BoxRec

I'm going with De La Hoya by stoppage. My belief is not as strong as it once was, but i still heavily favour De La Hoya 70/30.

I have watched clips of Floyd trash talking in Oscars face at different venues of the press tour and i'm surprised to say the least. He looked like a fool to me, like a small boy trying to be the bully.

Couldn't agree more. Roy Jones has a much better case than the likes of Floyd. Jones is far from the best fighter of all time, but he did at least stay in the light heavyweight division for a while, and beat a decent level heavyweight in Ruiz, if not an exceptional one, and also beat Toney and Hopkins, two future hall of famers in their own rights.

Mayweather's career since the Castillo fights has been extremely dissapointing for me, and I give him little credit for beating Gatti, Baldomir and Judah. Judah is a B+ level fighter with good natural assets, and little more, he doesn't have the mental toolset to be an elite level fighter.

Oscar has done his work over the long haul, and has faced a lot of good fighters, he also took on the best available competition when he faced Mosley, and came bloody close to winning their first, electrifying fight. If he beats Floyd at his age and level of activity, that's a bloody good shout to me, especially if he goes on to fight and beat Cotto, which, I think he may yet have the tools to do.

Floyd hasn't dazzled at all, aside from looking aggressive and powerful against a frankly terrified Gatti who entered the fight expecting to lose.

Credit should also be given for the masterclass he pulled over the then unbeaten Diego Corrales. Corrales himself was a bloody good fighter both before and after their fight, but floyd absolutley mullered him that night.

On the other hand he was decked 4 (was it without checking) times, I had him losing every round and was totally outclassed by Floyd. his trainer threw the towel in and whilst Corrales did protest there was very little point in carrying on, and Ive never met anyone who says the fight shouldnt have been stopped, or that it was a premature ending.

Easy making noises about weight making after the event, and he had made 130 a mere 3 months before the fight.

Terence wrote:I disagree Stu, an argument will be made for Floyd but Oscar is going to struggle on the all-time lists himself. Oscar is a very good fighter with some impressive achievements but he was at his best around the welter mark and is he a patch on the likes of Napoles? Not remotely.

If Floyd does win he will be the fighter least deserving of discussion on the hall time lists because he has hopped about the divisions and never truly gelled as a fighter for long periods. Gatti was not a very goo dmeasuring stick, nor was Baldomir and Judah is also quite poor. Oscar will be an impressive scalp but when he retires Floyd's report will be filed 'under should have done better'.

We are talking about a fighter who cried after the Baldomir fight because no one suggested opening-up the pages of history after that performance.

If we have lists with 10-15 fighters on them and we give them all a shout of greatest of all time where do they stand in comparison with one another and where do the genuinely GOAT guys stand above those lists?

Would Napoles, Duran etc in the prime get up and OUTCLASS DLH as a Light Middle... outclass the DLH that gave Mayorga a pasting. My statement is on the performance. Personally, I don't think it will happen - Floyd will either lose or win via running. Duran especially is in most peoples running as P4P #1 - but no chance would he outclass DLH mark 2007 at 154. He might wear him down and beat him, but outclass? no.

How can everyone say his best weight was at Welter/Light Welter - yes, he was dazzling in his pomp at the weight. But he has matured into a hell of a fighter with age and has outlasted his contemporaries (Quartey, Trinidad, Mosley etc). DLH lost to Mosley as a Welter, but beat him (in the eyes of all but 3 people) as a Light Middle.

If you had to name the top 10 DLH PERFORMANCES - surely is wins (and the manner of his wins) over Vargas and Mayorga must rank very high - aswell as his "defeat" to Mosley. I don't know if its cause of Floyd Mayweather Snr - but memories of DLH at 147 is his struggling wins over Quartey and an aging Whittikar and losing to Trinidad and Mosley. He hasn't lost in most peoples eyes at 154 - admittedly he needed Wright to cement a legacy at the weight, but he's beaten some decent names at the weight and won well.

