# Who actually believes Floyd is top 10?



## Rockinghorseshit (Oct 4, 2013)

Which Flomos will put it out there they think he is top 10 worthy?

I think a case could be made for him being top 50 but I want to see those guys like Tilang who I'm pretty sure rated him Top 10 make a case for it.


----------



## MrJotatp4p (May 23, 2013)

Top 10, top 50 is all opinionated bullshit anyways. You have to really look at all these fighter at their absolute best, then break down who they fought, what they did when they fought them. You also have to go by the eye test. I think Floyd belongs in top 30. Forgot where I have him ranked but I will have to get on my imac later and look at my list. 

For me I like to look at guys in their prime and judge based off that. Damn near all the ATG fighters took losses when they fought on way too long and I don't judge them off of those losses.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

MrJotatp4p said:


> Top 10, top 50 is all opinionated bullshit anyways. You have to really look at all these fighter at their absolute best, then break down who they fought, what they did when they fought them. You also have to go by the eye test. I think Floyd belongs in top 30. Forgot where I have him ranked but I will have to get on my imac later and look at my list.
> 
> For me I like to look at guys in their prime and judge based off that. Damn near all the ATG fighters took losses when they fought on way too long and I don't judge them off of those losses.


Top 30 is fair imo.

Top 10 is too much though way too much


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

"I think a case could be made for top 50" lol duh, what an understatement


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> "I think a case could be made for top 50" lol duh, what an understatement


He has put in a lot of work over time.

1998: Genaro Hernandez (World SFW Champion)
1998: Angel Manfredy (No. 2 SFW)
1999: Carlos Gerena (No. 9 SFW)
2000: Goyo Vargas (No. 10 SFW)
2001: Diego Corrales (No. 1 SFW)
2001: Jesus Chavez (No. 4 SFW)
2002: Jose Luis Castillo (No. 1 LW, WBC claimant) [New lineage]
2002: Jose Luis Castillo (No. 1 LW)
2003: Philip N'Dou (No. 4 SFW) (@135)
2004: DeMarcus Corley (No. 5 LWW)
2005: Arturo Gatti (No. 1 LWW, WBC claimant)
2006: Zab Judah (No. 3 WW)
2006: Carlos Baldomir (World WW Champion)
2007: Oscar De La Hoya (No. 5 LMW, WBC claimant)
2007: Ricky Hatton (World LWW Champion) (@147)
2009: Juan Manuel Marquez (World LW Champion) (@147)
2010: Shane Mosley (No. 2 WW, WBA claimant)
2011: Victor Ortiz (No. 2 WW, WBC claimant)
2012: Miguel Cotto (No. 1 LMW, WBA claimant)
2013: Robert Guerrero (No. 3 WW)
2013: Canelo Alvarez (No. 1 LMW, WBC claimant) [New RING Champion]
2014: Marcos Maidana (No. 6 WW, WBA claimant)
2014: Marcos Maidana (No. 6 WW)
2015: Manny Pacquiao (No. 1 WW, WBO claimant)

All those were at the time of the fights and excluding himself in any instances where it would apply. He can't fight himself, of course.

His very top wins are bested by a good number of fighters, but Floyd has a lot of depth and a lot of dominance. A lot of skill. Hell, Duran and Whitaker didn't even beat 20 ranked opponents in their careers. However, Duran is Top 10 for me and Whitaker Top 20. Floyd Top 30-35. @Bogotazo I got those as well on those aforementioned guys.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Word, I think I have him (and Manny) around 40 or something like that. I lost my list.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> He has put in a lot of work over time.
> 
> 1998: Genaro Hernandez (World SFW Champion)
> 1998: Angel Manfredy (No. 2 SFW)
> ...


good post. So much depth and so much consistency


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Word, I think I have him (and Manny) around 40 or something like that. I lost my list.


How much emphasis you placing on this fight? Pacquiao probably has more to gain. I don't see him as just this terribly hopeless, overmatched guy though. I think the bitterness of the delay is going to wear off as the fight draws near and people are going to be getting nervous and excited as fuck. Pacquiao is past it and got KO'ed by another man. Nothing can change that. However, he still shown capable of beating legit P4P guys and Floyd's lost a good half step, half second or whatever. That's enough to make him more hittable than he's ever been. His wheels obviously aren't exactly primed up himself either.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> good post. So much depth and so much consistency


Well, there isn't anyone that's come after him who will likely even approach that level of depth. Floyd came into the game rabid and intent on proving himself. There is also way too much down time between fights these days and too many 'champions' taking fights against non-contenders too often.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> How much emphasis you placing on this fight? Pacquiao probably has more to gain. I don't see him as just this terribly hopeless, overmatched guy though. I think the bitterness of the delay is going to wear off as the fight draws near and people are going to be getting nervous and excited as fuck. Pacquiao is past it and got KO'ed by another man. Nothing can change that. However, he still shown capable of beating legit P4P guys and Floyd's lost a good half step, half second or whatever. That's enough to make him more hittable than he's ever been. His wheels obviously aren't exactly primed up himself either.


I really don't know. It's hard to say. The way the fight looks and plays out could change things in hindsight, whether that's right or wrong. It's still a fight worth having and getting excited about because neither is prime, but it's clear Pacquiao has more to gain here. Floyd deserves credit for beating this version of Manny if he does, and this version of Manny is still the next best welterweight, not some has-been.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Well, there isn't anyone that's come after him who will likely even approach that level of depth. Floyd came into the game rabid and intent on proving himself. There is also way too much down time between fights these days and too many 'champions' taking fights against non-contenders too often.


yeah that's true. It's just too bad he didn't have Maragarito on his resume because that would have changed it so much :-(


----------



## godsavethequeen (Jun 12, 2013)

Is it just me or what. But when you look at the W L D columns and add up how many loses opponents had that fought Floyd and Pac there is only a minimal amount of loses compared to many other ATG's in the top 30. Surely that makes them both top 30 along with their longevity at the top.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> Well, there isn't anyone that's come after him who will likely even approach that level of depth.


Nah, those Goyo Vargas, Guerrero, near shot Mosley wins are hardly amazing depth, regardless of how you good are with your numbers, HoI - it's not basketball.

Depth is El Feo.

Floyd's got a very good resume, don't get me wrong, but it's his 0 (which will always be a big part of his legacy), outstanding skills, longevity, constistency (aided by his resume), exposure/popularity that will separate him from future ATG's and moves him closer to the greats of the past, not the unreachable heights of his resume alone.

Margarito or Williams or whoever, they wouldn't have improved his legacy significantly in the eyes of an unbiased observer really, if we're talking strictly names, as they hardly were great fighters.
But at the same time they would have improved his legacy, as Floyd's biggest criticism usually consists of accusations of avoiding certain fights.
Which most of the times goes way too far - his detractors make it look like Floyd avoided everybody, from Kostya to Selchuk Aydin - never mind the fact that Floyd was hardly a PPV-star prior to welter, who could make any fight happen instantly.


----------



## JohnAnthony (Jun 6, 2013)

Undefeated over around 17 years or so. also p4p top 10 for around 15 years number 1 in sport for around 12.

number 1 or 2 of the decade.

Surely that deserves top 20.

Main negative is he lacks a genuine ATG win.

But he's got a chance this May.


----------



## Powerpuncher (May 20, 2013)

People in the consensus top 30 often aren't all they're cracked up to tbh

Fitzsimmons - a semi pro era where everyone looks useless on film. His stance looks really easy to punish for a schooled boxer. 

Pep - only a 1 division champion, losing the series to Saddler imo hurt his standing

Saddler - his record is excellent and a physical beast but a limited boxer if you watch him. 

Armstrong - yes he did it in 3 divisions at once, but he was only a champ for 2 years and even if he made 20 defences in that time he didn't face Burley, Holman Williams or Cocoa Kid at WW. 

Mickey Walker - goes up the divisions winning title from WW to LHW and beats some HWs but is never the best in any division. Several losses at WW. Beat a weak LHW champ. Probably got a gift for the MW title against Flowers. Drew against a hot and cold Sharkey

Chavez - clearly second best of his era at the weights he boxed at. 

Ross - didn't dominate his era but was the best from LW to WW for a period, I'm not sure if that makes him a clear top fighter of all time. In fact I don't.

Monzon - only a 1 division champ, usually had a size advantage, his best opponents were past prime and he didn't beat a great MW

Hagler - the same as Monzon really. 

So yes lots of rose tinted glasses and Mayweather isn't the best ever either. Although it is all subjective.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Powerpuncher said:


> People in the consensus top 30 often aren't all they're cracked up to tbh
> 
> Fitzsimmons - a semi pro era where everyone looks useless on film. His stance looks really easy to punish for a schooled boxer.
> 
> ...


I've never seen Saddler in the top ten ever and I never see many with Hagler or Monzon in tbf.

The general names hanging around most top ten lists would be Greb, Robinson, Ezzard, Langford, Armstrong, Duran , both leonards, Ross, Ali, Moore, Pep, FItszimmons, Walker, Canzoneri.

Ultimately modern boxers aren't really gonna be able to crack the top ten because they just don't fight as often, the belt situation is fucked up, the weight situation is fucked up, they don't fight the best guys at their peak often enough. It's just a completely different era of boxing that you can't really compare properly. The older guys bust their nut more and boxing was a tougher sport back then that had more mainstream appeal and more people participated. The newer guys have compenstated themselves with more money, health and better lifestyle in return for lesser legacy's. I cant blame them but it is what it is.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Powerpuncher said:


> lots of rose tinted glasses


Fitz looks shit on film.
You can read _(you don't watch pre-30's fighters)_ him till you start mutating into Janitor, he'd still look shit on film.

Endless lists of every fringe contender Pep/Robinson/Saddler/etc has ever faced doesn't make them greater than they were in reality.
Even if every one of them fought 467 times a year and split 34 fight series with some forgotten Kid Nestle who once shadowboxed naked in front of a 5 year old Emanuel Futch.


----------



## icebergisonfire (Aug 22, 2013)

I really don't know but this makes me wonder. On BoxRec, they have their own formula and among all boxers, if he were to retire today, he'd be 4th alltime. I'm hesitant to put him that high but in mythical head to heads, I'd likely never put anyone above him.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Lester1583 said:


> Nah, those Goyo Vargas, Guerrero, near shot Mosley wins are hardly amazing depth, regardless of how you good are with your numbers, HoI - it's not basketball.
> 
> Depth is El Feo.
> 
> ...


Well yeah, it's definitely a less weighty sort of depth. It's in numbers more so than quality, but a form of it nonetheless. I blame it on the number of divisions being doubled thus diluting the overall quality of a contender. Imagine you had squeeze the Top 10 in all 17 divisions into eight.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

icebergisonfire said:


> I really don't know but this makes me wonder. On BoxRec, they have their own formula and among all boxers, if he were to retire today, he'd be 4th alltime. I'm hesitant to put him that high but in mythical head to heads, I'd likely never put anyone above him.


Oh so in fantasy head to head matches you dont see SRL, SRR, and Hearns obliderating him? You think Whitaker wouldnt have a good shot to beat him at lightweight? Chavez sr, Pryor, and Duran have no shot at all? Benitez? Napoles? Donald Curry or Marlon Starling? Meldrick Tayloe? Griffith? Prime versions of De La Hoya & Shane Mosley? McCallum & Norris? I think a large number of these guys would beat floyd.


----------



## icebergisonfire (Aug 22, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Oh so in fantasy head to head matches you dont see SRL, SRR, and Hearns obliderating him? You think Whitaker wouldnt have a good shot to beat him at lightweight? Chavez sr, Pryor, and Duran have no shot at all? Benitez? Napoles? Donald Curry or Marlon Starling? Meldrick Tayloe? Griffith? Prime versions of De La Hoya & Shane Mosley? McCallum & Norris? I think a large number of these guys would beat floyd.


 Off the top of my head, Hearns with his height and reach is the one I'm most iffy with. In mythical head to heads, of course any outcome is possible, I just tend to side with Floyd for most of them.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

icebergisonfire said:


> Off the top of my head, Hearns with his height and reach is the one I'm most iffy with. In mythical head to heads, of course any outcome is possible, I just tend to side with Floyd for most of them.


You didn't answer. You think Floyd beats all of that list basically?


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

icebergisonfire said:


> Off the top of my head, Hearns with his height and reach is the one I'm most iffy with. In mythical head to heads, of course any outcome is possible, I just tend to side with Floyd for most of them.


prime 154 terry norris would beat the fuk out of floyd

look at these six, seven punch combos






right uppercut, right hook, overhand right, left hook, left uppercut, counter left

another dumfuk flomo dont even know who terry norris is


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Powerpuncher said:


> People in the consensus top 30 often aren't all they're cracked up to tbh
> 
> Fitzsimmons - a semi pro era where everyone looks useless on film. His stance looks really easy to punish for a schooled boxer.
> 
> ...


Top 5 On Film (For Me):

01. Roy Jones, Jr.
02. Pernell Whitaker 
03. Roberto Duran 
04. Ray Leonard
05. Ray Robinson

Could probably make one through Top 15-20 but it wouldn't be consistent. Too many great fighters between the likes of Sinclair, Chavez, Rodriguez, Napoles, Hearns, McCallum, Toney, Nunn, Tyson, et al.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> Top 5 On Film (For Me):


Warms my heart _(of steel)_ to see Robinson rated so low for a change.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> I really don't know. It's hard to say. The way the fight looks and plays out could change things in hindsight, whether that's right or wrong. It's still a fight worth having and getting excited about because neither is prime, but it's clear Pacquiao has more to gain here. Floyd deserves credit for beating this version of Manny if he does, and this version of Manny is still the next best welterweight, not some has-been.


