BoxRec

I discussed this recently with a casual fan who thinks that Floyd is the best fighter ever and that he'll never lose a professional bout. While I don't believe that he's got much of a case for being the best ever, I think the latter claim is plausible and I'm curious about what people here think.

After Floyd's last fight will he be undefeated? And while I get that many people think he deserved to lose already (I for one thought JLC clearly beat him in their first bout) I'm only concerned with official results.

I think he probably will retire undefeated he picks his opponents too well and he's smart enough not to take too big a risk at this stage of his career.

I stand by my long held opinion that he has already been beaten (by Castillo) but of course that doesn't show as a loss on his record.

Joe Calzaghe, Rocky Marciano, and Sven Ottke never lost. Usually the same fighters who keep fighting-on past their prime and picking-up defeats to opponents they should never have lost to are the same fighters who had existing defeats on their record for one reason or another. Fighters who spent their entire career protecting their 0 and managed to reach the end of their prime with their 0 still intact often also know when to hang it up as their one last effort to finish protecting their 0.

Ian1973 wrote:I think he probably will retire undefeated he picks his opponents too well and he's smart enough not to take too big a risk at this stage of his career.

I stand by my long held opinion that he has already been beaten (by Castillo) but of course that doesn't show as a loss on his record.

All of this is correct, and I would add that I think Maidana won the first fight as well 7-5.

He's already lost in life several times.

LOL to Floyd losing to Maidana but I do think Castillo won the first fight. I think too many people are concerned with Mayweather taking a loss rather than him achieving history, this shows how people are so full of hate and how much they despise a winner.

Like it or not, Mayweather is a Winner and he'll more than likely go out undefeated and taking on even tougher challenges to boot. He tried to make the fight with Manny in 2010 to which we saw how Pacquiao refused to take the test by not signing the contract, so IMHO no person should fault him for not making that fight.

The only people left for him to fight reside at higher weight classes that anyone really considers capable of beating him (Gennady, Hopkins or Ward), I don't see him moving up considering he has already done that since his days at 130 up to now.

He will go out undefeated, like it or not.

Lackeos wrote:Joe Calzaghe, Rocky Marciano, and Sven Ottke never lost. Usually the same fighters who keep fighting-on past their prime and picking-up defeats to opponents they should never have lost to are the same fighters who had existing defeats on their record for one reason or another. Fighters who spent their entire career protecting their 0 and managed to reach the end of their prime with their 0 still intact often also know when to hang it up as their one last effort to finish protecting their 0.

Ian1973 wrote:I think he probably will retire undefeated he picks his opponents too well and he's smart enough not to take too big a risk at this stage of his career.

I stand by my long held opinion that he has already been beaten (by Castillo) but of course that doesn't show as a loss on his record.

All of this is correct, and I would add that I think Maidana won the first fight as well 7-5.

I also had him losing against Castillo but definitely not against Maidana. He won both Maidana fights clearly. I'm actually flabbergasted by the notion that anyone had Maidana winning either fight. However you are entitled to your opinion.

Will Leonard Bundu ever lose?


Who cares, the real question is, will he ever prove he is the best?

Floyd will never lose while he is handpicking his opponents & deciding when & if he fights.

Yeah that's my impression as well. Mayweather already lost to Castillo, one. Two the first Maidana fight is debatable either way. Three Mayweather has two fights left so a lose where he loses the zero officially on record would not be surprising. Mayweather did not look to good in his last two fights.

Well this is really a question of: Who out there has the tools to beat Floyd?

I wouldn't say that there are all that many. But I would give Pacquaio the best shot at beating him.

Followed by Amir Khan due to his hand speed, Floyd hasn't fought against anything like that before in recent times.

Even if Floyd fought and beat Pac and Khan, he wouldn't get much credit for it. People would say Pac was over-the-hill, etc. If Floyd beats Khan what does he get from it? Not a damn thing. It makes me laugh that people want to see Floyd vs Khan rather than the guy that KO'd Khan? If Floyd beat Thurman it would be that he was too "green", not ready. If he beat Brook it would be that Brook was over-rated.

Speed is about all Khan has. Khan has great speed, and throws good combinations....for a while. He is way to predictable though, and Floyd would time him easily and make him pay. Danny Garcia didn't have any problem doing that. A way past his best Diaz put Khan on his ass. (and imo won the fight) Sure he could trouble Floyd for a while like several others can, but common.... How many times have we heard "Floyd avoids fighter that are: young, have a high work rate, good over-all skills, fast, guys taller than him, big punchers, good counter-punchers, etc. (I forgot the black guy ducking thing too lol)

Face it, Floyd has beaten every style out there, and beating Khan would be an absolutely no-win situation for Floyd. It is a nothing fight. A win over Khan does nothing for Floyd's legacy, if that matters. To hear now that Floyd is "ducking" Khan is absolutely hilarious.