DLH is up there, certainly if you consider Napoles in the debate for Greatest of all time he is well up there. I cannot remember a single case of all time great "prospect" OUTCLASSING a fellow all time great - unless the guy was proven to rediculously shot (i.e. Joe Louis). Actually there is one, Hearns vs Duran - but Duran was such a hot and cold fighter in those days. People mentioned (with some justification) RJJ achievement beating John Ruiz - I think it was Bunce or Claude Abrams said when talking about it that RJJ should now "unquestionably" be considered the greatest of all time based on that win. Well a masterclass on DLH should surely be considered a greater accomplishment cause of who he is fighting, he is facing a great. I don't think he will do it myself.

We have seen some marvelous accomplishments over the years from greats.... Leonard beat Hagler, Ali beating Foreman, Holyfield upsetting Tyson but even in these great achievements the opponent was never outclassed.

What more could Floyd Mayweather Jnr do - if he goes and puts on a masterclass vs DLH. I remember when this fight was mooted back in the days when Floyd was a Super Feather and DLH was a Welter it was laughed at... People were saying "never happen", Floyd will get knocked spark out etc.... Similar comments were made when RJJ first discussed a heavyweight move (and actually when Leonard mentioned Hagler following the Mugabi fight) - now its happening its not that significant according to the critics.

What more can Floyd do? Do you really think after a masterclass against one of the top 5 fighters of his generation, at an above optimal weight and when his opponent has just put in possibly his best ever performance that ANY other opponent can enhance his ranking. Do you really think the likes of Hatton, Cotto (whats he done exactly?), Margarito (whats he done exactly?) would make the critics go.... well, now he's a contender for P4P status. No chance, if this fight doesn't do it - then no fight will - cause the eggs are in DLH's basket. The only one who could enhance his legacy more is Mosley at 147 - but then again the critics will say he is too old.

Some people don't like Floyd and will criticise him for anything - this is evident when you call a three time world champion in two weights "not very good".

stujones wrote:
It will depend on the manner of the win. Of Floyd jabs, moves and runs from the heavier man then yes - I think there will still be a debate, but if Floyd stays in his face and can do what he done to Gatti and beat DLH in EVERY department then you have to ask - who else could have done that. .

Pernell Whitaker? I think Leonard would've handled ODH as well.

At the moment i can't get too excited about this one, like Kilburn says, there's a certain lack of suspense when you know one can't hurt the other..

Mayweather on points. And he might even make it look easy.

Personally I agree with James and Tel. What you would have here is 2 weight jumpers fighting it out to see who is the best. Oscar has come unstuck in two of the divisions that he has moved to.

For Mayweather to be crowned as a GOAT, there simply HAS to be the assertion that Oscar is as well. I beg to differ. Great fighter, without a doubt, but in the same league as SRR, SRL, Duran, Hagler, Monzon, Pep, and too many others to mention, not likely.

To pick up on a point made in relation to Holyfield / Tyson by Stu, I really dont see what more he could have done to outclass Tyson. Tyson was a fighting machine, there would be no point in hit and run tactics a la Mayweather. Evander outfought, outmuscled, outgutted, and even outfouled Tyson, backed him up and stopped him. What was he supposed to do, kill the guy?

MightyWarrior wrote:

stujones wrote:
It will depend on the manner of the win. Of Floyd jabs, moves and runs from the heavier man then yes - I think there will still be a debate, but if Floyd stays in his face and can do what he done to Gatti and beat DLH in EVERY department then you have to ask - who else could have done that. .

Pernell Whitaker? I think Leonard would've handled ODH as well.

At the moment i can't get too excited about this one, like Kilburn says, there's a certain lack of suspense when you know one can't hurt the other..

Mayweather on points. And he might even make it look easy.

Leonard, Duran, Benitez and Hearns are better than ANYONE that Oscar has beaten to date.

Duran was in no kind of fighting shape for Hearns by all account, he'd been pissing around partying and shagging hookers before the Hearns fight, and the fight should probably not have been made he was in such poor condition.

Oscar is a very good fighter, of his era, one of the best, but the assertion as one of the greatest ever is a little wide of the mark.

I consider a fighter who in their prime was virtually unbeatable at their weight (think Duran, Leonard, Hagler, Rubin Olivares, Willie Pep, Pernell Whittaker, Ray Robinson, Carlos Monzon) to be more impressive than a fighter who cherry picks his way to titles in an era when they are easy to come by. Floyd has taken what he knew were safe bets by taking on Baldomir, Gatti, and Judah, let's see him take on Cotto shall we? I very much doubt it somehow. If he beat Cotto, then I'll be impressed.