Will it determine who you rate over the other? Most people have them about dead even all-time, with Pacquiao tending to get the slight nod on resume.



Lester1583 said:


> Warms my heart _(of steel)_ to see Robinson rated so low for a change.


Badass Puncher-Boxer though. Yes, 'Puncher-Boxer'. Not the inverse.



john garfield said:


> Very astute observation, HoI. Never heard the savviest fight-writers touch on that. Agree whole heartedly, 'n Sugar gave me tips in the gym.


http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=434902&page=3

I miss that guy a lot.


----------



## Casual Benson's Unknown (Jun 5, 2012)

Maybe cracks the top 30 with a win over Pac, doubt he ever gets any higher than that for me though, most people seem to have Pea just inside the top 25 and Floyd hasn't got anything to threaten overtaking Whitaker other than longevity.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Will it determine who you rate over the other? Most people have them about dead even all-time, with Pacquiao tending to get the slight nod on resume.


That's how I have him, slightest edge. I think it might be enough. I suppose it depends how the fight goes. Good poll question; yes/no/depends how it goes.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Unknown Poster said:


> Maybe cracks the top 30 with a win over Pac, doubt he ever gets any higher than that for me though, most people seem to have Pea just inside the top 25 and Floyd hasn't got anything to threaten overtaking Whitaker other than longevity.


Chavez
De La Hoya (arguably)
McGirt x2
Nelson
Vasquez
Ramirez x2
Pineda

Nah, he don't really. Pacquiao is his Chavez I suppose, but I'd rate '93 JCC over '15 Pacquiao without much hesitation. He'd slipped a bit, but he went into the fight as the #1 P4P (which in reality, Whitaker had been for a couple years already) and his 0 intact. McGirt was another P4P guy who was in his prime, that Whitaker moved up to dethrone at 147.

Whitaker's resume is really good @Bogotazo if not particularly glamourous. I reckon a lot of WBF posters hardly even know who Julio Cesar Vasquez the Light Middleweight was. About as dangerous a fight as Floyd's ever taken, and that's like Pea's fifth-best win. Some people actually don't have him winning.


----------



## tezel8764 (May 16, 2013)

My favourite dude atm:


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

tezel8764 said:


> My favourite dude atm:


He's certified dopeness.

But!






Probably feel that NYC soundtrack Bogo.


----------



## tezel8764 (May 16, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> He's certified dopeness.
> 
> But!
> 
> ...


How about this dude:






:rofl


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Chavez
> De La Hoya (arguably)
> McGirt x2
> Nelson
> ...


I haven't seen that fight but I respect for Whitaker's resume. There's a reason he's almost always 15-20.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Chavez
> De La Hoya (arguably)
> McGirt x2
> Nelson
> ...


That Vasquez victory is very impressive because whitaker jumped weight classes against a guy much more dangerous than Canelo Alvarez. And beat him handily at that. Vasquez was no chump and would be a champ today. Anyone doubting it should check his fight with Winky. A war!

Whitaker's resume is much better than floyd's despite having less fights. Whitaker fought better guys than floyd. Whitaker had a much higher workrate than Floyd.

Shit, since we're sorta on the topic, HoI, do you think starling or curry could give Floyd serious issues and beat him?


----------



## tezel8764 (May 16, 2013)

Does 50-0 mean anything to yous guys?


----------



## tezel8764 (May 16, 2013)

@Bogotazo

I was just scouting that thread that HOI posted, wheres/what happened to Turbotime?


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tezel8764 said:


> Does 50-0 mean anything to yous guys?


That is actually minor in the grand scheme of things. Not once did he fight someone equivilant to his skill level, another high quality technician as himself. No, G. Hernandez & Judah dont count. Where is Floyd's 'Benitez'?


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

tezel8764 said:


> @Bogotazo
> 
> I was just scouting that thread that HOI posted, wheres/what happened to Turbotime?


Don't know :conf he showed up for a bit then disappeared again.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> I haven't seen that fight but I respect for Whitaker's resume. There's a reason he's almost always 15-20.


He might just be my favourite boxer of all-time. It really sort of depends on the day and my mood. Here's some nice perspective on the Whitaker-Chavez fight, courtesy of @sweet_scientist, the greatest Sweet Pea aficionado (and one of the best posters period) ever. You really need to read it.









tommygun711 said:


> That Vasquez victory is very impressive because whitaker jumped weight classes against a guy much more dangerous than Canelo Alvarez. And beat him handily at that. Vasquez was no chump and would be a champ today. Anyone doubting it should check his fight with Winky. A war!
> 
> Whitaker's resume is much better than floyd's despite having less fights. Whitaker fought better guys than floyd. Whitaker had a much higher workrate than Floyd.
> 
> Shit, since we're sorta on the topic, HoI, do you think starling or *curry* could give Floyd serious issues and beat him?


That's a particular question I have ducked (and will continue) for a long time. :lol: Curry at his absolute (brief) best could give a lot of welters 'serious issues', including Floyd.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

I'll take a look tomorrow Hands, thanks.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> I'll take a look *tomorrow* Hands, thanks.


:verysad


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Floyd would have got KO'd by Withaker. He's just that good. Floyd hasn't beaten an atg in his prime. He ducked Margarito and prime Cotto, so that means he loses to Sweat Pea


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

tezel8764 said:


> @Bogotazo
> 
> I was just scouting that thread that HOI posted, wheres/what happened to Turbotime?





Bogotazo said:


> Don't know :conf he showed up for a bit then disappeared again.


He shows up very randomly for very, very brief windows of time.



bballchump11 said:


> Floyd would have got KO'd by Withaker. He's just that good. Floyd hasn't beaten an atg in his prime. He ducked Margarito and prime Cotto, so that means he loses to Sweat Pea


:lol:

Awww, c'mon now. Surely you don't deny Whitaker belongs in TBE conversations.


----------



## tezel8764 (May 16, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> He shows up very randomly for very, very brief windows of time.


I thought May v Pac would bring him back, probably needs some BIG Oscar news to reel him back in.



Hands of Iron said:


> Probably feel that NYC soundtrack Bogo.


Hey! I remember that dude over at ESB, gave me some props and told me not to give up on my vids. I haven't made one for ages, doesn't help when my Hard Drive with all my Boxing Fights I accumulated over the last couple went to shit when I was overseas on Christmas Holidays, some power surge or something. Really put me off, now I gotta start all over again. :verysad


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> Badass Puncher-Boxer though. Yes, 'Puncher-Boxer'. Not the inverse.


Yup, we've discussed Robinson with PowerPuncher in the "Where would a prime Frank Bruno be amongst todays heavyweights?" thread - if you're interested:
http://checkhookboxing.com/showthre...heavyweights&p=1812916&viewfull=1#post1812916

But page 4 is where Bogotazo appears suddenly with a Cotto gif - this is where it all began.



Bogotazo said:


> I haven't seen that fight but I respect for Whitaker's resume. There's a reason he's almost always 15-20.


It's a very good win but not a very good fight from Whitaker - clearly not his weight, at the very end of his prime, slower and not as sharp as before.
The fight was actually not easy at all for Pea.

Still, a mandatory watch if you're interested in Whitaker.

Vasquez is a good fighter to watch too - strong, powerful, tough and skillful enough - classic case of being underrated and forgotten cuz of nationality - solid resume with wins over Superman Davis, Trice, Castillejo, Winky, Daniels.

He was no worse than some more popular light middle champs/argentine fighters.

And Vasquez-Dottuev is a hidden gem too - round 6 will make your day.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Lester1583 said:


> Yup, we've discussed Robinson with PowerPuncher in the "Where would a prime Frank Bruno be amongst todays heavyweights?" thread - if you're interested:
> http://checkhookboxing.com/showthre...heavyweights&p=1812916&viewfull=1#post1812916
> 
> But page 4 is where Bogotazo appears suddenly with a Cotto gif - this is where it all began.
> ...


I think I need to reserve a Whitaker day post-bar.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

The film test is a flawed way to rank imo. I think if you do the film test you have to attribute the time period on how good they looked in comparison to that time to fully use it. 

I mean you wouldn't say Gravity has better effects that 2001 so therefore it must be a better film would you.


----------



## Pimp C (Jun 3, 2013)

He's not close to top 10 ATG and never will be. I have him top 25 ATG right now. If he finishes his career 50-0 a top 15 ATG he would be.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> :lol:
> 
> Awww, c'mon now. Surely you don't deny Whitaker belongs in TBE conversations.


Sweet Pea is my homie. I just find when people compare him to Floyd, they get a little carried away.


----------



## Hoshi (Aug 21, 2012)

Pimp C said:


> He's not close to top 10 ATG and never will be. I have him top 25 ATG right now. If he finishes his career 50-0 a top 15 ATG he would be.


His next few wins leading up to 50-0 would have to be stunning for that to happen, as his best wins are Castillo and Corales, nobody around would be better then them unless he were to beat the champs at higher divisions. Which fighters do you think he surpasses just by simply padding the record to 50?

Talking of Whitaker is it strange I rate Floyd just as highly defensively? Sure Pea had far better footwork and a better jab not to mention lateral movement when punching but defensively I don't see much between them. That said Mayweather backing in straight lines is such a head scratcher for someone so talented.

The competition angle can be used I suppose. Looking a million dollars and winning against average oppositon or looking average and winning against milllion dollar competition.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Sweet Pea is my homie. I just find when people compare him to Floyd, they get a little carried away.


he's clearly better than Floyd when you look at resume :conf


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> he's clearly better than Floyd when you look at resume :conf


I agree, but if floyd finishes this year undefeated and retired, people will see the distance between them tighten up


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Hoshi said:


> His next few wins leading up to 50-0 would have to be stunning for that to happen, as his best wins are Castillo and Corales, nobody around would be better then them unless he were to beat the champs at higher divisions. Which fighters do you think he surpasses just by simply padding the record to 50?
> 
> Talking of Whitaker is it strange I rate Floyd just as highly defensively? Sure Pea had far better footwork and a better jab not to mention lateral movement when punching but defensively I don't see much between them. That said Mayweather backing in straight lines is such a head scratcher for someone so talented.
> 
> The competition angle can be used I suppose. Looking a million dollars and winning against average oppositon or looking average and winning against milllion dollar competition.


Whitaker looked anything but average in the Chavez, McGirt II, Nelson, Ramirez II and Haugen fights. They were more or less Masterclass 101 exhibitions. There were difficulties in the first bout with McGirt (he was a damn good P4P caliber fighter) and the Vasquez (already discussed) fight at 154. There were problems with Wilfredo Rivera (I) and Diosbely Hurtado in 96/97 though he was clearly past it and had adopted a nice consistent coke habit by that point.


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

most, if not all of whitackers wins, were against opponents that were in their primes

also, pernell fought seven UD fighters to floyds three, one being the hatton cherry-pick with ricky fighting in a weight class that he clearly did not belong struggling with collazo who mosley easily beat, immediately thereafter. 


majority of mayweather wins at 140 or above are against opponents with 3 or more losses with many already have been kod(cotto, zab, mitchell, gatti). 

the ones that had one loss(rg,ortiz) where fighters that had just moved up in weight and had one win at 147 and since immediately regulated to b-level status

after cotto is inevitably exposed in his next fight, when you really think about it, one could make a very strong case that floyd has two(canelo/hoya) or maybe three(39-year-old mosely) high profile wins since 2004...none of whom were in their prime.

floyd of course couldve went the way of pernell and fought guys in their prime after the dlh win(sergio, pw, cotto, margo, paq) but went on a 20 month vacation to avoid such a challenge.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

50-0 means fuck all, its just a number, who he faces it what makes any difference. Obviously Pacquaio will be a huge win and add to his legacy if he wins. That does mroe for him that just having a number.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> There were difficulties in the first bout with McGirt (he was a damn good P4P caliber fighter)


If I remember correctly (been a long time since I watched this fight), it was a closer fight on the scorecards than it should've been mostly cuz of Whitaker losing focus/relaxing/taking the foot off the gas.

This is one of the few things I never liked about Pernell - not the clowning stuff but him not always being focused - that was his strength and his weakness at the same time.

He was having fun in the ring/enjoying himself and it lead to him being more unpredictable and improvisational.
But that also led to unnecessary risks and close fights (on the scorecrds).

He rarely was all business, no bullshit in big fights _(or maybe I still can't forgive him for that shitty Oscar fight)_ - he was that against Ramirez in the rematch (and Haugen, if I'm not mistaken) - it was one of the best displays of pure boxing.
Admittedly, against a faded and stylistically nonthreatening opponent.

They are very different fighters with Mayweather in that regard - it's one of the reasons Floyd has never been knocked down properly - he's always focused/always result-conscious.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

If Mayweather gets to 50-0, that'd be over 27-0 in title fights. Lineal titles in 4 divisions. Lineal titles in 2 divisions at once. Undisputed welterweight champion*. 20 years (with some breaks in between) undefeated. 
Then he would have collected the WBC title at 130, 135, 140, 147 2X, 154 2x
WBA at 147 and 154
IBF at 147 (2x)*
WBO at 147

That's 12(13)* titles in 5 weights across 3 different decades. Now tell me that's not impressive 

*If he fights Brook after Pacquiao


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Lester1583 said:


> If I remember correctly (been a long time since I watched this fight), it was a closer fight on the scorecards than it should've been mostly cuz of Whitaker losing focus/relaxing/taking the foot off the gas.
> 
> This is one of the few things I never liked about Pernell - not the clowning stuff but him not always being focused - that was his strength and his weakness at the same time.
> 
> ...


