just not in his best weight division, but WW wasn't Durans best weight division when he fought Leonard the first time either). Yes the "Hitman" Hatton was no "Hitman" Hearns or Roberto Duran, but a Hatton scalp is much more of a accomplishment than beating some "Eurotrash".

Lets also not forget to mention Floyd fighting both Cotto and Alvarez at 154. Or that he also beat Manny Pacquiao. Sure the Pacquiao fight didn't come to fruition when we all wanted it to, but to blame that situation solely on Floyd also doesn't sell to the objective eye. I feel if all the ducks were in a row the first negotiations in 2009 and Pacquiao didn't balk at the random testing or file the defamation lawsuit, that fight happens in 2009.

NateJR wrote:

MachoTime wrote:

NateJR wrote:Saying Floyd would have to move up to 160 (2 divisions above his naturalweight) and fight a prime Champion at the age of 39 to compare to Leonard beating Hagler is ludacris. These are the types of standards people hold Floyd to that i was talking about. As was mentioned Leonard was only 30 when he fought Hagler, plus Leonard was a bonafide Welterweight or bigger his entire career, Floyd is a former super featherweight. IMO floyd beating DLH, Cotto and Alvarez is more impressive than Leonard beating Hagler.

All of them guys your talking about DLH, Cotto and Alvarez would have been lit up by Leonard & Hagler. Is more impressive than beating Hagler, yeah sure.

The size disparity is about the same and floyd beat them all north of the 30 year old mark.. the talent gap isn't as wide as you make out to be either.. ;agler would have def. Beat the likes of all of them but then we are comparing a natural Middleweight Hagler to junior Welterweights and a older and smaller Welterweight Mayweather to a huge Welterweight that was well outta the Welterweight division by the time he stepped into the ring with Hagler.

Pureist wrote:Everyone has bought up floyds unbeaten record, what would be the difference in ATG rating if Castillo was awarded the win as he should have been in their first fight, also, if Chavez had of retired at 80-0 how would that have impacted these arguments,

davie wrote:

KBB wrote:Notice the Pacquiao faithful won't even bother to get in this thread to give Floyd any credit at all, this is how you know how butthurt these IDIOTS are, they call themselves "boxing fans" and cannot even put their girlie hate emotions aside to give credit where credit is due.

It's funny whenever I read threads like these and someone will say that the ATG's fought better competition, I say go and get the records of these so called "ATGs" and do a side by side comparison to those on Mayweather's list and you'll see for yourself that many of the fighters on their lists barely measure up or are nowhere near far ahead but they only have a name for themselves based on who they lost to or beat.

SRL waited until Hagler was long in the tooth before he took that bout, he never faced Pryor. It was Manny Pacquiao's fault that the fight didn't happen in 2010 so anyone still stupid enough to blame that on Floyd obviously doesn't know what they are talking about.

Floyd is definitely one of the ATGs, by the time it's said and done (assuming he breaks Marciano's record) he will easily sit in the Top 10 whether the hater here like it or not.

Well there we are.
Everyone was getting on fine, discussing the merits of Floyds illustrious career, everyone being civil, pleasant and respectful of others views.
Then you come along and make a cock of yourself as usual, badmouthing people who aren't even involved in the thread and yet again turning this into a reason to get the good old "it's manny's fault" line in there

I notice I'm the first to respond to your shite however, which tells me something.
Either you are already on everyone elses ignore list (in which case, I apologise to everyone else on the thread for introducing your consciousness to KBB's dribbling) or I'm the only one naive enough to respond to your trolling, which saddens me....