Roy Jones ranks highly because of his tenure at 175, at least he stayed there, although the level of competition wasn't the greatest. Beating Ruiz does not make you an all time great fighter, not the greatest at any rate. Archie Moore beat heavyweights as good and better than Moore and came within an inch of knocking Marciano out too. He was also 175 champ forever, and in a different era, would have had his shots at the title a hell of a lot earlier.

Give me a fighter who dominates their weight class convincingly over a belt hopping egomaniac any day. Whilst it impresses many people I don't really give a toss.

The win over Mayorga, is not worthy of such high praise, it proves beyond doubt that Oscar is still a force, but let us not get carried away, Mayorga is there to be hit, and Oscar has always liked a static target.

Andy Mac wrote:Personally I agree with James and Tel. What you would have here is 2 weight jumpers fighting it out to see who is the best. Oscar has come unstuck in two of the divisions that he has moved to.

For Mayweather to be crowned as a GOAT, there simply HAS to be the assertion that Oscar is as well. I beg to differ. Great fighter, without a doubt, but in the same league as SRR, SRL, Duran, Hagler, Monzon, Pep, and too many others to mention, not likely.

To pick up on a point made in relation to Holyfield / Tyson by Stu, I really dont see what more he could have done to outclass Tyson. Tyson was a fighting machine, there would be no point in hit and run tactics a la Mayweather. Evander outfought, outmuscled, outgutted Tyson, backed him up and stopped him. What was he supposed to do, kill the guy?

Tyson was most certainly not in his pomp and it was a close fight up untill he gassed. Indeed I think it was after the fourth round that Jim Watt said "I still stand my prediction, but it doesn't look like it will be in the round that I predicted".

Much of the reason why Tyson was the favourite going into the rematch was because of his early success in the first contest.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

MightyWarrior wrote:

stujones wrote:
It will depend on the manner of the win. Of Floyd jabs, moves and runs from the heavier man then yes - I think there will still be a debate, but if Floyd stays in his face and can do what he done to Gatti and beat DLH in EVERY department then you have to ask - who else could have done that. .

Pernell Whitaker? I think Leonard would've handled ODH as well.

At the moment i can't get too excited about this one, like Kilburn says, there's a certain lack of suspense when you know one can't hurt the other..

Mayweather on points. And he might even make it look easy.

Leonard, Duran, Benitez and Hearns are better than ANYONE that Oscar has beaten to date.

Duran was in no kind of fighting shape for Hearns by all account, he'd been pissing around partying and shagging hookers before the Hearns fight, and the fight should probably not have been made he was in such poor condition.

Oscar is a very good fighter, of his era, one of the best, but the assertion as one of the greatest ever is a little wide of the mark.

I consider a fighter who in their prime was virtually unbeatable at their weight (think Duran, Leonard, Hagler, Rubin Olivares, Willie Pep, Pernell Whittaker, Ray Robinson, Carlos Monzon) to be more impressive than a fighter who cherry picks his way to titles in an era when they are easy to come by. Floyd has taken what he knew were safe bets by taking on Baldomir, Gatti, and Judah, let's see him take on Cotto shall we? I very much doubt it somehow. If he beat Cotto, then I'll be impressed.

Roy Jones ranks highly because of his tenure at 175, at least he stayed there, although the level of competition wasn't the greatest. Beating Ruiz does not make you an all time great fighter, not the greatest at any rate. Archie Moore beat heavyweights as good and better than Moore and came within an inch of knocking Marciano out too. He was also 175 champ forever, and in a different era, would have had his shots at the title a hell of a lot earlier.

Give me a fighter who dominates their weight class convincingly over a belt hopping egomaniac any day. Whilst it impresses many people I don't really give a toss.

The win over Mayorga, is not worthy of such high praise, it proves beyond doubt that Oscar is still a force, but let us not get carried away, Mayorga is there to be hit, and Oscar has always liked a static target.

I never said DLH was the greatest of all time, I never said he deserves to mentioned in the debate - I did say he is an all time great (difference from greatest). What I also said was he could "hang" with the greatest of all time. Someone like Eric Morales will probably never be considered the Greatest Featherweight of them all... but can you imagine ANYONE outclassing a pomp Morales in a mythical match up. I couldn't.