Yeah, Floyd never breaks his focus, form or fundamentals, Whitaker did and got away with it at sometimes appalling levels despite being an ATG technician where other facets are concerned. He is probably one of the worst examples for a young fighter to follow stylistically though, nobody can fight like Whitaker other than Whitaker. He was a collosal talent of abstract art and creative skill in the ring which is part of the reason he's so much more interesting to watch for me. I prefer that instinctive and reflexive based head-and-upper body movement slipping and evading to Floyd's philly shell. Whitaker's jab was the best in LW history IMO considering we got nothing on Leonard, he had an exceptionally high work rate in his prime and he's arguably the best _in-fighter_ I've ever seen, he just didn't make it his home exclusively enough to ordinarily be mentioned in that group of the Armstrongs, Durans, Chavez, et al. and speaking of the latter, uhh....


----------



## Hoshi (Aug 21, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> Whitaker looked anything but average in the Chavez, McGirt II, Nelson, Ramirez II and Haugen fights. They were more or less Masterclass 101 exhibitions. There were difficulties in the first bout with McGirt (he was a damn good P4P caliber fighter) and the Vasquez (already discussed) fight at 154. There were problems with Wilfredo Rivera (I) and Diosbely Hurtado in 96/97 though he was clearly past it and had adopted a nice consistent coke habit by that point.


Yeah didn't mean Whitaker looked average but if he had it is still better than looking world class against average opposition which some people think is impressive.

Very rare when you do both. Damn you Jones!! :smile


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> 50-0 means fuck all, its just a number, who he faces it what makes any difference. Obviously Pacquaio will be a huge win and add to his legacy if he wins. That does mroe for him that just having a number.





bballchump11 said:


> If Mayweather gets to 50-0, that'd be over 27-0 in title fights. Lineal titles in 4 divisions. Lineal titles in 2 divisions at once. Undisputed welterweight champion*. 20 years (with some breaks in between) undefeated.
> Then he would have collected the WBC title at 130, 135, 140, 147 2X, 154 2x
> WBA at 147 and 154
> IBF at 147 (2x)*
> ...





quincy k said:


> most, if not all of whitackers wins, were against opponents that were in their primes
> 
> also, pernell fought seven UD fighters to floyds three, one being the hatton cherry-pick with ricky fighting in a weight class that he clearly did not belong struggling with collazo who mosley easily beat, immediately thereafter.
> 
> ...


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Records and titles don't mean much. Stats don't really impress me in this era due to the influx of belts and stats. Who he has fought is the only thing that really matters and how he fought against them.

Now sure weights can make a difference and titles to a lesser extent if its say against the number 1 or 2 in the division as a whole as an example but having loads of titles shots doesn't matter too much cause you have fighters who wouldn't even win a title with numerous defences spanning several weights nowasdays (see Broner/Burns as a couple of examples).

Mayweather has fought some great fighters and Pacquaio would be his best win to date. Alvarez can boost him if he does anything notewrothy later and then whoever else he fights. He can prob get to lower 20s imo with a couple more fights but I think he missed his chance at really pushing up by wiating too long on Manny and missing out on other top fighters he could have fought and won.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> 50-0 means fuck all, its just a number, who he faces it what makes any difference. Obviously Pacquaio will be a huge win and add to his legacy if he wins. That does mroe for him that just having a number.





bballchump11 said:


> If Mayweather gets to 50-0, that'd be over 27-0 in title fights. Lineal titles in 4 divisions. Lineal titles in 2 divisions at once. Undisputed welterweight champion*. 20 years (with some breaks in between) undefeated.
> Then he would have collected the WBC title at 130, 135, 140, 147 2X, 154 2x
> WBA at 147 and 154
> IBF at 147 (2x)*
> ...


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

damn, instead of going on that 20 month vacation after he cherry-picked 140 hatton, floyd couldve fought a prime margo, cotto and then followed up with sergio

that would make him top ten if not top five

couldve...

wouldve...

shouldve


----------



## Casual Benson's Unknown (Jun 5, 2012)

May has definitely closed the gap on Pea, but even a Pac win doesn't make it close imo, a win against a good 160 pounder on top of Pac would maybe open it to debate imo, but that's it

A top 20 of wins from the 2 combined would be dominated by Pea imo and he'd have the number 1 win and I think 4 of the top 5

As well as looking the better fighter against the clear better level of opposition

Mayweather has consistency and longevity in this debate, and that isn't enough


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

Question: would we be discussing this if he didn't market himself as the best ever?


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> Question: would we be discussing this if he didn't market himself as the best ever?


Yes considering that nobody in the history of boxing should Mayweather get to 50-0 have defeated 20 World Champions, claimed 4 lineal titles and done so in dominating fashion.

I look at Pea and Floyd the same as I look at Roy and Bhop. Floyd and Bhop have the depth and longevity, but Roy and Pea have the better top wins and were just better fighters then their respective contemporaries.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> damn, instead of going on that 20 month vacation after he cherry-picked 140 hatton, floyd couldve fought a prime margo, cotto and then followed up with sergio
> 
> that would make him top ten if not top five
> 
> ...


Margarito was an average fighter who barely beat a one handed Joshua Clottey and got clobbered by Mosley. Margacheato is perhaps the most overrated fighter in history. Oscar and Mosley were both better fighters than Margacheato was. Same goes for Canelo. Canelo would've beaten Cheato just like he beat Angulo.

A prime Floyd wouldve beaten Cotto at 147 easier than an old flat footed Floyd beat him at 154.

Sergio didnt become and opponent until after Floyd retired and by that time he was a middleweight.


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Margarito was an average fighter who barely beat a one handed Joshua Clottey and got clobbered by Mosley. Margacheato is perhaps the most overrated fighter in history. Oscar and Mosley were both better fighters than Margacheato was. Same goes for Canelo. Canelo would've beaten Cheato just like he beat Angulo.
> 
> A prime Floyd wouldve beaten Cotto at 147 easier than an old flat footed Floyd beat him at 154.
> 
> Sergio didnt become and opponent until after Floyd retired and by that time he was a middleweight.


how many undefeated world champion fighters did floyd beat not moving up in weight for the fight(hatton being a grade A cherry pick)?

two

how many undefeated world champion fighters did margarito beat not moving up in weight for the fight?

four

by the way, sergio was one of five reasons (paq, cotto, margo, pw being the three others) that floyd retired(went on vacation for people not living in flomo land).

do you realize that your hero has only fought three undefeated fighter in his entire career?

one that was a career 140 that went life and death with collazo who was immediatey schooled by mosely and the other made to fight at a catchweight?

thats pathetic for someone claiming to be TBE.

ffs, margarito has fought more undefeated champion fighters(five to floyds three and none being a cherry pick like floyds hatton)

TBE lmfao


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> most, if not all of whitackers wins, were against opponents that were in their primes


Nelson nor Chavez were in their primes.



> also, pernell fought seven UD fighters to floyds three


:rofl Yes, a pity Floyd never fought the likes of Poli Diaz and Louie Lomeli. :rofl



> one being the hatton cherry-pick with ricky fighting in a weight class that he clearly did not belong struggling with collazo who mosley easily beat, immediately thereafter.


Hatton was considered the man to beat for those looking for a Mayweather opponent. Hatton was the media and fan pick as the number 1 Floyd opponent. Hatton was never a full fledged welterweight but neither was Floyd who to many was the smaller/weaker man in the ring.

You know who else wasnt a full fledged welterweight? Julio Cesar Chavez.



> majority of mayweather wins at 140 or above are against opponents with 3 or more losses with many already have been kod(cotto, zab, mitchell, gatti).


 This makes absolutely no sense. Jose Luis Ramirez, Jorge Paez, Rafael Pineda, Juan Nazario, Greg Haugen, and Azumah Nelson had all lost before they fought Pea. This has no bearing on their rankings or standings.

If you take away the 3 journeymen/Fringe Contenders Pea beat who were undefeated, that would put Floyd and Pea near neck and neck in terms of undefeated fighters beaten, 3 to 4.



> after cotto is inevitably exposed in his next fight, when you really think about it, one could make a very strong case that floyd has two(canelo/hoya) or maybe three(39-year-old mosely) high profile wins since 2004...none of whom were in their prime.


No you couldnt. You just have a brain deficiency.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> how many undefeated world champion fighters did floyd beat not moving up in weight for the fight(hatton being a grade A cherry pick)?


Hatton was not a cherry pick. Hatton was tabbed as the media and fan favorite for Floyds next fight.

You make literally zero sense. Its like trying to have a boxing conversation with Victor Ortiz. Are you a tree bro?

If we use your brain deficient logic, Julio Cesar Chavez was a cherry pick because he was never a true welterweight.



> two


So how many undefeated champions did Pernell Whitaker beat that were not moving up in weight?



> how many undefeated world champion fighters did margarito beat not moving up in weight for the fight?


1, neither Kermit Cintron, Joshua Clottey, Sabsation Lujan were world champions when Margacheato beat them

The only undefeated world champion Margacheato beat was Cotto.

Are you sick?



> by the way, sergio was one of five reasons (paq, cotto, margo, pw being the three others) that floyd retired(went on vacation for people not living in flomo land).


Mayweather retired after defeating Hatton in December of 2007. Sergio Martinez didnt record his first noticeable win until he beat Alex Bunema on HBO BAD in 2008.

And why would Mayweather retire because he was afraid of Cotto and Margarito, considering he easily defeated Margacheatos father Shane Mosley and fought Cotto at 154lbs?

Are you implying that Cotto and Margacheato were stronger more fearful fighters than 154lb Oscar De La Hoya coming off a brutal 6th round destruction of Ricardo Mayorga and Shane Mosley who made Margacheato his bitch infront of 20,000 screaming Mexicans in LA?

:rofl



> do you realize that your hero has only fought three undefeated fighter in his entire career?


Meaningless.

I rate Juan Marquez, Jose Luis Castillo, Oscar De La Hoya, Manny Pacquiao, as four of his five best victories and all suffered losses.

This is boxing, fighters lose.



> one that was a career 140 that went life and death with collazo that was immediaty schooled by mosely and the other made to fight at a catchweight?


Mayweather fought 70% of his career at 130lbs.

Tell me how Margacheato did at 154lbs against Daniel Santos.



> thats pathetic for someone claiming to be TBE.


Nobody in the history of boxing has gone through 5 weight divisions, defeated 20 champions and achieved 50-0

TBE.

And Floyd did it without concrete handwraps :hey


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Nelson nor Chavez were in their primes.
> 
> :rofl Yes, a pity Floyd never fought the likes of Poli Diaz and Louie Lomeli. :rofl
> 
> ...


chavez was still undefeated, ranked 1 pfp in 1992 and azumah was on a 20 fight win streak, ranked seven pfp in 1999


Julio Cesar Chavez
Pernell Whitaker
Terry Norris
Orlando Canizales
James (Buddy) McGirt
Riddick Bowe
Azumah Nelson
Sung-Kil Moon
Julian Jackson
James Toney


Mike Tyson
Julio Cesar Chavez
Pernell Whitaker
Michael Nunn
Antonio Esparragoza
Meldrick Taylor
Azumah Nelson
Raul Perez
Virgil Hill
Marlon Starling

sure, hatton was the man to beat in the eyes of a flomo.

but to those not living in flomo land all we see is a 154 champion dragging up a career 140 who went life and death with 147 luis collazo, the same collazo that got schooled by 147 mosely when floyd decided that hatton was a great "opponent" even though legit 147s margo, cotto, pw and 154 sergio and pw were willing and able

lmfao michiganwarrior trying to criticize pfp opponents chavez and nelson on sweet peas record

what a dumfuk flomo


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Records and titles don't mean much. Stats don't really impress me in this era due to the influx of belts and stats. Who he has fought is the only thing that really matters and how he fought against them.
> 
> Now sure weights can make a difference and titles to a lesser extent if its say against the number 1 or 2 in the division as a whole as an example but having loads of titles shots doesn't matter too much cause you have fighters who wouldn't even win a title with numerous defences spanning several weights nowasdays (see Broner/Burns as a couple of examples).
> 
> Mayweather has fought some great fighters and Pacquaio would be his best win to date. Alvarez can boost him if he does anything notewrothy later and then whoever else he fights. He can prob get to lower 20s imo with a couple more fights but I think he missed his chance at really pushing up by wiating too long on Manny and missing out on other top fighters he could have fought and won.


Does lineal and undisputed mean nothing to you because if Floyd reaches 50-0, that's most likely what that'll mean. You can try and explain and devalue it all you want, but Floyd would have proved he was the man even at 38 years old


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Hatton was not a cherry pick. Hatton was tabbed as the media and fan favorite for Floyds next fight.
> 
> You make literally zero sense. Its like trying to have a boxing conversation with Victor Ortiz. Are you a tree bro?
> 
> ...


kermit cintron


Body shot 2007-11-23146ï¿½Jesse Feliciano147*15*-*5*-*3*

Staples Center, Los Angeles, California, USAWTKO1012
time: 1:53 | referee: Jon Schorle | judge: Larry Layton 89-82 | judge: Lou Filippo 88-83 | judge: Pat Russell 88-83 
IBF World welterweight title 2007-07-14146Walter Dario Matthysse147*26*-*1*-*0*

Boardwalk Hall, Atlantic City, New Jersey, USAWKO212
time: 0:29 | referee: Earl Morton | judge: Joe Garcia 10-8 | judge: Larry Layton 10-8 | judge: Joseph Pasquale 10-8 
IBF World welterweight title 

clottey became a world champion as did sergio


2008-08-02147Zab Judah143*36*-*5*-*0*

Palms Casino Resort, Las Vegas, Nevada, USAWTD912
time: 1:12 | referee: Robert Byrd | judge: Duane Ford 87-84 | judge: Glenn Trowbridge 86-85 | judge: George Hill 86-85 
vacant IBF World welterweight title 

what does sebastian lujan have to do with this?


