The 49-0 record... and Floyd

[Coco]

Floyd has fought everyone out there, including much bigger guys and has barely lost a round in doing so.
History may look back and say he was considered boring by the armchair fan, but will concede he was a master craftsman, certainly the best of his generation.
History won't accuse him of ducking Khan, Williams or Margarita

[stujones]

Ezzard -

Will agree to disagree on much of what you are saying. Yes, I don't mind being criticised for defending Mayweather's resume. I know it could have been better.

Camacho in 1992 would have been Floyd's best ever win..... mmm, not sure. Big fan of Camacho and I think open to debate. Bit of a toss up between Camacho and DLH (the over the hill version Floyd faced).

Haugen - better than the three you mentioned - mmmm okay, personally I still think "Grandpa Mosley" was a better at least on paper. He was considered the #1 Welter - beating up Margarito in the process.... but definitely better than the other few mentioned - although again Guerrero is underated IMO.

Terrence Alli or Lonnie Smith - Nope, not as good as Mosley or Guerrero - open to debate re Ortiz and Berto.

Off course Hagler wouldn't have had the personality to have had clauses - obviously we cannot say the same for Leonard - who even had clauses about the length of a fight. However, in Hagler's case in the main, for the vast majority of his championship career, he did not need any closes because his opponents were either out weighed or way over matched. Hagler "cleaned up" the division quite clearly, but it was a time when the division was terrible.

[stujones]

Floyd has fought everyone out there, including much bigger guys and has barely lost a round in doing so.
History may look back and say he was considered boring by the armchair fan, but will concede he was a master craftsman, certainly the best of his generation.
History won't accuse him of ducking Khan, Williams or Margarita

Hallelujah.

[jamesmcdonnell]

I know what your getting at John, there is some frustration and I can agree. However, I do think his opponents get over analysed a bit too much.

You've mentioned Margarito, Williams and a Prime Pac Man - Okay, completely agree with a prime Pac Man - but (and I've said this many times) - Margarito? Well if we are saying Margarito, why not say Daniel Santos, Paul Williams? If we are saying Paul Williams, then why not Carlos Quintana? Neither of whom were the #1 Welters in the division at any time. Now if you would have said Kostya Tszyu or Winky Wright then I would be more inclined to agree. Kostya Tszyu would undisputed number #1 Light Welter at Floyd's time at the weight and its a bit of a toss up if you want to go for Winky of DLH (at the time of the DLH vs Floyd fight) for the #1 Light Middle.

I think had he fought and beaten either Williams or Margarito at the time of their Welterweight reign - Williams would have been labelled "too green" (as he was vs Quintana), Margarito would have been labelled - not proven enough. I don't see enough "gaps" in the Floyd resume where I can "oh yes, Margarito undisputedly more worthy than him".... also taking to account everyone is surely entitled to a slightly easier one every now and again - beaten 2006-2010 he fought - Judah, Baldomir (might not be the best, but was #1 at the time), DLH, Hatton, JMM, Mosley - every one of those I feel is as worthy as fighters who were losing to the likes of Santos and Quintana - even if some were not at their optimum weight when they fought.

Also, to be fair, perhaps Williams vs Floyd might have happened had it not for been for Williams' accident - you can never tell and for me, it was looking like the best was yet to come for Williams - great win in hindsight over Lara.

Completely agree re Pacquiao.

To be honest, I will not scoff at any suggestion that Floyd is TBE. For me, you cannot compare era's and yes, Floyd's career has some frustrating points - but again you only need to look at his 2006-2010 opponents to see it wasn't all bum of the month. However, the way in which he handles these highly credible fighters - his ring craft and all around ability - for me he has to be right up there with some of the finest of all time.

I'm a huge SRL fan and used to champion him to the hilt in such debates about the G.O.A.T - However, seeing Floyd fight - I'm not talking about his resume her, just seeing the man in action. I think I would find it hard to make a case for Leonard now.

At 147 I can see little case for Floyd, Leonard was too big, too strong and aggressive, and too smart - I'm not sure Floyd has a case for every really being dominant at 147. He hasn't beaten a single proper elite level welterweight in their prime.