Same with DLH - as much as I like Leonard etc - a DLH vs Leonard fight would have moments for both fighters. I would favour Leonard but it wouldn't be a forgone conclusion and it certainly would be a shut out. Similarly with Whittikar, and many of the other fighters mentioned Benitez, Duran, Napoles - I would favour DLH at 154 lbs.

Its funny how James you often reference Leonard and then say you don't like weight hopers - Leonard was a massive weight hoper in his day. An argument that is often used against me when these GOAT threads get mentioned (as ATM I always say its Leonard). I always get put back that Leonard was a great challenger but never showed himself a champion (in terms of defences of the same belt etc).

Leonard was a weight hopper, in fact, the first of the great weight hoppers, but his level of competition at Welterweight was undeniable.

I don't see anyone totally humiliating Oscar at welterweight either, but then again, even if Floyd does win, no way does Oscar not have his moments, the gulf in class and skill would never be big enough.

I would put Oscar up there somewhere in the all time greats, just where, who knows, there's so much competition that compiling all time great lists is a largely facile exercise, outside of the obvious fighters, it just becomes to my mind a bit too arbitrary. I don't think Oscar makes it into the top 10, and not sure where RJJ goes. Often you need time and distance to put people's achievements into persective.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Leonard was a weight hopper, in fact, the first of the great weight hoppers, but his level of competition at Welterweight was undeniable.

I don't see anyone totally humiliating Oscar at welterweight either, but then again, even if Floyd does win, no way does Oscar not have his moments, the gulf in class and skill would never be big enough.

I would put Oscar up there somewhere in the all time greats, just where, who knows, there's so much competition that compiling all time great lists is a largely facile exercise, outside of the obvious fighters, it just becomes to my mind a bit too arbitrary. I don't think Oscar makes it into the top 10, and not sure where RJJ goes. Often you need time and distance to put people's achievements into persective.

Finally, I've explained myself! Completely agree - personally I think RJJ is in the top 10 - not sure if Oscar would make top 30 - but thats just shows some of the greats that have been.

I never said, I fully expect Floyd Mayweather do to a master class - I'm tipping DLH. However, SHOULD he - then he would have to be considered the greatest of all time. Luckily for Mayweather in two of my top 3 are Welters - so you can offer a direct mythical comparison... and there is no way Leonard and Robinson would put a clinic on DLH. I'm not suggesting for one minute that Mayweather will, all I am saying is should he.....

I was going to say a similar line about Leonard being the first of the weight hopers - but I thought some smart alec would say "no, Henry Armstrong". I would argue the same thing about Mayweather (as a Super Featherweight) and DLH at Lightweight.... there wasn't many other fighters around that could have posed a question. Sure DLH missed out on Tszyu and Mayweather criminally has missed out on Hatton as they went up - but at some of their weights (DLH at Welter and Light; Floyd at Super Feather and Light) they were good long reigning champions who fought the best.

stujones wrote:

Andy Mac wrote:Personally I agree with James and Tel. What you would have here is 2 weight jumpers fighting it out to see who is the best. Oscar has come unstuck in two of the divisions that he has moved to.

For Mayweather to be crowned as a GOAT, there simply HAS to be the assertion that Oscar is as well. I beg to differ. Great fighter, without a doubt, but in the same league as SRR, SRL, Duran, Hagler, Monzon, Pep, and too many others to mention, not likely.

To pick up on a point made in relation to Holyfield / Tyson by Stu, I really dont see what more he could have done to outclass Tyson. Tyson was a fighting machine, there would be no point in hit and run tactics a la Mayweather. Evander outfought, outmuscled, outgutted Tyson, backed him up and stopped him. What was he supposed to do, kill the guy?

Tyson was most certainly not in his pomp and it was a close fight up untill he gassed. Indeed I think it was after the fourth round that Jim Watt said "I still stand my prediction, but it doesn't look like it will be in the round that I predicted".

Much of the reason why Tyson was the favourite going into the rematch was because of his early success in the first contest.

I'm sorry Stu, but I just cant see that my friend. For Tyson to be 4 points down on 2 cards, and 7 points down on the other after ten rounds isn't very successful to my mind. Bearing in mind this was not a boxing match, it was a fight. However I can understand why Tyson would be favourite in any rematch, as he had the power to KO anyone early on.

stujones wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Leonard was a weight hopper, in fact, the first of the great weight hoppers, but his level of competition at Welterweight was undeniable.