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> chavez was still undefeated, ranked 1 pfp in 1992 and azumah was on a 20 fight win streak, ranked seven pfp in 1999


And Azumah Nelson and Julio Cesar Chavez both fought Whitaker at Lightweight and Welterweight respectively, two weights they never fought at. Even if you ignore the fact that Azumah Nelson was champ for 10 years prior to fighting Pea he fought him at a weight he was totally unaccustomed too

Isnt that the same excuse you used for Hatton who was ranked #8 P4P when he fought Floyd?

Same with Julio Cesar Chavez. Moved up in weight he was not accustomed to and was clearly past his best days.



> but to those not living in flomo land all we see is a 154 champion dragging up a career 140 who went life and death with 147 luis collazo


Nobody at the time considered Floyd Mayweather a true 154lber. Nobody still to this day considers Floyd a 154lber.

At the time many considered Floyd smaller and weaker than Hatton.

This is the type of nonsense which makes me question your sanity Victor.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> Body shot
>  
> 2007-11-23146Â¾Jesse Feliciano147*15*-*5*-*3*
> 
> ...


They became champions. They werent champions at the time Victor.

Fuck Joshua Clottey won the vacant IBF Championship for Zab Judah. :rofl

So are you claiming this is more prestigious than beating Jose Luis Castillo or Genaro Hernandez?


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> And Azumah Nelson and Julio Cesar Chavez both fought Whitaker at Lightweight and Welterweight respectively, two weights they never fought at. Even if you ignore the fact that Azumah Nelson was champ for 10 years prior to fighting Pea he fought him at a weight he was totally unaccustomed too
> 
> Isnt that the same excuse you used for Hatton who was ranked #8 P4P when he fought Floyd?
> 
> ...


who is Victor?

chavez had previously fought above the 140 limit on numwrous occasions and won convincingly

may people believe that hatton lost to collazo

to make matters worst, 147 mosely absolutely schooled luis and immediately thereafter floyd decided to fight hatton the same year

do you have any references where chavez struggled with a 147 before sweet pea "cherry-picked" chavez?


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> They became champions. They werent champions at the time Victor.
> 
> Fuck Joshua Clottey won the vacant IBF Championship for Zab Judah. :rofl
> 
> So are you claiming this is more prestigious than beating Jose Luis Castillo or Genaro Hernandez?


so beating an undefeated fighter who later becomes a champion has no value?

and zab judah was the lineal 147 champ when he beat spinks and was a 147 title defense for floyd

you dumfuk flomo


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> who is Victor?


You remind me of victor ortiz.



> chavez had previously fought above the 140 limit on numwrous occasions and won convincingly


LMAO. Stop, youve been comprehensively schooled. Not that I believe that Julio Cesar Chavez wasnt ten times the opponent Hatton was, just using your own stupid logic.



> may people believe that hatton lost to collazo


No they didnt.



> to make matters worst, 147 mosely absolutely schooled luis and immediately thereafter floyd decided to fight hatton the same year


Meaningless. Luis Collazo broke his hand early in that fight. Hatton was considered the bigger more high profile opponent than Mosley at the time.

This however has nothing to do with anything. Floyd cherry picked a Junio Welterweight, according to your dumbass logic, Pea cherry picked a Super Featherweight and a Light Welterweight.


> do you have any references where chavez struggled with a 147 before sweet pea "cherry-picked" chavez?


Julio Cesar Chavez never fought a champion level welterweight, which is worse because he wasnt even accustomed to the weight

Julio Cesar Chavez weighed 142 at the scales. 3lbs less than Sweet Pea

Conversely 154lb Mayweather weighed 148 while Hatton weighed 155


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> so beating an undefeated fighter who later becomes a champion has no value?


Not as much value as beating a Jose Luis Castillo, Genaro Hernandez, Oscar De La Hoya, Shane Mosley, Juan Marquez, ect ect

I'd rate Margacheatos victory over Kermit Cintron, green Sergio Martinez and Joshua Clottey with the likes of Demarcus Corley, Robert Guerrero and Goyo Vargas.



> and zab judah was the lineal 147 champ when he beat spinks and was a 147 title defense for floyd
> 
> you dumfuk flomo


And your point is Victor?


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> You remind me of victor ortiz.
> 
> LMAO. Stop, youve been comprehensively schooled. Not that I believe that Julio Cesar Chavez wasnt ten times the opponent Hatton was, just using your own stupid logic.
> 
> ...







why dont you look at the faces of both fighters at the end of the fight; hatton with two busted eyes and collazo with, well, nothing

and merchant believes the flash knockdown was the only difference in the fight

and if hatton thought he was a legit 147 why did he vacate to go back down to 140?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/boxing/5287038.stm

hatton was already proven to not be an a level 147 by struggling with collazo, further validated by molseys schooling of luis, whereas there was never a case for either nelson or chavez

and why are you making a reference to nelson? he wasnt undefeated when they fought

you know, now that i think of it, you kind of remind me of victor ortiz as well

ill just call you ortriz from now on.


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Not as much value as beating a Jose Luis Castillo, Genaro Hernandez, Oscar De La Hoya, Shane Mosley, Juan Marquez, ect ect
> 
> I'd rate Margacheatos victory over Kermit Cintron, green Sergio Martinez and Joshua Clottey with the likes of Demarcus Corley, Robert Guerrero and Goyo Vargas.
> 
> And your point is Victor?


why are you comparing margarito wins over undefeated fighters wiht some of floyds wins?

what i pointed out is that margarito has fought more undefeated fighters than floyd

are you saying that there is no value to fighting an undefeated fighter that is a champion or that goes on to become a champion?

is that what you are implying ortriz?

only in flomo land wold someone say that defeating and undefeated champion or undefeated fighter that goes on to become a champion has no intrinsic value.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Demarcus Chop Chop Corley vs Kermit Cintron


Better victory?

Both won vacant belts, both lost their biggest fights, however Kermit Cintron quit vs Sergio Martinez, Paul Williams and Antonio Margarito

Chop Chop slugged it out with Floyd and Miguel Cotto hurting both, lost a Split decison vs a prime Zab Judah, gave Maidana all he could handle and took Provodnikov the distance


'

I'll have to go with Chop Chop here.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> why are you comparing margarito wins over undefeated fighters wiht some of floyds wins?
> 
> what i pointed out is that margarito has fought more undefeated fighters than floyd


Undefeated doesnt mean shit compared to accomplishments and in ring ability. Hell im undefeated. There is no blueprint on how to beat me. Floyd should fight me next lol!!!!

Chill out Victor.


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Undefeated doesnt mean shit compared to accomplishments and in ring ability. Hell im undefeated. There is no blueprint on how to beat me. Floyd should fight me next lol!!!!
> 
> Chill out Victor.


whatever you say, ortriz


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> whatever you say, ortriz


Next time I'll charge you for the boxing tutorial


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Next time I'll charge you for the boxing tutorial


you mean the tutorial that claims that wins over undefeated opponents are valued the same as non-undefeated opponents?

only in flomo land would you read something so stupid


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> you mean the tutorial that claims that wins over undefeated opponents are valued the same as non-undefeated opponents?
> 
> only in flomo land would you read something so stupid


So you rate Margacheatos win over Cintron higher than Floyds win over Castillo Victor?


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

MichiganWarrior said:


> And Azumah Nelson and Julio Cesar Chavez both fought Whitaker at Lightweight and Welterweight respectively, two weights they never fought at. Even if you ignore the fact that Azumah Nelson was champ for 10 years prior to fighting Pea he fought him at a weight he was totally unaccustomed too.


Haha, 5 1/2 years. :deal

The Professor wasn't no lightweight, never did anything a lightweight. Just an ATG fighter and elite 126/130 lber daring for further greatness 5 lbs north of the division he was accustomed to shedding down to and whose greatest win was actually still ahead of him, post-Whitaker. It wasn't as if Pernell was really dwarfing him in the ring there on the night or dominating him with imcomparably unfair physicality. Same goes for Chavez, really. That fight was officially and technically at a catchweight.



quincy k said:


> chavez had previously fought above the 140 limit on numerous occasions and won convincingly.


Indeed he did, numerous times although not against anyone particularly notable. I think Chavez would've been worse off coming in any higher than 142. It would appear that virtually nobody within the media even gave the weight a single thought in the build up to the fight, and the catchweight was installed on behalf of Chavez nonetheless. 12 of 18 boxing writers, commentators and trainers polled picked Chavez to win the bout. Hindsight and a good bit of revisionist history has seen the value of Whitaker's win (no closer than a 9-3 affair) be dropped over time, maybe a little bit unfairly. I think JCC was in far better condition than James Toney was when Roy dominated him, to draw a comparable example of top wins by ATGs against ATGs. I think Marvin Hagler was more faded when SRL squeezed out a 7-5 decision over him. I'd rate him well above Toney all-time and in the same tier as Hagler, if not greater.

So, I mean... Can just as easily point at Corrales being drained to shit, a one trick pony and not anywhere near the same level regardless, could talk about Jose Luis Castillo being a poor man's Chavez and one of his favorite punching bags as a sparring partner but why sink to that level. Those are great wins for Floyd against top fighters (one of them Top 5 P4P and the other the top lightweight of the era). Whitaker doesn't need some smear campaign launched against other fighters to make a case for him, he can do that on his own merit, resume, achievements and skill. This culture and emphasis on 0's, "leftovers" and drastic win diminishment from every angle across the board is really, really bad for boxing. (Can I get a hallelujah, @Bogotazo?). Anyway, he was also the first true undisputed lightweight champion since Roberto Duran in 1978 (who unified in his last bout at 135), and there hasn't been one since, in over 20 years.

Some info on Whitaker's top opponents at the time, removing him from the P4P picture and looking at the landscape from his POV:

Julio Cesar Chavez: 87-0 (#1 P4P) (31 years old)
Buddy McGirt: 59-2 (#4 P4P) (29 years old)
Azumah Nelson: 32-1 (#6 P4P) (31 years old)
Oscar De La Hoya: 23-0 (#2 P4P) (24 years old)
Julio Cesar Vasquez: 53-1 (#1 LMW) (28 years old)


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)




----------



## Rockinghorseshit (Oct 4, 2013)

Michigan actually made some good points for once. Or maybe I just never saw his old posts.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> Does lineal and undisputed mean nothing to you because if Floyd reaches 50-0, that's most likely what that'll mean. You can try and explain and devalue it all you want, but Floyd would have proved he was the man even at 38 years old


Again it depends. Lineal I dont really care for, Briggs was a lineal champ but I didnt rate him top five in the division. Cotto is a lineal champ now and I dont rate him top five either. Lineal just means you beat a guy who has once beaten the guy of the division but it doesnt accont for anything that happened in between, I rank it no differently than the ABCs as it all xepends on the context of hows its won and the state of the division.

Undisputed is better as you actually have to clean the whole division up but can still depend on who you beat to do it. In this case he would have to beat Pacquaio which would be his best win so I would rank that win more than if he beats Brook to fully unify because fighting Pacquio in effect is classing the undisputed champ of the division. Brook just happens to have a trinket.


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> So you rate Margacheatos win over Cintron higher than Floyds win over Castillo Victor?


no, but what does that have to do with the fact that margarito had more victories over undefeated fighters than floyd?

why are you trying to evade one argument to create another, ortriz?


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Haha, 5 1/2 years. :deal
> 
> The Professor wasn't no lightweight, never did anything a lightweight. Just an ATG fighter and elite 126/130 lber daring for further greatness 5 lbs north of the division he was accustomed to shedding down to and whose greatest win was actually still ahead of him, post-Whitaker. It wasn't as if Pernell was really dwarfing him in the ring there on the night or dominating him with imcomparably unfair physicality. Same goes for Chavez, really. That fight was officially and technically at a catchweight.
> 
> ...


corrales immediately went to prison after the fight in a plea bargain which may or may not have had an effect on his performance. i dont factor that equation in as it was a good win for floyd. there is no doubt that mayweather was an incredible fighter at the lower weights.

my argument with the hatton fight, when floyd first started his questionable resume which is littered with asterisks at 140 and above, was that ricky was already proven to be inferior at the weight by going life and death with a 147 collazo who was schooled in a glorified sparring session with mosely(shane winning by 27 points), coincidentally the same year that floyd determined hatton was a good opponent for him. there was cotto, margo, pw, and sergio in 2007 yet floyd cherry-picked hatton, a guy that willingly gave up the 147 belt to go back down to 140

referee: ​Kenny Bayless | judge: ​Adalaide Byrd 119-108 | judge: ​Duane Ford 118-109 | judge: ​Nobuaki Uratani 118-109 ​
that had yet to be proven with chavez, being inferior at 147, who was the number 1 pfp fighter at 140.

hatton after 147 collazo










mosely after 147 collazo


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> no, but what does that have to do with the fact that margarito had more victories over undefeated fighters than floyd?
> 
> why are you trying to evade one argument to create another, ortriz?


Because undefeated is meaningless compared to accomplishments crack baby

Fairly easy to understand for non brain deficient folk Victor.


----------



## Jonnybravo (Jun 4, 2013)

MW my favourite cracker, didnt your cracker ass get banned recently for being a cunt?


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Preach Hands!


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Jonnybravo said:


> MW my favourite cracker, didnt your cracker ass get banned recently for being a cunt?