Leonard never fought a fighter quite like Floyd before and I think his inability to tag Floyd would even frustrate Ray. Whilst Floyd might not have fought a fighter as good as Leonard before. He has fought pretty much every style there is and every time (except for DLH - and I'm getting increasingly convinced Floyd has issues in training there) he's been well in control (personally, I do not see Castillo 1 as particularly close - lost a few rounds yes, but always thought Floyd was in control).

I don't want to sound like a fan boy or part of TMT with the clichéd sentence, but no-one (barring DLH) has come close to unlocking the Matrix - no matter what style he has faced. That's why if anyone wants to make a case for him being the GOAT - I will not simply scoff.... resume, accomplishments etc - yes fair enough he might not be the best ever.... but in the ring simply because in 49 fights only once he came close to losing - I think anyone can make a case Floyd against any one from 135-147. We can criticise his resume all we want, but it is hardly a Lester Jacobs undefeated streak is it.

I don't think Leonard has fought someone as accurate and quick as Floyd and I think he would pot shot his way to a win. His jab would be just too quick even for Leonard.

Name one welterweight on a par with Leonard that Floyd beat, and please, not past it DLH! I don't think Floyd would have ever been able to pick and poke his way to a win against Leonard, Leonard's footwork and handspeed were far too good, and he would have gotten into range against Floyd and made him pay. It's all well and good mugging off the people Floyd has, but you don't get to do it against an ATG like Leonard.

I think Stu you've been blinded a little by the cherry picking Floyd has done at 147. He's never faced an elite level welterweight in their prime. Beating the shell of Mosley or DLH doesn't equate to fighting a peak Leonard, Hearns, or Duran, or even a Benitez.

[Coco]

Floyd hasn't beaten anyone on par with Leonard, but it is important to remember there has not been anyone around in this generation on SRL level either. PBF has fought everyone available.

[big lennox]

When you think that he won his first world title in his 18th fight against the late Gerando Herndandez in a fine win, he has been boxing at world level for a very long time. And winning. Whatever way you you slice and dice his record, it is a remarkable achievement.Boxing is to hit and not get hit, and he does that against everyone, big and small. Definitely a great fighter.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Floyd hasn't beaten anyone on par with Leonard, but it is important to remember there has not been anyone around in this generation on SRL level either. PBF has fought everyone available.

He did not face DLH or Mosley when they were in their primes the two biggest omissions on his resume- now perhaps there were reasons those fights didn't happen, but the fact is, he did not take on any of the best welterweights available when they were in their primes, either facing them past their primes, not at all, or facing fighters moving up to welterweight. Mosley to be fair, was calling out Mayweather for years, but Mayweather didn't seem at all keen until Shane was past his formidable prime.

The fact that a past it DLH ran Floyd close, tells me how good Floyd was at Welterweight. Very good, but not great.

Floyds overall career is highly impressive, but his run at 147 - not so much.

[orbtastic]

http://www.nytimes.com/1985/09/23/sport ... r-ego.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryLS-KnHsgk

Bizarre Holmes meltdown, live on TV.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Floyd hasn't beaten anyone on par with Leonard, but it is important to remember there has not been anyone around in this generation on SRL level either. PBF has fought everyone available.

Yes, but you have to compare who was around. Floyd began his campaign at welterweight after DLH and Mosley were no longer the forces they were. I think Floyd personally was smart enough to know, he wasn't strong enough to compete with them in their primes.

[johnswan1]

Floyd personally was smart enough to know, he wasn't strong enough to compete with them in their primes.

Yes, and this is also why he retired in 2007 after he beat Hatton at Welter - he didn't fancy any the 1-4 ranked opponents at the time who were Cotto-Margarito-Mosley-Williams. He was only interested in Cotto after Margarito and Pac turned him into damaged goods and Mosley a few years later as his speed and reflexes diminished. Mosley was considered shot going into the Margarito fight and many were worried for his safety and although he got the win it masked the fact that Mosley was nowhere near his prime and as he said himself at the time, he was brought up in Cali fighting Mexicans and knew how to beat them.

[stujones]

Name one welterweight on a par with Leonard that Floyd beat, and please, not past it DLH! I don't think Floyd would have ever been able to pick and poke his way to a win against Leonard, Leonard's footwork and handspeed were far too good, and he would have gotten into range against Floyd and made him pay. It's all well and good mugging off the people Floyd has, but you don't get to do it against an ATG like Leonard.