I don't see anyone totally humiliating Oscar at welterweight either, but then again, even if Floyd does win, no way does Oscar not have his moments, the gulf in class and skill would never be big enough.

I would put Oscar up there somewhere in the all time greats, just where, who knows, there's so much competition that compiling all time great lists is a largely facile exercise, outside of the obvious fighters, it just becomes to my mind a bit too arbitrary. I don't think Oscar makes it into the top 10, and not sure where RJJ goes. Often you need time and distance to put people's achievements into persective.

Finally, I've explained myself! Completely agree - personally I think RJJ is in the top 10 - not sure if Oscar would make top 30 - but thats just shows some of the greats that have been.

I never said, I fully expect Floyd Mayweather do to a master class - I'm tipping DLH. However, SHOULD he - then he would have to be considered the greatest of all time. Luckily for Mayweather in two of my top 3 are Welters - so you can offer a direct mythical comparison... and there is no way Leonard and Robinson would put a clinic on DLH. I'm not suggesting for one minute that Mayweather will, all I am saying is should he.....

I was going to say a similar line about Leonard being the first of the weight hopers - but I thought some smart alec would say "no, Henry Armstrong". I would argue the same thing about Mayweather (as a Super Featherweight) and DLH at Lightweight.... there wasn't many other fighters around that could have posed a question. Sure DLH missed out on Tszyu and Mayweather criminally has missed out on Hatton as they went up - but at some of their weights (DLH at Welter and Light; Floyd at Super Feather and Light) they were good long reigning champions who fought the best.

Cannot really call Armstrong a weight hopper, as he weighed pretty much around 130-135 for all his bouts. Think the most he weighed in his prime was 140!

DLH wouldn't be great in a 15 round era. He may have been stopped a few times after the 12th given his famous fades.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Cannot really call Armstrong a weight hopper, as he weighed pretty much around 130-135 for all his bouts. Think the most he weighed in his prime was 140!

Also Armstrong defended his title so often it's not like he could be accused of hopping around the weights to avoid people.

No this is true, he faced everyone. Poor bastard should have had a version of the middleweight title, but got shafted and given the draw. This he only weighed 145 for that too!

jamesmcdonnell wrote:.... there's so much competition that compiling all time great lists is a largely facile exercise, outside of the obvious fighters, it just becomes to my mind a bit too arbitrary. I don't think Oscar makes it into the top 10, and not sure where RJJ goes. Often you need time and distance to put people's achievements into persective.

My feelings too James.

It makes my brain hurt even thinking about the compilation of a ATG list, there are far too many subjective considerations to be taken into account. Time does give a slightly better perspective though.

I recently purchased Burt Randolph Sugar's 100 greatest fighters of all time book, and outside the top 10, a lot of the picks seem quite bizzare. Even some of the top 10, like Marciano and Dempsey seem more because they are part of a golden age of boxing than anything else.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:I recently purchased Burt Randolph Sugar's 100 greatest fighters of all time book, and outside the top 10, a lot of the picks seem quite bizzare. Even some of the top 10, like Marciano and Dempsey seem more because they are part of a golden age of boxing than anything else.

Yes Burt's lists tend to suck, does he still have Dempsey at 3?I seem to remember him not having Larry Holmes in the top ten heavywieghts.

He seems to just live off telling the same old inaccurate stories. He still goes around saying Willie Pep won a round without throwing a punch which is total BS. In his list of 100 greatest sportsmen he was missing guys like Maradonna but had in some American college athletes.

He's colourful and everything and makes a nice talking head for documentaries but how he's managed to get a reputaion as a top expert is beyond me.

One of the first things I did when I discovered boxrec was to trawl the Boxers of the Past Forum, and some of the lists they compiled there. And with the unbelievable database on past fighters records spent many a spare hour looking up fighters I hadn't heard of or who I was vague about. I came to the conclusion that compiling lists was not for me. They do a great job on that forum not least because fighters who might have been forgotten get a deserved consideration.

stujones wrote:

Terence wrote:I disagree Stu, an argument will be made for Floyd but Oscar is going to struggle on the all-time lists himself. Oscar is a very good fighter with some impressive achievements but he was at his best around the welter mark and is he a patch on the likes of Napoles? Not remotely.