Stop. Don't come in here just to start fights.


----------



## Reppin501 (May 16, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> That Vasquez victory is very impressive because whitaker jumped weight classes against a guy much more dangerous than Canelo Alvarez. And beat him handily at that. Vasquez was no chump and would be a champ today. Anyone doubting it should check his fight with Winky. A war!
> 
> Whitaker's resume is much better than floyd's despite having less fights. Whitaker fought better guys than floyd. Whitaker had a much higher workrate than Floyd.
> 
> Shit, since we're sorta on the topic, HoI, do you think starling or curry could give Floyd serious issues and beat him?


I think Mayweather would force Curry to follow him to the ropes. Curry tends to come in indecisive in these situations leaving himself open to A. Counters B. Takes a shot and backs off C. Comes in half ass and gets clinched...Curry would fall into Mayweather's pace which is always a bad idea. He would throw lazy jabs get countered with right hands, and eventually Floyd would discourage Curry from trying to press him, and Curry would settle for trying to box Floyd, and he would lose a lackluster but clear decision. While similar in speed, Floyd has better timing and would beat him in the middle of the ring. Curry has a good crisp right hand but I he tends to throw it and admire it, Floyd would make him pay for that. Curry has good footwork and is deliberate in terms of controlling range when fighting from the outside, which could help him. He's inconsistent in doing this when pressuring...particularly when he gets an opponent on the ropes. Which is where I think the fight is ultimately won. Whether its via Floyd hitting him with heavy counters or Floyd having early success along the ropes and forcing Curry to settle for a middle of the ring chess match that I don't believe he can win, either way Floyd in close quarters on the ropes is a position he's comfortable in. Would he want to sit there all night...no of course not, but he would land the more meaningful shots in those exchanges and if Curry can't win there, he won't win anywhere. IMO

Loses exchange after backing Starling to the ropes, misses a jab gets punished. 









Backs Hwang to the ropes misses jab gets punished









Backs Hwang to the ropes comes in open, gets hit with a peach of right hand, Floyd has thrown a couple of these in his day.


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> _*Because undefeated is meaningless*_ compared to accomplishments crack baby
> 
> Fairly easy to understand for non brain deficient folk Victor.


then why does your hero and make believe friend keep making a big deal about it, ortriz?

somebody here made a comment that flomos for the most part come from an indigent and uneducated upbringing and vicariously live through the accomplishments of others such as floyd. as when he wins they somehow win(even thought they dont have a nickel to their name to bet).

you seem to fit this kind of person

seriously, youre a "warrior" from michigan?


----------



## Slip (Jul 17, 2012)

Nowhere near top 10. 

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> then why does your hero and make believe friend keep making a big deal about it,


Because Floyds undefeated resume is backed up by great accomplishments Victor.

Not that hard to understand. Are you comparing Kermit Cintron to Floyd Victor?

You should run along now, you clearly dont have the intelligence to engage in this level of boxing discussion


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Because Floyds undefeated resume is backed up by great accomplishments Victor.
> 
> Not that hard to understand. Are you comparing Kermit Cintron to Floyd Victor?
> 
> You should run along now, you clearly dont have the intelligence to engage in this level of boxing discussion


how am i comparing cintron to floyd? where did i say that or even imply it? ortriz, why are you putting words into my mouth so you create an argument?

do you realize that you wont even find another flomo here to back up your theory that there is not an intrinsic value that an undefeated fighter carries into the ring?

thats how delusional you are.

regulated to creating arguments to support theories(comparing cintron to floyd)

please, can you caption the post where i compare cintron to floyd


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> how am i comparing cintron to floyd? where did i say that or even imply it? ortriz, why are you putting words into my mouth so you create an argument?
> 
> do you realize that you wont even find another flomo here to back up your theory that there is not an intrinsic value that an undefeated fighter carries into the ring?
> 
> ...


Lmao. Intrinsic value? Stop trying to use words you do not understand. You and I both know you're an uneducated pleb Roach.

Undefeated records mean nothing if that fighter has not defeated class fighters.

Like I said, move along son


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Not as much value as beating a Jose Luis Castillo, Genaro Hernandez, Oscar De La Hoya, Shane Mosley, Juan Marquez, etcc


i've got to ask, do you really rate Floyd's wins over Mosley, DLH and Marquez? I mean, they're good wins, but nothing more.

With Marquez you can make an argument that marquez hadn't yet grown into the weight, and the catchweight gave Floyd a bit of an advantage

DLH you can say DLH was old

Mosley you can say was old, coming off long lay off, never once had a significant victory post Margacheato

G. Hernandez was not the technical operator that people like to make out


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

If Floyd beats Paxquaio, I think he's top 15 and likely top ten. There's something to be said for longevity (while actually being near the top pfp the whole time), jumping weightclasses, and being undefeated. There's no fighter in history who has these three elements down like Floyd does. Regarding quality of opponents, his resume isn't loaded with greats in their prime, but there are endless goods and very goods.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Lmao. Intrinsic value? Stop trying to use words you do not understand. You and I both know you're an uneducated pleb Roach.
> 
> Undefeated records mean nothing if that fighter has not defeated class fighters.
> 
> Like I said, move along son


uneducated?

this coming from the idiot who offered me paq at even money when i told you that i already bought manny at +275 at the open?

lmfao, just because youre the only one in your little circle of hood rats that has internet access to check boxing lines doesnt mean that you should assume people that can afford internet dont.


----------



## Rockinghorseshit (Oct 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> i've got to ask, do you really rate Floyd's wins over Mosley, DLH and Marquez? I mean, they're good wins, but nothing more.
> 
> With Marquez you can make an argument that marquez hadn't yet grown into the weight, and the catchweight gave Floyd a bit of an advantage
> 
> ...


 @Capaedia thinks Marquez was a great win for Floyd.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> nobody can fight like Whitaker other than Whitaker


Zapata, baby, Zapata.



Hands of Iron said:


> he had an exceptionally high work rate in his prime


That's one the biggest Whitaker's strengths.

This is what separates him from many other defensive masters.
Too many of them love their defense too much, too many of them have the "defense first and foremost" mindset.

Whitaker is one of the few (the best probably) defensive counterpunchers who wasn't that dependant on his counterpunching - he could create offense himself.



Hands of Iron said:


> Yeah, Floyd never breaks his focus, form or fundamentals


Floyd is so drilled with fundamentals he's predictable even.
Predictable doesn't necessarily mean easy-to-beat or one-dimensional.

It's just you know/his opponents know what he's gonna do next - right hand=shoulder roll, inside=elbow in the face,right hand, lazy jab/Floyd's body bends forward=pull counter, etc.

Like a machine. In a good way.

You know what he can do, what he can't do - he never surprises (unless your name is V.Ortiz).

It's easier to see and analyse him in hypothetical fights than Pea.

Especially the welter version that usually used in those kinda discussions.
Which is not really fair, as Floyd declined significantly - he's a limited fighter nowadays - legs are gone, combinations are gone, hands are gone, hair are gone - who relies on his excellent discipline (mental and physical), superior skills and mediocrity of modern welter/light middle era.

A bigger faster Canto slowly drifting across the Lacy ocean.

Regarding focus.
It was actually susprising and disappointing to see him screaming like a bitch against Chino.
Personally, I've always thought that despite his less than manly outside the ring actions, he was still closer to someone like Jones than Hopkins in his in ring mentality.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> i've got to ask, do you really rate Floyd's wins over Mosley, DLH and Marquez? I mean, they're good wins, but nothing more.


I rate DLH as a very good win. I rate Mosley as a good win. I rate Marquez as a win that years from now will be viewed as one of the most dominating performances over an ATG of all time

DLH was coming off a brutal KO victory over Mayorga who would go on to give a pre-Margacheato Mosley all he could handle, and gave Cotto trouble as well. Nobody has ever obliterated Mayorga like Oscar did.

Floyd also had barely moved to 147 when he took on a full fledged Junior Middleweight in Oscar.

Mosley was arguably the man at Welterweight, outright told that he was "too good" by Pacquiao and his team and Mayweather beat him in a way nobody expected by outright taking the fight to him.

Finally, for all the weight excuses for Marquez why hasnt their been any calls for a rematch? The weight had no bearing on the fight, Mayweather was just better. MArquez and his team acknowledge as such.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

@Hands of Iron

Sweet Pea though not technically the bigger man in terms of size and dimensions was stronger than both Nelson and Chavez. Pea was doing HIIT before it became fashionable. Dude was a physical stud and controlled both Chavez and Nelson physically.

They had Pea in the gym doing Greco-Roman wrestling and going through Soviet strength training programs. Not to take anything away from those victories as I said before, but Pea outmatched those guys physically and not just the speed side of things.


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

MichiganWarrior said:


> I rate DLH as a very good win. I rate Mosley as a good win. I rate Marquez as a win that years from now will be viewed as one of the most dominating performances over an ATG of all time
> 
> DLH was coming off a brutal KO victory over Mayorga who would go on to give a pre-Margacheato Mosley all he could handle, and gave Cotto trouble as well. Nobody has ever obliterated Mayorga like Oscar did.
> 
> ...


I think the complaints about the Marquez fight were valid until Marquez proved to be a top fighter in the sport while past prime at welter. Roids just aren't gonna improve a late thirties fighter compared to his virtual prime. I'd take the Marquez who fought Floyd in a Bradlry-like decision over the one who knocked out Pac. Also, most people forget that Floyd enters the ring below 150 which discounts his size advantage over Marquez.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

MichiganWarrior said:


> @Hands of Iron
> 
> Sweet Pea though not technically the bigger man in terms of size and dimensions was stronger than both Nelson and Chavez. Pea was doing HIIT before it became fashionable. Dude was a physical stud and controlled both Chavez and Nelson physically.
> 
> They had Pea in the gym doing Greco-Roman wrestling and going through Soviet strength training programs. Not to take anything away from those victories as I said before, but Pea outmatched those guys physically and not just the speed side of things.


Chavez, Jr: "Whitaker sucks without his strength."


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Rockinghorseshit said:


> Which Flomos will put it out there they think he is top 10 worthy?
> 
> I think a case could be made for him being top 50 but I want to see those guys like Tilang who I'm pretty sure rated him Top 10 make a case for it.


I've made my case for years and so far i've been right. I've been saying that Floyd is going to be one of the best ever since he was at 130lb days. *10 years ago. shit 15 years ago!*


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Only person that matches Floyd's resume in the fab 4 is SRL and you got people rating Duran in the top 8. Hearns in the top 20 and Hagler as one of the best middleweights ever when his biggest wins were against smaller foes.

The answer is obvious, of course Floyd belongs in the top 10. Shouldn't even be a question. Dude does everything perfect skillwise and got a very deep resume, with a LONG reign of dominance, the highest paid athlete, undefeated against constant elite fighters for 20 years straight, never be kd or hardly ever had any close match and on and on and on. Seriously.... not even in the top 40 in people's list?


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Only person that matches Floyd's resume in the fab 4 is SRL and you got people rating Duran in the top 8. Hearns in the top 20 and Hagler as one of the best middleweights ever when his biggest wins were against smaller foes.
> 
> The answer is obvious, of course Floyd belongs in the top 10. Shouldn't even be a question. Dude does everything perfect skillwise and got a very deep resume, with a LONG reign of dominance, the highest paid athlete, undefeated against constant elite fighters for 20 years straight, never be kd or hardly ever had any close match and on and on and on. Seriously.... not even in the top 40 in people's list?


Plenty of people match Floyd's resume, and exceed it.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

People here talk about Floyd as if he took the easy route to the top. Floyd had ALWAYS fought above his level since he turned pro and never stopped. Floyd hasn't fought a bum since???? his what? 13th pro fight?


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Plenty of people match Floyd's resume, and exceed it.


plenty? name it. Duran, Hagler and Hearns doesn't match it. wtf, what? willie pep? or some guy who 300 wins and 50 losses?


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

you got these so called atgs that suppose to be ahead of floyd and falls apart early 30s, drugged out, punch drunk and fighting cans for pennies. But yet they > floyd. yeah ok.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> you got these so called atgs that suppose to be ahead of floyd and falls apart early 30s, drugged out, punch drunk and fighting cans for pennies. But yet they > floyd. yeah ok.


Don't force us to tear you a new one again by proving that the Fab 4 is more accomplished than Floyd. Please. It's not what this forum is for and you always get blood all over the damn carpet.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> plenty? name it. Duran, Hagler and Hearns doesn't match it. wtf, what? willie pep? or some guy who 300 wins and 50 losses?


Ok. Ali for starters blows floyds resume out of the water. Same with Whitaker. Robinson. Jones Jr. Greb. Armstrong. Charles. I think duran and hearns exceed it. Pacquiao possibly has a slightly better resume (both mixed it up with a lot of the same guys). Shit.. i think you can even make an argument for holyfield having a stronger resume. But im not gonna name anymore because knowing how you're king Flomo you will act like like none of these guys come close to TBE!!

Floyd's legacy imo lies in his dominance, undefeated status and longevity. His resume, not really. He lacks that singular career defining victory that he wouldve had if he fought Packy in 2010.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Don't force us to tear you a new one again by proving that the Fab 4 is more accomplished than Floyd. Please. It's not what this forum is for and you always get blood all over the damn carpet.


I like tliang :lol:

You two should throw down again. I've already said what I wanted and needed to in regards to Pernell.