I think Stu you've been blinded a little by the cherry picking Floyd has done at 147. He's never faced an elite level welterweight in their prime. Beating the shell of Mosley or DLH doesn't equate to fighting a peak Leonard, Hearns, or Duran, or even a Benitez.

I said in my post above "whilst Floyd might not have fought a fighter as good as Leonard before". So I agree with the first point you state. However, what I said is that he has fought a lot of styles - from the fighters trying to use their speed and technique, people fighting with all out aggression, fighters using the jab etc - no-one has come close.

Depends on your definition of "elite" if you are meaning elite as in all time great at their absolute pomp - then yes, I'd agree. If you are meaning "elite" as in the best in the division at the time then Floyd has fought a fair few of these. The shell of Manny was still way to good for the next best Welter (Bradley).

Floyd has "mugged" the best that is available - okay, Mosley, Pac and DLH might have been over the hill - but they were still the best that were available.

Leonard was fantastic, but the one criticism correctly labelled at Ray, and I guess the same can be made with Floyd is his inactivity and his lack of cleaning up divisions. Yes, his resume is like a whose who of opponents but if we are only talking about his pre Hagler career - well then he was only a world champion for 2 and a bit years and in some ways a bit difficult to gauge just how good and smart he was - would he have remained undefeated against the likes of Curry, McCallum etc - the man only had 6 world title defensive.

If Ray found the footwork and defensive mastery of Benetez trouble at times - and Benetez definitely won a fair few rounds - then he might have had similar difficulties with Floyd.

Just my take.

[Ezzard]

Ezzard -

Will agree to disagree on much of what you are saying. Yes, I don't mind being criticised for defending Mayweather's resume. I know it could have been better.

Camacho in 1992 would have been Floyd's best ever win..... mmm, not sure. Big fan of Camacho and I think open to debate. Bit of a toss up between Camacho and DLH (the over the hill version Floyd faced).

Haugen - better than the three you mentioned - mmmm okay, personally I still think "Grandpa Mosley" was a better at least on paper. He was considered the #1 Welter - beating up Margarito in the process.... but definitely better than the other few mentioned - although again Guerrero is underated IMO.

Terrence Alli or Lonnie Smith - Nope, not as good as Mosley or Guerrero - open to debate re Ortiz and Berto.

Off course Hagler wouldn't have had the personality to have had clauses - obviously we cannot say the same for Leonard - who even had clauses about the length of a fight. However, in Hagler's case in the main, for the vast majority of his championship career, he did not need any closes because his opponents were either out weighed or way over matched. Hagler "cleaned up" the division quite clearly, but it was a time when the division was terrible.

Lonnie Smith was an excellent if erratic fighter but clearly better than the majority of Mayweather fodder. But then I always had a soft spot for the guy. Guerrero/Berto/Ortiz never put in a performance like Smith's demolition of Costello.
Alli was a seasoned contender in the two (the later three title era). At worst he was Berto's equal...at worst...
Haugen beat Camacho and Jimmy Paul! Mosely had fought 2 fights in 3 years when Flod faced him. He was just a name.

Hagler cleaned out the division prior to being champ. Then cleaned it out again once he won the titles. But the big difference was that he didn't just retire when he wanted to avoid someone. Anyone in boxing who could make 160 could beat a path to his door and he would fight them. No public vote needed.

Leonard's second career was all about dice loading. But at least he'd done thigns for real in his first career. Jones did this from the start and Floyd made an art form out of it.

He's clearly a super talent. But 49 fights in all we know is that he has supernatural handspeed despite being almost 40 years old!

Emile Griffith beat Dick Tiger and Benvenuti without a weight clause.

If we're comparing Floyd's career to DLH then fine...I've no problem with what you're saying. If we're comparing him to the greatest ever fighters then let's do it properly.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Have to say, I'd like to see an era with far less weight hopping, it really does make it easy for fighters to inflate their records, especially when they insist on catchweights.

I've not problem with a guy moving up near the tail end of their career, but I'd much rather see fighters dominating a division.

I guess though that fighters want to chase the biggest paydays, and world titles at multiple weights seems to be the easiest way to do this.

[stujones]

Ezzard -

Will agree to disagree on much of what you are saying. Yes, I don't mind being criticised for defending Mayweather's resume. I know it could have been better.