If Floyd does win he will be the fighter least deserving of discussion on the hall time lists because he has hopped about the divisions and never truly gelled as a fighter for long periods. Gatti was not a very goo dmeasuring stick, nor was Baldomir and Judah is also quite poor. Oscar will be an impressive scalp but when he retires Floyd's report will be filed 'under should have done better'.

We are talking about a fighter who cried after the Baldomir fight because no one suggested opening-up the pages of history after that performance.

If we have lists with 10-15 fighters on them and we give them all a shout of greatest of all time where do they stand in comparison with one another and where do the genuinely GOAT guys stand above those lists?

Would Napoles, Duran etc in the prime get up and OUTCLASS DLH as a Light Middle... outclass the DLH that gave Mayorga a pasting. My statement is on the performance. Personally, I don't think it will happen - Floyd will either lose or win via running. Duran especially is in most peoples running as P4P #1 - but no chance would he outclass DLH mark 2007 at 154. He might wear him down and beat him, but outclass? no.

How can everyone say his best weight was at Welter/Light Welter - yes, he was dazzling in his pomp at the weight. But he has matured into a hell of a fighter with age and has outlasted his contemporaries (Quartey, Trinidad, Mosley etc). DLH lost to Mosley as a Welter, but beat him (in the eyes of all but 3 people) as a Light Middle.

If you had to name the top 10 DLH PERFORMANCES - surely is wins (and the manner of his wins) over Vargas and Mayorga must rank very high - aswell as his "defeat" to Mosley. I don't know if its cause of Floyd Mayweather Snr - but memories of DLH at 147 is his struggling wins over Quartey and an aging Whittikar and losing to Trinidad and Mosley. He hasn't lost in most peoples eyes at 154 - admittedly he needed Wright to cement a legacy at the weight, but he's beaten some decent names at the weight and won well.

DLH is up there, certainly if you consider Napoles in the debate for Greatest of all time he is well up there. I cannot remember a single case of all time great "prospect" OUTCLASSING a fellow all time great - unless the guy was proven to rediculously shot (i.e. Joe Louis). Actually there is one, Hearns vs Duran - but Duran was such a hot and cold fighter in those days. People mentioned (with some justification) RJJ achievement beating John Ruiz - I think it was Bunce or Claude Abrams said when talking about it that RJJ should now "unquestionably" be considered the greatest of all time based on that win. Well a masterclass on DLH should surely be considered a greater accomplishment cause of who he is fighting, he is facing a great. I don't think he will do it myself.

We have seen some marvelous accomplishments over the years from greats.... Leonard beat Hagler, Ali beating Foreman, Holyfield upsetting Tyson but even in these great achievements the opponent was never outclassed.

What more could Floyd Mayweather Jnr do - if he goes and puts on a masterclass vs DLH. I remember when this fight was mooted back in the days when Floyd was a Super Feather and DLH was a Welter it was laughed at... People were saying "never happen", Floyd will get knocked spark out etc.... Similar comments were made when RJJ first discussed a heavyweight move (and actually when Leonard mentioned Hagler following the Mugabi fight) - now its happening its not that significant according to the critics.

What more can Floyd do? Do you really think after a masterclass against one of the top 5 fighters of his generation, at an above optimal weight and when his opponent has just put in possibly his best ever performance that ANY other opponent can enhance his ranking. Do you really think the likes of Hatton, Cotto (whats he done exactly?), Margarito (whats he done exactly?) would make the critics go.... well, now he's a contender for P4P status. No chance, if this fight doesn't do it - then no fight will - cause the eggs are in DLH's basket. The only one who could enhance his legacy more is Mosley at 147 - but then again the critics will say he is too old.

Some people don't like Floyd and will criticise him for anything - this is evident when you call a three time world champion in two weights "not very good".

You make some good points Stu, but when you asked about an all time great prospect outclassing an all time great, all you need to do is look at DLH destroying Chavez when he had a record of 97-1-1, and again when his record was 101-2-2. I know cuts were involved, but did anybody really think Chavez was in with a shout in either of those fights? Nobody mentions that as a defining fight for DLH - because it wasn't. I see a victory for Floyd over DLH as being better than that, but not enough to give him a shout in GOAT debates. Floyd can run all night and possibly shut out DLH and the record books would show the points margin but he is not going to outclass DLH by standing his ground and trading with him. What would even be the point in doing that when he clearly won't have the size or power at the weight.