----------



## Casual Benson's Unknown (Jun 5, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> Haha, 5 1/2 years. :deal
> 
> The Professor wasn't no lightweight, never did anything a lightweight. Just an ATG fighter and elite 126/130 lber daring for further greatness 5 lbs north of the division he was accustomed to shedding down to and whose greatest win was actually still ahead of him, post-Whitaker. It wasn't as if Pernell was really dwarfing him in the ring there on the night or dominating him with imcomparably unfair physicality. Same goes for Chavez, really. That fight was officially and technically at a catchweight.
> 
> ...


ATG post, man


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Where's do you rate Floyd @Chacal? :think


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Ok. Ali for starters blows floyds resume out of the water. Same with Whitaker. Robinson. Jones Jr. Greb. Armstrong. Charles. I think duran and hearns exceed it. Pacquiao possibly has a slightly better resume (both mixed it up with a lot of the same guys). Shit.. i think you can even make an argument for holyfield having a stronger resume. But im not gonna name anymore because knowing how you're king Flomo you will act like like none of these guys come close to TBE!!
> 
> Floyd's legacy imo lies in his dominance, undefeated status and longevity. His resume, not really. He lacks that singular career defining victory that he wouldve had if he fought Packy in 2010.


throwing out names out there means what? tell how they top floyd's resume and accomplish and ability.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Don't force us to tear you a new one again by proving that the Fab 4 is more accomplished than Floyd. Please. It's not what this forum is for and you always get blood all over the damn carpet.


you guys can try all you want but when it is all said and done Floyd is going to be rated in the top 10 and you guys will be like damn that motherfucker tliang has been right for the last 15 plus years. that mother fucker, i hate that mother fucker lol


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> you guys can try all you want but when it is all said and done Floyd is going to be rated in the top 10 and you guys will be like damn that motherfucker tliang has been right for the last 15 plus years. that mother fucker, i hate that mother fucker lol


Its all opinionated anyway :lol: . There is no consensus on the top 10. You think the opinions of Stephen A Smith or Skip Bayless hold more weight than anybody on here? Mainstream media already thinks floyd is "TBE". Nothing will stop uneducated boxing fans from shitting on past ATGs and regurgitating Floyd's bullshit like you do.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> throwing out names out there means what? tell how they top floyd's resume and accomplish and ability.





tliang1000 said:


> plenty? name it.


Scuse me, but you didnt ask for an explanation. And i dont feel the need to explain why Ali's resume takes a huge shit over Floyd's.. do your research first.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Its all opinionated anyway :lol: . There is no consensus on the top 10. You think the opinions of Stephen A Smith or Skip Bayless hold more weight than anybody on here? Mainstream media already thinks floyd is "TBE". Nothing will stop uneducated boxing fans from shitting on past ATGs and regurgitating Floyd's bullshit like you do.


When i saw him at 130lbs 15 years ago, i already said there is no beating that guy, he is flawless and that has also remained true. I'm really a prophet in the boxing forums. :deal


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Scuse me, but you didnt ask for an explanation. And i dont feel the need to explain why Ali's resume takes a huge shit over Floyd's.. do your research first.


break Ali and Floyd down in categories and you will find that Ali falls short.


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

I hate to say this tliang, but I find out hard to believe you've been watching mayweather for 15 years and have this little sense of history. Unless FMjr is all you've watched.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> break Ali and Floyd down in categories and you will find that Ali falls short.


Blat!!!


----------



## TSOL (Dec 15, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> break Ali and Floyd down in categories and you will find that Ali falls short.


Ali took on the greatest challenges available. Lil Floyd has not.


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> Where's do you rate Floyd @Chacal? :think


I'd imagine about top 30. Below your ATG's of the past, the fab 4 and co, whittaker, chavez et all but above your lewis' and jones' etc.


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> break Ali and Floyd down in categories and you will find that Ali falls short.


Ali had better speed, footwork, power, reflexes, combinations... I could go on


----------



## TSOL (Dec 15, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> I rate DLH as a very good win. I rate Mosley as a good win. I rate Marquez as a win that years from now will be viewed as one of the most dominating performances over an ATG of all time
> 
> Finally, for all the weight excuses for Marquez why hasnt their been any calls for a rematch? The weight had no bearing on the fight, Mayweather was just better. MArquez and his team acknowledge as such.


floyd would win the rematch but he still decided to cheat the scale against a LW. that's always gonna taint the victory


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

Chacal said:


> Ali had better speed, footwork, power, reflexes, combinations... I could go on


Beat 7 HoFers.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Chacal said:


> Ali had better speed, footwork, power, reflexes, combinations... I could go on


then go on and talk about Ali's accuracy, defense, lack of body punching, range, timing and i could go on and on.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Mal said:


> I hate to say this tliang, but I find out hard to believe you've been watching mayweather for 15 years and have this little sense of history. Unless FMjr is all you've watched.


Yeah i don't follow boxing outside of Floyd. While blindly making bets and winning them every week.


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Yeah i don't follow boxing outside of Floyd. While blindly making bets and winning them every week.


Anyway can say stuff like this over the net. Congrats? But what you've posted since I can remember, you know very little beyond FMjr, always trying to go against other greats who are said to be better, as if that is an insult.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> you guys can try all you want but when it is all said and done Floyd is going to be rated in the top 10 and you guys will be like damn that motherfucker tliang has been right for the last 15 plus years. that mother fucker, i hate that mother fucker lol


Anyone that rates him in the top 10, now or in 15/20/50 years, DKSAB. It's that simple. If people get collectively dumber and more ignorant, you'll still be that fool who couldn't accept that his favorite wasn't as special as others.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Unknown Poster said:


> ATG post, man


Thanks, man. Lester has had some really good follow-ups when talking about him and Floyd style-wise as well.



Chacal said:


> I'd imagine about top 30. Below your ATG's of the past, the fab 4 and co, *whitaker,* chavez et all but above your lewis' and jones' etc.


(sun)

Me & Rigo's fave fighter. Well, Robearto(e) is right up there as well.



tliang1000 said:


> I'm really a prophet in the boxing forums. :deal












All Praise Be


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> then go on and talk about Ali's accuracy, defense, lack of body punching, range, timing and i could go on and on.


Ali was a very accurate puncher with an incredible defence who would often time right hands over jabs and was a master of fighting on the outside. He didn't go to the body much if ever, granted, but the rest of the things you listed could be argued for Ali. Then you consider he beat several ATG's...

You are a spastic though and your opinion won't change, I already know this.


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> Thanks, man. Lester has had some really good follow-ups when talking about him and Floyd style-wise as well.
> 
> (sun)
> 
> ...


One of mine too. Rigo, Hearns and Whittaker are probably my top 3. Fuck tliang, he ain't no prophet.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

:hey






"Why Muhammed Ali and not me? Muhammed Ali fought Ken Norton and really lost 3 times." :lol:


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Did Ali have a body jab?


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Did Ali have a body jab?


:rofl

You're trolling, right? That's as good as going "Floyd got dat philly shell"


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Honestly though, I think Floyd is more skilled than Ali :cry yeah I said it

Now comparing the skills of a heavyweight and a welterweight will always be messy, but lets put that aside. 

When it comes to Ali and Sugar Ray Robinson, I'm not really blown away by their skills when I watch their fights. They're both just athletic freaks imo who are pretty skilled and tough as shit. Both their greatest ever in their weight classes all time. But when it comes to guys who I watch and just think "wow, this guy had skill", that would be your Roberto Duran, Sweet Pea, Mike McCallum, Jose Napoles, and yes Floyd Mayweather as well as other fighters. 

Of course Ali is greater than Floyd and has a better resume, but Floyd could do things in the ring technique wise that Ali couldn't while Ali could do things in the ring athletically that Floyd couldn't.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Mal said:


> Anyway can say stuff like this over the net. Congrats? But what you've posted since I can remember, you know very little beyond FMjr, always trying to go against other greats who are said to be better, as if that is an insult.


Yeah who the hell are those other boxers? Who? let me bet hundreds on them or on the total and know nothing about other fighters... OKAY!


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Chacal said:


> Ali had better speed, footwork, power, reflexes, combinations... I could go on


I think Ali fails in every single one of these categories to floyd, and it's not even close after Ali's 30th

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Chacal said:


> Ali was a very accurate puncher with an incredible defence who would often time right hands over jabs and was a master of fighting on the outside. He didn't go to the body much if ever, granted, but the rest of the things you listed could be argued for Ali. Then you consider he beat several ATG's...
> 
> You are a spastic though and your opinion won't change, I already know this.


I like how people pretend on here act like that i don't have an eye for talent.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Anyone that rates him in the top 10, now or in 15/20/50 years, DKSAB. It's that simple. If people get collectively dumber and more ignorant, you'll still be that fool who couldn't accept that his favorite wasn't as special as others.


Bernard hopkins dksab then nor does SRL who both put Floyd in top 10. Mikey Garcia and Robert Garcia both put Floyd as number 1 best ever. People act like i'm hyping Floyd up too much but you you will say anyone that rates him in the top 10 now DKSAB. SMH


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Yeah who the hell are those other boxers? Who? let me bet hundreds on them or on the total and know nothing about other fighters... OKAY!


Boxers you clearly have never heard of. It's sad how you refuse to educate yourself on the history tliang. All because you defend fmjr so stubbornly and emotionally.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Chacal said:


> One of mine too. Rigo, Hearns and Whittaker are probably my top 3. Fuck tliang, he ain't no prophet.


Yeah, it's kind of interesting though because Rigondeaux doesn't take a whole lot of what separates Whitaker from many and why he was so difficult to win rounds from: His jab, inside fighting ability, punch variation and work rate were all about as important as his defensive head-n-upperbody movement. He really wasn't a "defensive fighter" tbh, it was just the flashiest and most instinctive part of his game. Mayweather and Rigo get hit less than he did, he took more risks too though. Would say Rigo got more technically proficient and explosive footwork, more P4P power obviously as well.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Mal said:


> Boxers you clearly have never heard of. It's sad how you refuse to educate yourself on the history tliang. All because you defend fmjr so stubbornly and emotionally.


I don't know if you know this Mal but I CONDUCT RESEARCH. Not only on boxing but on Basketball, tennis, UFC and i do great on it. I DO NOT need 25hours of footage of a great to know how good they are. My eyes work you know.


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> I don't know if you know this Mal but I CONDUCT RESEARCH. Not only on boxing but on Basketball, tennis, UFC and i do great on it. I DO NOT need 25hours of footage of a great to know how good they are. My eyes work you know.


No, it often takes many years of exposure. You are proof of that my friend.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Mal said:


> No, it often takes many years of exposure. You are proof of that my friend.


many years of exposure of what? i can pick out a winner between two prospects in two rounds of footage. It is not that hard, don't over think it.


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> I like how people pretend on here act like that i don't have an eye for talent.


Firstly, I just want to say that this sentence is so fucked I don't know where to begin.

Secondly you don't have an eye for anything. You're a total fucking retard. I hope you die in a fire.

Fin.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> I like how people pretend on here act like that i don't have an eye for talent.


I don't think Bogo is going to bother engaging here. :lol: Everyone already blew their load in that 70-page Ray Leonard thread in the WBF.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> I don't think Bogo is going to bother engaging here. :lol: Everyone already blew their load in that 70-page Ray Leonard thread in the WBF.


man when i saw the opening post 4 days ago. i didnt want to engage. it is like damn i've already said the same shit like 20 times WHY?!


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

bballchump11 said:


> Honestly though, I think Floyd is more skilled than Ali :cry yeah I said it
> 
> Now comparing the skills of a heavyweight and a welterweight will always be messy, but lets put that aside.
> 
> ...


I agree with the first part, but question Ali's resume. Let me explain:

The Liston wins get discounted for reasons we all know. Floyd's wins over DLH, Marquez, and Mosley seem to catch more backlash for no great reasons.

Ali basically beat a hodgepodge of stiffs after that, and Patterson, who wasn't a stiff but was beatable. Ali looked great during that period, to his credit.

Then came the exile. He came back and looked like crap against Bonavena and got his ass kicked by Frazier, so that doesn't help his resume imo..

After that he went on a nice run but didn't notch any great wins and then lost to Norton and hardly beat him in the rematch. I don't think Norton was all that special and his resume is mostly built off over performing against Ali. He should've just been a footnote on Ali's ledger.

Then he beat a past peak Frazier, very good win but not great.

Then he beat Foreman, which is basically his lone great win. And we all know Foreman had glaring technical weaknesses, so it wouldn't be in the same vein as beating most of the other all time heavyweight greats at their peak...more like Holyfield's first win over Tyson.

After that, Frazier III gets glorified bc it was a war, but Frazier was basically done already. Tyson, Lennox, Vitali, etc. wouldn't have struggled with him.

He beat Bugner, Shavers, and Lyle (pretty good) but could've lost to Norton and Young, and did lose to Spinks (pretty bad).

I think it's an overrated resume bc he gets passes for a bunch of losses, non-dominant wins and subpar performances.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> many years of exposure of what? i can pick out a winner between two prospects in two rounds of footage. It is not that hard, don't over think it.


You only prove my point further.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Anyone that rates him in the top 10, now or in 15/20/50 years, DKSAB. It's that simple. If people get collectively dumber and more ignorant, you'll still be that fool who couldn't accept that his favorite wasn't as special as others.


I've never seen you on here trying to blast Whitaker or diminish his wins.


----------



## MEXAMELAC (Apr 14, 2014)

MrJotatp4p said:


> Top 10, top 50 is all opinionated bullshit anyways. You have to really look at all these fighter at their absolute best, then break down who they fought, what they did when they fought them. You also have to go by the eye test. I think Floyd belongs in top 30. Forgot where I have him ranked but I will have to get on my imac later and look at my list.
> 
> For me I like to look at guys in their prime and judge based off that. Damn near all the ATG fighters took losses when they fought on way too long and I don't judge them off of those losses.


