BoxRec

jessi wrote:

Deserter wrote:

jessi wrote:Sportsman get better, it's proven in every sport, boxing is no different.

Jeff Thomas wrote:Wow is this boxrec or some daft forum for boxing newbies?

Absolutely mental that anyone is even considering this- you need to educate yourself if you truly believe he's the best based on his very name heavy résume and performances against good but hardly any great opposition.

He's picked and chosen his way to 45-0. Yes there are some brilliant wins in there Manfreddy, Genaro Hernandez, Corrales, Castillo, Hatton but other then that its all a little bit smoke and Mirrors. Great names sure but a long way removed from their primes. Even the lower tier guys like Judah and Shamba Mitchell had ran into moderate form before he decided to take them on.

He downright ducked an unbeaten Cotto, Paul Williams, Margarito, Tszyu, Freitas, prime Mosley and of course Pacquiao. For the record I think he'd have beaten them but not without hiccup. It's ok that now - at this advanced stage in his career that he is suddenly saying 'you choose and I'll fight anybody'. But the divisions around him are laden with mediocre (world class) fighters. It's like Man Utd saying they'll play anybody once Arsenal, Chelsea and City have retired from the league.

Personally to me records mean very little these days. It's easy to pick and choose your way to virtually any record you like if your talented. He's got a fabulous system of fighting. It's very clever and means he has an answer for almost anything his opponent does, but you've got to remember who he is fighting. These aren't Durans, Benitez's or Hearns' they are a series of mostly good not great fighters. I always try and imagine the fighters your comparing the subject with and how they would have got on in the same matches.

Are we in any doubt that Leonard, Duran and co would have barely lost a round on route to 45-0 against the same men.

He is a great but for me he sits somewhere around the same place as the earlier mentioned Felix Trinidad. Probably above Don Curry head to head and certainly legacy wise. Before you come back and say oh well it's different eras ask yourself this. Would he have beaten Winky Wright who was a tremendous fighter not generally considered an ATG? I have my doubts.

Jeff Thomas wrote:Wow is this boxrec or some daft forum for boxing newbies?

Absolutely mental that anyone is even considering this- you need to educate yourself if you truly believe he's the best based on his very name heavy résume and performances against good but hardly any great opposition.

He's picked and chosen his way to 45-0. Yes there are some brilliant wins in there Manfreddy, Genaro Hernandez, Corrales, Castillo, Hatton but other then that its all a little bit smoke and Mirrors. Great names sure but a long way removed from their primes. Even the lower tier guys like Judah and Shamba Mitchell had ran into moderate form before he decided to take them on.

He downright ducked an unbeaten Cotto, Paul Williams, Margarito, Tszyu, Freitas, prime Mosley and of course Pacquiao. For the record I think he'd have beaten them but not without hiccup. It's ok that now - at this advanced stage in his career that he is suddenly saying 'you choose and I'll fight anybody'. But the divisions around him are laden with mediocre (world class) fighters. It's like Man Utd saying they'll play anybody once Arsenal, Chelsea and City have retired from the league.

Personally to me records mean very little these days. It's easy to pick and choose your way to virtually any record you like if your talented. He's got a fabulous system of fighting. It's very clever and means he has an answer for almost anything his opponent does, but you've got to remember who he is fighting. These aren't Durans, Benitez's or Hearns' they are a series of mostly good not great fighters. I always try and imagine the fighters your comparing the subject with and how they would have got on in the same matches.

Are we in any doubt that Leonard, Duran and co would have barely lost a round on route to 45-0 against the same men.

He is a great but for me he sits somewhere around the same place as the earlier mentioned Felix Trinidad. Probably above Don Curry head to head and certainly legacy wise. Before you come back and say oh well it's different eras ask yourself this. Would he have beaten Winky Wright who was a tremendous fighter not generally considered an ATG? I have my doubts.

Lenny wrote:Nice one Jeff. I'd include Casamayor in the fighters he should have fought list because I'd love to have seen that fight. Someone who was as clever and dirty as Floyd up close.

Tom Ford wrote:17 years at the top and undefeated.

Floyd is up there.