Camacho in 1992 would have been Floyd's best ever win..... mmm, not sure. Big fan of Camacho and I think open to debate. Bit of a toss up between Camacho and DLH (the over the hill version Floyd faced).

Haugen - better than the three you mentioned - mmmm okay, personally I still think "Grandpa Mosley" was a better at least on paper. He was considered the #1 Welter - beating up Margarito in the process.... but definitely better than the other few mentioned - although again Guerrero is underated IMO.

Terrence Alli or Lonnie Smith - Nope, not as good as Mosley or Guerrero - open to debate re Ortiz and Berto.

Off course Hagler wouldn't have had the personality to have had clauses - obviously we cannot say the same for Leonard - who even had clauses about the length of a fight. However, in Hagler's case in the main, for the vast majority of his championship career, he did not need any closes because his opponents were either out weighed or way over matched. Hagler "cleaned up" the division quite clearly, but it was a time when the division was terrible.

Lonnie Smith was an excellent if erratic fighter but clearly better than the majority of Mayweather fodder. But then I always had a soft spot for the guy. Guerrero/Berto/Ortiz never put in a performance like Smith's demolition of Costello.
Alli was a seasoned contender in the two (the later three title era). At worst he was Berto's equal...at worst...
Haugen beat Camacho and Jimmy Paul! Mosely had fought 2 fights in 3 years when Flod faced him. He was just a name.

Hagler cleaned out the division prior to being champ. Then cleaned it out again once he won the titles. But the big difference was that he didn't just retire when he wanted to avoid someone. Anyone in boxing who could make 160 could beat a path to his door and he would fight them. No public vote needed.

Leonard's second career was all about dice loading. But at least he'd done thigns for real in his first career. Jones did this from the start and Floyd made an art form out of it.

He's clearly a super talent. But 49 fights in all we know is that he has supernatural handspeed despite being almost 40 years old!

Emile Griffith beat Dick Tiger and Benvenuti without a weight clause.

If we're comparing Floyd's career to DLH then fine...I've no problem with what you're saying. If we're comparing him to the greatest ever fighters then let's do it properly.

Yes, he did do things for real in his first career..... but the criticism you could label at Leonard was his "first career" was far too short for him to be in the GOAT debate. In the pre Floyd days, I championed Leonard in similar debates - e.g. comparing him to the ATG's of previous years. However, as people would rightly say - his main championship reign was 2 and a bit years and he was 8-1 in that reign. Of his 8 wins - Finch, Green, and Bonds - all good fighters but hardly the greatest fighters never to win a world title. Kalule was underated but again, not exactly the greatest Light Middle of all time and he never fought out of Denmark.

Had Tyson retired after Holmes and Spinks, would he be considered higher than Floyd?

Yes, I agree Terrence Ali is comparable to Berto - but Berto is among Floyd's worst opponents since winning the world title 17 years ago. That's the point I am making, you cite Ali as a credible defence for Chavez.... yet Berto, a former world champion, was not considered credible for Floyd.

[Ezzard]

I wouldn't have Leonard as the greatest either. Or even in the top 10. But put all his wins in with Floyd's and rank them in order and Ray has the top 4. Then there's a chasm. Then you get a Floyd win.

Leonard didn't make his rep on Finch, Green and Bonds. They are equivalent to Maidana, Berto, Ortiz, etc... Just fights he took between genuine super fights.

His career was short but then he didn't have Mayweather's magic chef cooking up those age-defying dinners for him.

I'm saying Berto is not credible as proof of Floyd being all-time. Again, put their wins in rank order and Chavez has 4 of the top 5. Maybe all 5 of them. Nobody makes a big fuss of wins over Alli, Roger Mayweather, Laporte, Martinez, Fuentes, etc... And neither do they claim Julio to be in the argument for greatest ever.

Tyson creamed a lot of good fighters. Floyd shut down more. He's clearly ahead of Mike.

[stujones]

Personally I would agree with 3 - if you are referring to Hagler, Duran and Hearns - but I am not as convinced that Benetez (assuming that who you mean by the 4th) is better than even a faded DLH, Miguel Cotto or Ricky Hatton.