I concur. That's why I rarely even waste time trying to make all-time great list's.


----------



## MEXAMELAC (Apr 14, 2014)

Hands of Iron said:


> Haha, 5 1/2 years. :deal
> 
> The Professor wasn't no lightweight, never did anything a lightweight. Just an ATG fighter and elite 126/130 lber daring for further greatness 5 lbs north of the division he was accustomed to shedding down to and whose greatest win was actually still ahead of him, post-Whitaker. It wasn't as if Pernell was really dwarfing him in the ring there on the night or dominating him with imcomparably unfair physicality. Same goes for Chavez, really. That fight was officially and technically at a catchweight.
> 
> ...


You told me you got to see JCC constantly and you can't sit there and tell me he was 100 by the time he fought Whitaker. The paper doesn't always tell the whole story. He was clearly declining and was a heavy drinker by that time. He had a shit load of fights. The eye test told me Chavez wasn't the same. He was gassing out way too early and just didn't look good at all physically. Right after that, he loses to Randall. You must have seen something similar brotha??


----------



## MEXAMELAC (Apr 14, 2014)

Edit


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> I don't know if you know this Mal but I CONDUCT RESEARCH. Not only on boxing but on Basketball, tennis, UFC and i do great on it. I DO NOT need 25hours of footage of a great to know how good they are. My eyes work you know.


How many months had you been training for here? Because with your eye for talent you must know you look fucking atrocious


----------



## Rockinghorseshit (Oct 4, 2013)

Chacal said:


> How many months had you been training for here? Because with your eye for talent you must know you look fucking atrocious


Tilang you flomo fool.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Bernard hopkins dksab then nor does SRL who both put Floyd in top 10. Mikey Garcia and Robert Garcia both put Floyd as number 1 best ever. People act like i'm hyping Floyd up too much but you you will say anyone that rates him in the top 10 now DKSAB. SMH


I have no problem saying they aren't knowledgeable boxing historians if they think Floyd is top 10.

At least on resume. In terms of pure ability I can't knock people who are impressed enough to have him that high P4P. Though I'd still disagree with them without question.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

MEXAMELAC said:


> You told me you got to see JCC constantly and you can't sit there and tell me he was 100 by the time he fought Whitaker. The paper doesn't always tell the whole story. He was clearly declining and was a heavy drinker by that time. He had a shit load of fights. The eye test told me Chavez wasn't the same. He was gassing out way too early and just didn't look good at all physically. Right after that, he loses to Randall. You must have seen something similar brotha??


Never said he was 100. I think he was in better condition than Toney (vs. Jones) and less faded than Hagler (vs. SRL). I list him as undefeated and #1 P4P because he was. I say the majority felt he would beat Whitaker because they did. I'm not claiming he was performing at his peak level and even posted other shit with George Benton saying he looked like he was running out of steam. Whitaker was also a major alcoholic and past his own best, dude's peak was at 135 just like JCC not 147 where he had to take far more risks standing in the pocket due to his depleted legs. Good for him that he was one of the best inside fighters of all-time, eh? Nobody mentions this. I'm at a loss for words as to why.



Hands of Iron said:


>





Hands of Iron said:


>


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

Chacal said:


> How many months had you been training for here? Because with your eye for talent you must know you look fucking atrocious


He's just begging to eat uppercuts with all that bending down forward. I'm sure he corrected that upon a single viewing though.


----------



## Reppin501 (May 16, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Anyone that rates him in the top 10, now or in 15/20/50 years, DKSAB. It's that simple. If people get collectively dumber and more ignorant, you'll still be that fool who couldn't accept that his favorite wasn't as special as others.


You have your rankings handy...I'd be curious to see it.


----------



## MEXAMELAC (Apr 14, 2014)

Hands of Iron said:


> Haha, 5 1/2 years. :deal
> 
> The Professor wasn't no lightweight, never did anything a lightweight. Just an ATG fighter and elite 126/130 lber daring for further greatness 5 lbs north of the division he was accustomed to shedding down to and whose greatest win was actually still ahead of him, post-Whitaker. It wasn't as if Pernell was really dwarfing him in the ring there on the night or dominating him with imcomparably unfair physicality. Same goes for Chavez, really. That fight was officially and technically at a catchweight.
> 
> ...





Hands of Iron said:


> Never said he was 100. I think he was in better condition than Toney (vs. Jones) and less faded than Hagler (vs. SRL). I list him as undefeated and #1 P4P because he was. I say the majority felt he would beat Whitaker because they did. I'm not claiming he was performing at his peak level and even posted other shit with George Benton saying he looked like he was running out of steam. Whitaker was also a major alcoholic and past his own best, dude's peak was at 135 just like JCC not 147 where he had to take far more risks standing in the pocket due to his depleted legs. Good for him that he was one of the best inside fighters of all-time, eh? Nobody mentions this. I'm at a loss for words as to why.


I understand. My question is where was Chavez compared to Pernell? Chavez was considered P4P #1 because he was still winning but did it mean that he was on Pernell's level, in terms of prime? I can't give you a % to compare both but based on what I was watching (forget paper), Pernell was fighting at an extremely high level. The dude wasn't even 30 years old and only had around 33 fights. Many still considered him to be in his full prime. After that fight, Chavez was losing to Randall and Pernell was beating McGirt for the 2nd time and Julio Cesar Vasquez. I can understand why the media would think Chavez would win. I mean, he was ranked #1 P4P but the media isn't always right. Sometimes, they don't even tell the truth and their job is build up fights. Based on how they were ranked, I wouldn't expect them to say anything less. It actually made sense. But I think that Chavez was at a point in his career, where he was declining with each fight. I think only the people who followed him closely, were able to see this (which is why I wanted your opinion). I remember him saying in a post fight interview, right before he fought Taylor, that he was starting to feel tired. He mentioned that the consistency was taking a toll on him. At this point he was still a beast though. The point you're making about Pernell, is kinda what I'm trying to say as well. Everyone talks about how great Pernell was in that fight but I think many are ignoring other things that the media wasn't seeing. And I'm also not saying that Whitaker wouldn't beat him anyway. Just making stating things I observed.

Good stuff though. As usual...:thumbsup


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

Rockinghorseshit said:


> @*Capaedia* thinks Marquez was a great win for Floyd.


Yeah, nah this is news to me matey.

However...

:deadmanny


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

MEXAMELAC said:


> I understand. My question is where was Chavez compared to Pernell? Chavez was considered P4P #1 because he was still winning but did it mean that he was on Pernell's level, in terms of prime? I can't give you a % to compare both but based on what I was watching (forget paper), Pernell was fighting at an extremely high level. The dude wasn't even 30 years old and only had around 33 fights. Many still considered him to be in his full prime. After that fight, Chavez was losing to Randall and Pernell was beating McGirt for the 2nd time and Julio Cesar Vasquez. I can understand why the media would think Chavez would win. I mean, he was ranked #1 P4P but the media isn't always right. Sometimes, they don't even tell the truth and their job is build up fights. Based on how they were ranked, I wouldn't expect them to say anything less. It actually made sense. But I think that Chavez was at a point in his career, where he was declining with each fight. I think only the people who followed him closely, were able to see this (which is why I wanted your opinion). I remember him saying in a post fight interview, right before he fought Taylor, that he was starting to feel tired. He mentioned that the consistency was taking a toll on him. At this point he was still a beast though. The point you're making about Pernell, is kinda what I'm trying to say as well. Everyone talks about how great Pernell was in that fight but I think many are ignoring other things that the media wasn't seeing. And I'm also not saying that Whitaker wouldn't beat him anyway. Just making stating things I observed.
> 
> Good stuff though. As usual...:thumbsup


I thought Chavez had been past his peak for a few years already personally, though he was on the very back end of his general prime; and going through both of their careers I'm miffed as to how and why so many people were picking JCC to beat Pea in 1993. Prisoners of the Moment and caught up in the undefeated hype, I suppose. You should know I have no problem calling a spade a spade, especially when it comes to Chavez who along with Whitaker, Duran, Tyson is one of my favorite fighters of all-time as well. The thing with Julio is that his first 40 or so professional bouts basically served as his 'amateur' career considering he didn't have much of one, whereas Whitaker had 215 before he went pro. I'm not saying he was just as worn due to that because he wasn't, it just simply bridges it a bit more. Of course, he had his vices outside of the ring the same as Julio that expedited his decline. Regardless of anything else, there haven't been many wins over the last couple of decades-plus that are better even with Julio being faded. I'd also rate '90 Meldrick Taylor as a more dangerous, capable and skilled opponent than any of Floyd's wins. And yeah, I did see a whole lot of JCC growing up, both on old VHS tapes my dad had as well as live. I remember I turned down the opportunity to see the Tsyzu fight live that took place here.

Ask Zopi @Zopilote if I don't have mad love for the dude. We used to have in-depth off the record boxing convos about him, and the whole deal with the Whitaker fight. It's a shame it didn't happen in the late 80s at 135.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Reppin501 said:


> You have your rankings handy...I'd be curious to see it.


I lost them, sorry dude. They were incomplete to begin with though as I'm very ignorant pre-60's. I would have Pac/Floyd roughly around 30-40 though at about the same place, very rough estimate.


----------



## MEXAMELAC (Apr 14, 2014)

Hands of Iron said:


> Haha, 5 1/2 years. :deal
> 
> The Professor wasn't no lightweight, never did anything a lightweight. Just an ATG fighter and elite 126/130 lber daring for further greatness 5 lbs north of the division he was accustomed to shedding down to and whose greatest win was actually still ahead of him, post-Whitaker. It wasn't as if Pernell was really dwarfing him in the ring there on the night or dominating him with imcomparably unfair physicality. Same goes for Chavez, really. That fight was officially and technically at a catchweight.
> 
> ...





Hands of Iron said:


> I thought Chavez had been past his peak for a few years already personally, though he was on the very back end of his general prime; and going through both of their careers I'm miffed as to how and why so many people were picking JCC to beat Pea in 1993. Prisoners of the Moment and caught up in the undefeated hype, I suppose. You should know I have no problem calling a spade a spade, especially when it comes to Chavez who along with Whitaker, Duran, Tyson is one of my favorite fighters of all-time as well. The thing with Julio is that his first 40 or so professional bouts basically served as his 'amateur' career considering he didn't have much of one, whereas Whitaker had 215 before he went pro. I'm not saying he was just as worn due to that because he wasn't, it just simply bridges it a bit more. Of course, he had his vices outside of the ring the same as Julio that expedited his decline. Regardless of anything else, there haven't been many wins over the last couple of decades-plus that are better even with Julio being faded. I'd also rate '90 Meldrick Taylor as a more dangerous, capable and skilled opponent than any of Floyd's wins. And yeah, I did see a whole lot of JCC growing up, both on old VHS tapes my dad had as well as live. I remember I turned down the opportunity to see the Tsyzu fight live that took place here.
> 
> Ask Zopi @*Zopilote* if I don't have mad love for the dude. We used to have in-depth off the record boxing convos about him, and the whole deal with the Whitaker fight. It's a shame it didn't happen in the late 80s at 135.


Reading this shit makes me say.."Where the fuck you've been"??? LOL. Looks like you're still in your prime homie ha. Classic HOI response.

Couple questions though...

Even though Whitaker had more amateur bouts, wouldn't you agree that Chavez doing it at the pro level was probably tougher? Also considering the differences in style? Chavez being the more physical boxer (pressure) compared to the slickster (I rarely get hit) Whitaker? I agree that Whitaker "win" was still very good. He still needed to go out there and do it. Plus Chavez was game.

Wow! It's like you went into my brain and picked out my "Taylor arguments" file with that comment. I've argued many times about what a nightmare Taylor was. That dude was a complete fucking nightmare for any style during that time. I have even questioned whether Pernell could beat Taylor (you might disagree). The guy was a machine. He was extremely fast, super active and perfect for the pro style. He threw around 1200 punches vs Chavez!!! Chavez had to dig deep and still calls it the toughest fight of his career. He always shakes his head, when they ask him about that fight. He still gives Chavez nightmares. Freddy Krueger ain't got shit on Taylor. He was also very strong. Probably one of my favorite fights. It had it all. It's a shame Pernell never fought Taylor or face Chavez earlier. Still doesn't make any sense.

Your post's on Chavez are the things I remember most about you in those ESB days (when I first saw you). I even complimented you and thought you were one of the better posters. So of course I remember you talking about how you followed Chavez. You always made great points. What I appreciated most about you is that you rarely showed any favoritism or bias. I respect that a lot and I consider those to be the better analyst/posters. Your opinions are always respected by me, even if we disagree on some. :cheers


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> I lost them, sorry dude. They were incomplete to begin with though as I'm very ignorant pre-60's. I would have Pac/Floyd roughly around 30-40 though at about the same place, very rough estimate.


 @Flea Man has Floyd Top 10. :yep

(Of the 21st Century)



MEXAMELAC said:


> Reading this shit makes me say.."Where the fuck you've been"??? LOL. Looks like you're still in your prime homie ha. Classic HOI response.
> 
> Couple questions though...
> 
> ...


Appreciate the words, dude. It was actually someone comparing Golovkin to Chavez last Saturday night that I took a bit of exception to that prompted me to start posting about boxing again, funny enough. And yeah, I'm not suggesting Pernell had anywhere near as much wear-and-tear when they fought. He just came from a completely different boxing background and rise to the top, wasn't a pro for very many fights before he saw the level of his opposition skyrocket.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> @Flea Man has Floyd Top 10. :yep
> 
> (Of the 21st Century)
> 
> Appreciate the words, dude. It was actually someone comparing Golovkin to Chavez last Saturday night that I took a bit of exception to that prompted me to start posting about boxing again, funny enough. And yeah, I'm not suggesting Pernell had anywhere near as much wear-and-tear when they fought. He just came from a completely different boxing background and rise to the top, wasn't a pro for very many fights before he saw the level of his opposition skyrocket.