I hope Floyd just retires and is done. Nothing else to prove. (even though many do NOT want him to retire until he at least loses once)

Badhusker wrote:Even if Floyd fought and beat Pac

He wouldn't, though.

Mayweather had a chance to fight Pacquiao when Pacquiao was #1 p4p. Pacquiao was tremendously superior p4p to any of Mayweather's other scalps. Mayweather has avoided that fight for 5 years, and if he ever does agree to it, it probably will be after Pacquiao is significantly degraded and has already dropped out of most peoples' p4p top 10's. That won't be haters retroactively diminishing the value of Pacquiao's scalp, it'll be "Look at what Pacquiao's p4p ranking at the time that Mayweather agrees to fight him. That's what the f*ck I thought."

Syntax Error wrote:Floyd will never lose while he is handpicking his opponents & deciding when & if he fights.

I can see if he handpicked someone at the bottom of the food chain but he's fighting champions and those that are younger and stronger (and most cases bigger) than him so I don't find it a bad thing that he has fought mostly champions or the likes of SSM, DLH, Canelo, Marquez, Hatton, Cotto and on and on.

If those are what you call "handpicked" then every fighter should be so selective. He handpicked Pacquiao but Manny did not sign the contract or was willing at the time to do the testing, so if that is another example of "handpicking" then again, every fighter should be selective as Floyd.

I don't like Mayweather as a person but I respect him as a fighter, you should try to remove your hateful bias so you can be honest about what I stated and see that if every fighter was as selective as he was then most or all of them would not be undefeated.

fergusg wrote:

Syntax Error wrote:Floyd will never lose while he is handpicking his opponents & deciding when & if he fights.

If you disregard boxers directly affected by the Showtime-Haymon versus Arum-Top Rank-HBO seemingly-insurmountable political hurdle, as well as those pugilists that are unknown to casual boxing observers, which fighters are being avoided by Floyd Mayweather Jr?

Don't even try to be reasonable with haters.They know for a fact that.He kicks puppies,rapes goats and
is the love child of Osama Bin Ladin..He is pure evil.

He's already lost: Oscar and Castillo

reggaereggae wrote:He's already lost: Oscar and Castillo

I thought the Dela Hoya fight was close but I thought Floyd nicked it personally by a round (or two max).

Lackeos wrote:

Badhusker wrote:Even if Floyd fought and beat Pac

He wouldn't, though.

Mayweather had a chance to fight Pacquiao when Pacquiao was #1 p4p. Pacquiao was tremendously superior p4p to any of Mayweather's other scalps. Mayweather has avoided that fight for 5 years, and if he ever does agree to it, it probably will be after Pacquiao is significantly degraded and has already dropped out of most peoples' p4p top 10's. That won't be haters retroactively diminishing the value of Pacquiao's scalp, it'll be "Look at what Pacquiao's p4p ranking at the time that Mayweather agrees to fight him. That's what the f*ck I thought."

Mayweather will retire having never fought a great fighter in his prime. Guys like Golovkin and Klitchko are crying out for a great rival, Floyd had that, the stage was set, and he bottled out.

fergusg wrote:By the time Floyd Mayweather Jr. steps foot into the ring again, he’ll be 38 years of age and only a couple of fights from retirement. He also receives a guaranteed $32m payday regardless as to whoever he fights.

So if I was him, I’d ignore some of the preposterous challenges posed by his critics to “dare” to face men that outweigh him by 25lbs+, such as the frequent calls for Floyd to fight the likes of Golovkin & Hopkins, and instead remain in his comfort zone and try to end his career on a high note.

I’m not suggesting that Floyd ducks anybody; I am simply suggesting that he doesn’t take any ludicrous risks, such as fighting men that are naturally much bigger than himself or sharing the ring with high-risk low-reward type opponents.

I don’t see any reason why Floyd Mayweather Jr. wouldn’t be able to retire with his unblemished record intact.

He should also avoid undefeated young lions like Thurman, just in case.

fergusg wrote:By the time Floyd Mayweather Jr. steps foot into the ring again, he’ll be 38 years of age and only a couple of fights from retirement. He also receives a guaranteed $32m payday regardless as to whoever he fights.

So if I was him, I’d ignore some of the preposterous challenges posed by his critics to “dare” to face men that outweigh him by 25lbs+, such as the frequent calls for Floyd to fight the likes of Golovkin & Hopkins, and instead remain in his comfort zone and try to end his career on a high note.