The Mayorga fight made DLH look really impressive but I don't think too much should be read into it. I thought Oscar was getting hit far too easily up until he landed that left hook in the first round, and after that he was in Mayorgas head and could press forward as he pleased, with Mayorga increasingly looking actually frightened of him.

And I don't think the comparison with a mythical Duran against DLH can be made in the same way. Duran was always a pressure fighter who came forward, roughing up his opponent, while Floyd has never been like that. What defines outclassing? I can see Floyd going in there, hitting DLH with weak punches all night and making DLH swing at nothing. But that's because he's quick enough and has the reflexes to do it. Duran was not that type of fighter, and even when the great man himself came up against a Leonard who was ready to fight a Floyd-type fight, he was looking like getting outclassed before saying "No Mas" and the rest is history......

Why are many here calling Mayweather a weight hopper when he dominated an excellent 130lbs division - beating long standing champ Gernaro Hernandez who probably wasnt' far off P4P status, Mayweather-Corrales was 1 and 2 squaring off in the division (Corrales also been a belt holder). Chavez went on to be a 2 weight champ, Manfredy was probably a top5 level fighter, Vargas was an ex-feather champ, C Hernandez would become a champ. Thats a mighty impressive Super-Feather reign and the way he dominated them all puts it right up there. No doubt if he stayed at 130 he would have beat all comers chewing up MAB, Morales and Pac. He also even tried to make a fight with Hamed at a 128 catch weight?

So should Mayweather have spent his career at 130? Preying on the smaller MAB and the similar sized Pacman and Morales?

Whats would be better beating MAB, Morales, Pacman at 130 or beating the 135 king, becoming the king at 147 and beating mcuher bigger great DLH? Remember Mayweather would have fought Cotto, Hatton, Tyszu if deals were made for those fights, he certainly didnt avoid those fights as he made offers for both Hatton and Cotto and wanted tyszu but supposedly asked for money Tyszus team werent willing to offer.

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:Why are many here calling Mayweather a weight hopper when he dominated an excellent 130lbs division - beating long standing champ Gernaro Hernandez who probably wasnt' far off P4P status, Mayweather-Corrales was 1 and 2 squaring off in the division (Corrales also been a belt holder). Chavez went on to be a 2 weight champ, Manfredy was probably a top5 level fighter, Vargas was an ex-feather champ, C Hernandez would become a champ. Thats a mighty impressive Super-Feather reign and the way he dominated them all puts it right up there. No doubt if he stayed at 130 he would have beat all comers chewing up MAB, Morales and Pac. He also even tried to make a fight with Hamed at a 128 catch weight?.

I don't think people are saying he should have stayed at 130 more that after moving up to 140 or 147 it would mean more to clean that division out. Rather than having three fights at 140lbs, moving up to 147lbs having three fights there and then moving to 154lbs.

Obviously it remains to be seen what he does after the Oscar fight if he goes back down to 147 and beats Cotto, Margartio, Williams and Mosely over the next few years i don't think anyone will complain.

Chavez was old, beyond his natural weight as his fights with DLH were for the Light Welter and Welter titles - his best weight was Super Feather and Lightweight. I'm might get slated for this, but part of the reason why I thought Taylor did so well for 11 rounds vs Chavez was because Julio seemed to lose a fair amount of footspeed at Light Welter and even more so at Welter. Sure still had enough to be a good Light Welter champion, but I think his Light Welter reign is kinda comparable to Floyd's reign as a Welterweight - not quite the same.

Anyway, fight one was a kicking again shouldn't have taken place cause Chavez had recent scar tissue going into the fight and of course this had a major impact. However, 2 years down the road and at a higher weight Chavez was competitive vs DLH. I have the fight on DVD and its one of my favourites - it was certainly not an OUTCLASS job, Chavez was absolutely gutted that it was stopped (due a huge amount of blood pooring out of his mouth) but Chavez was winning rounds (not winning the fight) and every round he had some moments. Not saying DLH couldn't have outclassed that version of Chavez, cause he did fight silly, but he definately didn't.