Even with those three for two of them there were some "issues" that meant they were not at their absolute best. Duran was never as dangerous at Welter and above as he was at Lightweight and Hagler couldn't get his punches off and looked visibly slower vs Mugabi than he had done previously. It's okay for us to call DLH past it (although coming off arguably a career best performace), it's okay for us to call Mosley past it (although coming off arguable a career 2nd best performance), its okay for us to call Cotto "not live" (whatever that means), it's okay for us to criticise the Floyd vs Alvarez match, it's okay for us to say Hatton was outweighed (no-one thought that before the fight) - but 2 of 3's of Leonard's best wins were against legends who were not at their absolute best - but this doesn't matter off course.

In terms of the Leonard/Floyd - okay I'll give you the top 4 for arguments sake - then though the next 9 or so would be Floyd's and that's why I'd rank Floyd above Ray. Longevity and consistently fighting very good, if not great, fighters. As Bunce said, Berto is a two version world champion with some decent fighters on his resume - at one stage he was hyped as the next big thing.... yet, he was considered an absolute bum ahead of this match. I didn't like the match either, but he wouldn't be considered a "bum" for any other champion. If it was Berto fighting Brook we'd be applauding Eddie for a decent test.

Who are the 5 from Chavez's victories that you think is better than DLH, Hatton, Cotto even a past it Pacquiao?

[Ezzard]

Berto is a two time world champion in the same way Mellow Birds is coffee.

[Ricky_]

Personally I would agree with 3 - if you are referring to Hagler, Duran and Hearns - but I am not as convinced that Benetez (assuming that who you mean by the 4th) is better than even a faded DLH, Miguel Cotto or Ricky Hatton.

Even with those three for two of them there were some "issues" that meant they were not at their absolute best. Duran was never as dangerous at Welter and above as he was at Lightweight and Hagler couldn't get his punches off and looked visibly slower vs Mugabi than he had done previously. It's okay for us to call DLH past it (although coming off arguably a career best performace), it's okay for us to call Mosley past it (although coming off arguable a career 2nd best performance), its okay for us to call Cotto "not live" (whatever that means), it's okay for us to criticise the Floyd vs Alvarez match, it's okay for us to say Hatton was outweighed (no-one thought that before the fight) - but 2 of 3's of Leonard's best wins were against legends who were not at their absolute best - but this doesn't matter off course.

In terms of the Leonard/Floyd - okay I'll give you the top 4 for arguments sake - then though the next 9 or so would be Floyd's and that's why I'd rank Floyd above Ray. Longevity and consistently fighting very good, if not great, fighters. As Bunce said, Berto is a two version world champion with some decent fighters on his resume - at one stage he was hyped as the next big thing.... yet, he was considered an absolute bum ahead of this match. I didn't like the match either, but he wouldn't be considered a "bum" for any other champion. If it was Berto fighting Brook we'd be applauding Eddie for a decent test.

Who are the 5 from Chavez's victories that you think is better than DLH, Hatton, Cotto even a past it Pacquiao?

Floyd's best win was a past it DeLaHoya imo. Hatton fought once at welter and looked crap vs Collazo. You mention Mosley was "coming off" a win vs Margarito but that was his only fight in about an 18month period, the guy was practically retired. He forced Canelo to draw down to a catchweight.

Who exactly did Floyd fight that was in their prime? Castillo maybe.... and he lost.

[stujones]

Leonard forced Hagler into fighting at 12 rounder in a massive ring.

Canelo makes Light Middle comfortably enough it was hardly catchweight - if it was 147 then fair enough, but it was 2 lbs and Canelo could have done a "Salido" if the 2 lbs was killing him.

Fair enough if you think Castillo really beat Floyd. How about the rematch win as his best win then?

[Ezzard]

If it was Berto fighting Brook we'd be applauding Eddie for a decent test.

Exactly my point.

Brook is a fantastic boxer. But if you're having to compare Floyd to Kell then you're a nautical mile away from convincing anyone that he's one of the greatest ever.

[stujones]

The point I was making is that acceptable opponents for anyone else would lead to some "excuse" as to why they are not acceptable for Floyd.