I’m not suggesting that Floyd ducks anybody; I am simply suggesting that he doesn’t take any ludicrous risks, such as fighting men that are naturally much bigger than himself or sharing the ring with high-risk low-reward type opponents.

I don’t see any reason why Floyd Mayweather Jr. wouldn’t be able to retire with his unblemished record intact.

Floyd says he's the best ever. We just want him to prove that. What is wrong with that?

fergusg wrote:

ikorolev wrote:

fergusg wrote:By the time Floyd Mayweather Jr. steps foot into the ring again, he’ll be 38 years of age and only a couple of fights from retirement. He also receives a guaranteed $32m payday regardless as to whoever he fights.

So if I was him, I’d ignore some of the preposterous challenges posed by his critics to “dare” to face men that outweigh him by 25lbs+, such as the frequent calls for Floyd to fight the likes of Golovkin & Hopkins, and instead remain in his comfort zone and try to end his career on a high note.

I’m not suggesting that Floyd ducks anybody; I am simply suggesting that he doesn’t take any ludicrous risks, such as fighting men that are naturally much bigger than himself or sharing the ring with high-risk low-reward type opponents.

I don’t see any reason why Floyd Mayweather Jr. wouldn’t be able to retire with his unblemished record intact.

He should also avoid undefeated young lions like Thurman, just in case.

To be honest, I feel that it’s too early (at least from a commercial perspective) for Keith Thurman to be considered as a potential Mayweather opponent, but I could be wrong.

I also believe that it is in Al Haymon’s interest to keep Floyd and Keith apart, because he is going to lose his most prized asset within the next twelve months, so it makes sense to retain value in Thurman by bringing him along slowly in order to pick-up all the vacated belts.

Put it this way: if Floyd beats Thurman, then Haymon will lose two prized-assets… alternatively, an upset risks the windfall that could be gained from a potential Mayweather-Pacquiao super-fight.

Out of interest though, I’ve watched Thurman fight and he seems fairly decent. He’ll definitely win one of the 147lb world titles, but I haven’t quite bought into the media hype yet. At least GGG’s performances warrant a certain amount of over-promotion, but I’m not so sure Keith’s does.

What have you seen in Thurman that convinces you that he’ll beat Floyd Mayweather Jr.?

Actually, Floyd losing to a good fighter would make a Pacquiao fight more realistic. Floyd wouldn't be so worried about keeping his zero and also wouldn't be able to point to Pacquiao losses making Manny undeserving to fight him.

I am not convinced that Thurman will beat Floyd, but he certainly seems to be the best undefeated fighter at 147 now. I would love to see him to fight Brook to clear things out.

I say no. Only because he will choose who he fights. If he legitimately challenges himself, he will lose sooner or later. As with all the other all time p4pers throughout the history of the sport. IMHO, a fighter who retires with no losses did not take all comers.

tiny_acres wrote:

fergusg wrote:

Syntax Error wrote:Floyd will never lose while he is handpicking his opponents & deciding when & if he fights.

If you disregard boxers directly affected by the Showtime-Haymon versus Arum-Top Rank-HBO seemingly-insurmountable political hurdle, as well as those pugilists that are unknown to casual boxing observers, which fighters are being avoided by Floyd Mayweather Jr?

Don't even try to be reasonable with haters.They know for a fact that.He kicks puppies,rapes goats and
is the love child of Osama Bin Ladin..He is pure evil.

What's with all this haters claptrap?

Who on Earth invented that ridiculously childish insult?

Just because you criticise someone or express a dislike for something they've done does not mean that you hate them or you're a 'hater'.

If he sticks around long enough, then inevitably yes... He will lose.

Not if he retires after this current contract as he says he will. I don't see what opponents he would realistically fight that would beat him. Pacquiao has the best shot and I think Floyd beats him pretty decisively.

I thought Canelo had a decent shot due to size and pressure but we all saw how that went. I don't think Brook or anyone else in the current crop of WWs is up to the challenge.

Just because you criticise someone or express a dislike for something they've done does not mean that you hate them or you're a 'hater'.[/quote][/quote]

Nothing wrong with anyone that criticizes boxers or expressing dislike. It makes for good debates if you base it on facts. It is the people that throw bogus things out there like Floyd never fights anyone good that negates all of it. We all know he hand-picks his opponents, but historically they have been all boxers that were at or near the top of their game at the time he fought them. I can only think of one time he fought a guy coming off a loss. Floyd has also given up weight to several (nearly 20 lbs 3 or 4 times fight night) that should be praised instead of criticized. I hope he hand picks Pacquiao next.