17 years!

loaded_gloves wrote:De la Hoya beating Hagler is among the all-time worst posts written on this forum.

An instant lobotomy should be performed, it's the only solution.

Syntax Error wrote:

loaded_gloves wrote:De la Hoya beating Hagler is among the all-time worst posts written on this forum.

An instant lobotomy should be performed, it's the only solution.

Who wrote that?

orbtastic wrote:I think McCallum would have beaten Floyd, but I also think against the "fabulous four" he'd have got at least one win.

Not so sure he'd have made 152 though. He was a big old lump for a light middle.

Counter-puncher wrote:

Lenny wrote:Nice one Jeff. I'd include Casamayor in the fighters he should have fought list because I'd love to have seen that fight. Someone who was as clever and dirty as Floyd up close.

i have said this for ages, but it seems to be a minority view

Chris W 1982 wrote:

orbtastic wrote:I think McCallum would have beaten Floyd, but I also think against the "fabulous four" he'd have got at least one win.

Not so sure he'd have made 152 though. He was a big old lump for a light middle.

I don't. If you took them all at the their prime then I think Floyd would do well to hear the final bell against any of them.

Leonard would have dazzled him

He was made for Hearns

Hagler far too big

Duran the night he beat Leonard was arguably the greatest man to ever step foot in the ring

A prime Floyd would certainly have beaten versions of the fab 4 but each at their best would have got the win.

Lenny wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:

Lenny wrote:Nice one Jeff. I'd include Casamayor in the fighters he should have fought list because I'd love to have seen that fight. Someone who was as clever and dirty as Floyd up close.

i have said this for ages, but it seems to be a minority view

I rate Casamayor pretty highly. Can pretty much fight whatever way he needed to. Would easily be the most intelligent fighter Floyd had fought (not counting the Marquez he faced).

Lightweight and light-welter were breezed though by Mayweather, avoiding the divisions biggest talents along the way, these divisions should have defined him imo

Chris W 1982 wrote:

orbtastic wrote:I think McCallum would have beaten Floyd, but I also think against the "fabulous four" he'd have got at least one win.

Not so sure he'd have made 152 though. He was a big old lump for a light middle.

I don't. If you took them all at the their prime then I think Floyd would do well to hear the final bell against any of them.

Leonard would have dazzled him

He was made for Hearns

Hagler far too big

Duran the night he beat Leonard was arguably the greatest man to ever step foot in the ring

A prime Floyd would certainly have beaten versions of the fab 4 but each at their best would have got the win.

stujones wrote:Casamayor was a fantastic fighter no getting away from it, but in the big ones he seemed to find away to lose fights he should never have lost.

Freitas, Corrales 2 and Castillo and he made harder work of Katisdis than necessary.

stujones wrote:Barrera at super feather I would have liked to have seen Floyd stick around for.

Lenny wrote:You kinda are comparing Duran to Hatton though Stu and throughout all their differences as fighters the big, standout, massive ones is their defence.

Duran wasn't just a rough brawling type, he was also incredibly difficult to tag cleanly. Hatton of the other hand has always been wide open and often straight on. Capable of getting out of the way in his younger days with his speed of foot but he was losing this long before he fought Floyd - not that Hatton could have ever beaten him.
Also Floyd didn't have it all his own way against the "rough, brawling, mauling type" that was Castillo

Syntax Error wrote:

loaded_gloves wrote:De la Hoya beating Hagler is among the all-time worst posts written on this forum.

An instant lobotomy should be performed, it's the only solution.

Who wrote that?

Lenny wrote:

stujones wrote:Casamayor was a fantastic fighter no getting away from it, but in the big ones he seemed to find away to lose fights he should never have lost.

Freitas, Corrales 2 and Castillo and he made harder work of Katisdis than necessary.

You could make a good case for him winning all 3 fights though...

stujones wrote:Barrera at super feather I would have liked to have seen Floyd stick around for.

Yes but unfortunately I think he missed Barrera and Morales by a couple of years, their paths just didn't come close enough to crossing

loaded_gloves wrote:De la Hoya beating Hagler is among the all-time worst posts written on this forum.

An instant lobotomy should be performed, it's the only solution.