You telling me seriously, if Floyd would have fought Margarito and Williams (the two that most people mention) at their best there wouldn't have been criticism, off course there would have been. Neither of whom were lineal champion or considered the man. Margarito gets outclassed by a "past it" Mosley, yet Mosley gets condemned. Williams loses to Quintana at his peak, of course if Floyd fought and did a number on him - this would have been cited. Its almost as if Margarito and Williams' resume become inflated BECASUE they didn't fight Floyd.

[Ezzard]

That's how it is if you are p4p number 1. Been the same for everyone.

Floyd found a way to market fights for big bucks even when the opponents weren't good enough to warrant the purse he was getting, good for him. Jones did the same. They can have the money for old rope...but not the plaudits too.

Maybe there's a reason why Leonard, Hagler, Monzon, Louis don't get the same criticism that isn't to do with "poor old Floyd..."

[stujones]

That's how it is if you are p4p number 1. Been the same for everyone.

Floyd found a way to market fights for big bucks even when the opponents weren't good enough to warrant the purse he was getting, good for him. Jones did the same. They can have the money for old rope...but not the plaudits too.

Maybe there's a reason why Leonard, Hagler, Monzon, Louis don't get the same criticism that isn't to do with "poor old Floyd..."

Leonard fought for the Light Heavyweight title as a Super Middle. He was the king of dice rolling as you put it. Hagler cleaned up the Middleweights, but fought in a shite era. His best opponents were not Middleweights. The term "bum of the month" was (harshly IMO) invented for Louis. Monzon - yeah, was in a much tougher era than Hagler and does not get the plaudits he deserves.

Hagler's opponents were especially shite. People will say "oh Floyd made Alvarez kill himself to make the weight" - Hagler's career best win was against a Welterweight - but does not get a single criticism and without that win his resume as a championship fighter would be piss poor next to Floyd's.

Might point is that it is not the same for everyone, we've been talking about P4Pers throughout and the criticism for their resume's is not the same for others. If Miguel Cotto mark 2015 at Middleweight fought Hagler as a champion it would be up there among Hagler's best championship wins - let alone Miguel Cotto of 2012 at a weight he is much better at, yet Cotto wasn't even a live opponent for Floyd. Hagler's best wins as a champion were against a Welterweight and a Lightweight. Just like Floyd he never beat a true great in his absolute pomp. The past it versions of DLH, Pacquiao and even Ricky Hatton at 147 were a lot more "live" than Duran at Middleweight.

[Ezzard]

Seales, Watts, Monroe, Colbert, Cyclone Hart, Finnegan, Roldan, Hamsho...they're all two times world champs in Mayweather's era.

[jamesmcdonnell]

That's how it is if you are p4p number 1. Been the same for everyone.

Floyd found a way to market fights for big bucks even when the opponents weren't good enough to warrant the purse he was getting, good for him. Jones did the same. They can have the money for old rope...but not the plaudits too.

Maybe there's a reason why Leonard, Hagler, Monzon, Louis don't get the same criticism that isn't to do with "poor old Floyd..."

Leonard fought for the Light Heavyweight title as a Super Middle. He was the king of dice rolling as you put it. Hagler cleaned up the Middleweights, but fought in a shite era. His best opponents were not Middleweights. The term "bum of the month" was (harshly IMO) invented for Louis. Monzon - yeah, was in a much tougher era than Hagler and does not get the plaudits he deserves.

Hagler's opponents were especially shite. People will say "oh Floyd made Alvarez kill himself to make the weight" - Hagler's career best win was against a Welterweight - but does not get a single criticism and without that win his resume as a championship fighter would be piss poor next to Floyd's.

Might point is that it is not the same for everyone, we've been talking about P4Pers throughout and the criticism for their resume's is not the same for others. If Miguel Cotto mark 2015 at Middleweight fought Hagler as a champion it would be up there among Hagler's best championship wins - let alone Miguel Cotto of 2012 at a weight he is much better at, yet Cotto wasn't even a live opponent for Floyd. Hagler's best wins as a champion were against a Welterweight and a Lightweight. Just like Floyd he never beat a true great in his absolute pomp. The past it versions of DLH, Pacquiao and even Ricky Hatton at 147 were a lot more "live" than Duran at Middleweight.

Sorry, but cannot agree with this. Hatton was nowhere near Duran's level of skill. Hatton was moving up to 147 where he really wasn't effective any more, and Duran was an ATG even out of his ideal weight class.