How dare you!

I have him as #TBE :yep


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

Mal said:


> He's just begging to eat uppercuts with all that bending down forward. I'm sure he corrected that upon a single viewing though.


Not to mention his feet are in cement, he is in slow motion, has no idea what balance is, leans all the way to his left when he throws a right hook, pushes his jab out while making his arm a chicken wing and is generally just fucking horrendous. The video is an abomination,


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> Never said he was 100. I think he was in better condition than Toney (vs. Jones) and less faded than Hagler (vs. SRL). I list him as undefeated and #1 P4P because he was. I say the majority felt he would beat Whitaker because they did. I'm not claiming he was performing at his peak level and even posted other shit with George Benton saying he looked like he was running out of steam. Whitaker was also a major alcoholic and past his own best, dude's peak was at 135 just like JCC not 147 where he had to take far more risks standing in the pocket due to his depleted legs. Good for him that he was one of the best inside fighters of all-time, eh? Nobody mentions this. I'm at a loss for words as to why.


Truly incredible post.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> then go on and talk about Ali's accuracy, defense, lack of body punching, range, timing and i could go on and on.


Man you're way off with this. Ali has a better resume and he has comparable skills. Ali in the 60s was actually very accurate and had great defense. Had great timing. The only thing you have here is the lack of body punching and "range" which isn't even a legitimate criticism because Ali knew how to control range.


----------



## Hoshi (Aug 21, 2012)

My word, I cannot believe some people in this thread. 

Mayweather's best wins are Castillo and Coralles, good wins not great wins. Going deeper than that and the cynics can let loose and rightly so if you are comparing the greats. 

Who is his third? DLH was past his best, Mosley was shot, Hatton and Marquez were ineffective at the weight. Is Canelo going to get thrown up here out of desperation?

Are we going to have to bring up how Mayweather looks flawless at times compared to other greats? Well think about it. If you play a sport with someone who is good you won't look as good as you would against someone who is significantly worse. It is common sense.

Quality of opposition is EVERYTHING.


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Hoshi said:


> My word, I cannot believe some people in this thread.
> 
> Mayweather's best wins are Castillo and Coralles, good wins not great wins. Going deeper than that and the cynics can let loose and rightly so if you are comparing the greats.
> 
> ...


A lot of Atg fighters never really beat better opposition (Hagler, Chavez, etc.). Assuming he beats Manny, he's way up the list.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Hoshi said:


> My word, I cannot believe some people in this thread.
> 
> Mayweather's best wins are Castillo and Coralles, good wins not great wins. Going deeper than that and the cynics can let loose and rightly so if you are comparing the greats.
> 
> ...


Marquez and Hatton were ineffective at the weight yet both won championships there? Marquez beating the best welter in the world?

My word indeed


----------



## El-Terrible (Jun 5, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Marquez and Hatton were ineffective at the weight yet both won championships there? Marquez beating the best welter in the world?
> 
> My word indeed


Marquez has never won a world title at 147 - and back in 2009 had never fought above 135


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> A lot of Atg fighters never really beat better opposition (Hagler, Chavez, etc.). Assuming he beats Manny, he's way up the list.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


its the timing of the opposition as well as their position in the prospective weight class

mitchell wasnt even ranked when they fought

floyd couldve fought prime cotto, margo, pw or sergio instead of hatton

39-year-old mosely(who had already been decisively defeated by both forrest and winky)

jmm whose only win above 140 is a come-from-behind-ko over paq

oritz, a career 140 with one win at 147

rg, a career 135 with one win at 147

hatton, a career 140 with one win at 147

floyds resume at 140 and above, when you break it down, is comprised of a win over dlh and canelo

the rest of his wins are asterisks in between two periods of inactivity when he couldnt find a cherry to pick


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> Yeah, it's kind of interesting though because Rigondeaux doesn't take a whole lot of what separates *Whitaker *from many and why he was so difficult to win rounds from: His jab, inside fighting ability, punch variation and work rate were all about as important as his defensive head-n-upperbody movement. He really wasn't a "defensive fighter" tbh, it was just the flashiest and most instinctive part of his game. Mayweather and *Rigo get hit less than he did*, he took more risks too though. Would say *Rigo got more technically proficient and explosive footwork*, more P4P power obviously as well.


HoI is making outlandish statements here, @Bill Jincock

Time to hit him with some ugandan knowledge.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> its the timing of the opposition as well as their position in the prospective weight class
> 
> mitchell wasnt even ranked when they fought
> 
> ...


We know. Why do you feel the need to regale us with your stupidity over and over again.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Flea Man said:


> How dare you!
> 
> I have him as #TBE :yep





Flea Man said:


> Truly incredible post.


Any legitimate excitement for _this_ fight or is it too far gone for you?



Lester1583 said:


> HoI is making outlandish statements here, @Bill Jincock
> 
> Time to hit him with some ugandan knowledge.


Fuck Kalule :lol:

That's just me compromising and trying compensate for the fact that Whitaker was just better by quite a bit.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

El-Terrible said:


> Marquez has never won a world title at 147 - and back in 2009 had never fought above 135


Semantics. Was robbed of the WBO in the third Pacquiao and decisively kod pacquiao at welterweight the 4th tho for no belt.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Sorry but Ali didnt have a body jab, I mean all those guys beating Ali but nobody beating Mayweather


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> We know. Why do you feel the need to regale us with your stupidity over and over again.


how many times have you been banned here?

i know twice in the last month alone so my guess maybe around six or seven times?

do you even understand how sad that is?

how pathetic you are?


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> Honestly though, I think Floyd is more skilled than Ali :cry yeah I said it
> When it comes to Ali and Sugar Ray Robinson, I'm not really blown away by their skills when I watch their fights.


Nothing wrong with the first statement.

Floyd is one of the best properly-schooled fighters.
And Ali is hardly a paragon of technical brilliance.

Robinson, on the other hand, is much more conventional - just cuz of his athleticism and killer instict he tended to do some unorthodox things doesn't mean he was closer to Ali than Floyd skill-wise.
He did have a few weakneses but then again they can't be all like Kalule _(if only)_.

Floyd, just like many young athletically gifted fighters, was like that when he was younger - leading/jumping with a right hand, leaping left hooks across half the ring - still he has always been way too rigid/careful/not as good with his feet to really pull a Graham in the ring.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Sorry but Ali didnt have a body jab, I mean all those guys beating Ali but nobody beating Mayweather


that doesn't make Floyd better.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Ali could do the pull counter just as good as Floyd :hey


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

quincy k said:


> its the timing of the opposition as well as their position in the prospective weight class
> 
> mitchell wasnt even ranked when they fought
> 
> ...


1. Mitchell was a throw away fight. Doesn't matter.
2. Hatton was more highly regarded at the time than all of them except maybe Cotto, but Cotto was with Arum and Hatton was more accomplished.
3. Mosley was pfp 3 according to the Ring and lineal. He was also 38, not 39. He declined the fight years earlier, floyd had called him out.
4. Jmm had the most important win of the last ten years at 147
5. Ortiz was a champ and peaking, coming off the foty
6. Guerrero was coming off solid wins over Aydin and Berto, both contenders at 47
7. Hatton was bigger than Mayweather

I can spin it too.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Hoshi said:


> *My word, I cannot believe some people in this thread.
> 
> Mayweather's best wins are Castillo and Coralles, good wins not great wins. Going deeper than that and the cynics can let loose and rightly so if you are comparing the greats.*
> 
> ...


:lol:

What you really wanted to shout here, but stopped short of doing so, is that you consider Michael Nunn and Mike McCallum to be far greater wins.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Hoshi said:


> My word, I cannot believe some people in this thread.
> 
> Mayweather's best wins are Castillo and Coralles, good wins not great wins. Going deeper than that and the cynics can let loose and rightly so if you are comparing the greats.
> 
> ...


When Oscar fought Floyd, he was cherry picking a blown up superfeatherweight and made him wear gloves he wasn't accustomed to in a new weight class :hey

well at least that's what people would say if Floyd fought somebody like that. "But Oscar was 36!" Well Floyd is 38 now


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> 1. Mitchell was a throw away fight. Doesn't matter.
> 2. Hatton was more highly regarded at the time than all of them except maybe Cotto, but Cotto was with Arum and Hatton was more accomplished.
> 3. Mosley was pfp 3 according to the Ring and lineal. He was also 38, not 39. He declined the fight years earlier, floyd had called him out.
> 4. Jmm had the most important win of the last ten years at 147
> ...


lmfao...mitchell, coming off a 140 ko loss, is a throw-away fight that doesnt matter. mosely four months shy of being 39 as if there was some difference between 38 and 39. selduck aydin a solid win for rg whose next fight is keith thurman whose a 10-1 favarite. ortiz done as a fighter after being immediately kod after the floyd fight by a journeyman 140. and what does hattons size have to do with the fact that he went life and death with collazo who was absolutely schooled by mosely?

whatever. im done arguing with flomos

if you follow this forum youll quickly realize that pretty much the only guys that rate floyd top ten are delusional flomos that havent been watching the sport for very long.

just look at the 14 pages of this thread and youll see what im talking about. your in very small company and that company is pretty bad.


----------



## Hoshi (Aug 21, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> :lol:
> 
> What you really wanted to shout here, but stopped short of doing so, is that you consider Michael Nunn and Mike McCallum to be far greater wins.


:smile:deal Toney's elite wins are light years ahead of Floyd's. No Toney appreciation on this forum :verysad

Mayweather may have some depth but lets take a look at Toney outside of those two godlike wins.

Johnson, Jirov, Sosa, Littles, Williams. Not to mention the fights with Griffin and Peter. I thought he won one against both of them.



bballchump11 said:


> When Oscar fought Floyd, he was cherry picking a blown up superfeatherweight and made him wear gloves he wasn't accustomed to in a new weight class :hey
> 
> well at least that's what people would say if Floyd fought somebody like that. "But Oscar was 36!" Well Floyd is 38 now


Not trashing the win it was good. Just shows outside of those two wins its flimsy and in all fairness the thread title asks for a cynical approach. In line with Pacquiao over Morales I'd say.

The age thing is circumstantial. What he is doing is impressive but the opposition overall and the activity over the last 6 years is a reason for that too.


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> When Oscar fought Floyd, he was cherry picking a blown up superfeatherweight and made him wear gloves he wasn't accustomed to in a new weight class :hey
> 
> well at least that's what people would say if Floyd fought somebody like that. "But Oscar was 36!" Well Floyd is 38 now


well, oscar himself was a "blown up superfeatherweight."

and most people i know of dont discredit floyds win over oscar as it was one of his best wins


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Lester1583 said:


> Nothing wrong with the first statement.
> 
> Floyd is one of the best properly-schooled fighters.
> And Ali is hardly a paragon of technical brilliance.
> ...


oh yeah I got you. And I wasn't rating Robinson skillwise, but I wanted to just make that comment also about him. Of course both him and Ali were very skilled, but that's not what jumps out to me when I watch them.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

quincy k said:


> well, oscar himself was a "blown up superfeatherweight."
> 
> and most people i know of dont discredit floyds win over oscar as it was one of his best wins


Blown up or drained down superfeatherweight... atsch


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> oh yeah I got you. And I wasn't rating Robinson skillwise, but I wanted to just make that comment also about him. Of course both him and Ali were very skilled, but that's not what jumps out to me when I watch them.


Robinson, as HoI rightly put it, was a killer first and foremost.
That's the main difference between him and say Leonard.
Leonard was too cerebral.
Robinson would beat Hearns differently and faster but taking more risks and maybe suffering a knockdown in the process.

Ali was a cheap Legra imitation, nothing more.
Arguello-Legra is the ultimate answer to the eternal Louis-Ali question.

Guys like Winstone, Davila, Harold Johnson, Cunto, etc. are closer to pure technicians - not necessarily cuz they were much more skillful - but cuz they had to rely on textbook skillset mostly.
Or maybe guys like Alfonso Lopez, Rose and Kalule - impossible-to-outbox-cleanly-smooth-fragile-perfect boxers.
Or lower-level talents like Brian Mitchell and Myung Woo Yuh - no particular strengths just your classic not overly complicated textbook boxing and balls of steel.

Anyway, Robinson relied on his chin too much - he probably was a face-first brawler.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> whatever. im done arguing with flomos.


Thank god. You really are one annoying little fucker


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Hoshi said:


> The age thing is circumstantial. What he is doing is impressive but the opposition overall and the activity over the last 6 years is a reason for that too.


Mayweather at 36 years old beat Canelo Alvarez who has beaten 3 World Champions himself and is the best 154lber in the world, which means you could argue Floyd is the best 154lber in the World.

Please explain to the panel why you think that Floyds win over Canelo is "desperation"


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

TBE!


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Thank god. You really are one annoying little fucker


im annoyed with myself having conversed with a clown like you

youve been banned here twice in the last month

maybe its normal for your to be banned from restaurants , bars, clubs and internet forums but for 99 percent of the people that properly function in society its an embarrassment.

and just as embarrassing that i conversed with you for the past 24 hours when ive told you on no less than nine occasions that you are on my ignore list

look at your avatar

TBE! TBE! TBE! TBE!

MichiganWarrior 
TBE!TBE!TBE!TBE!

!









who does shit like that?

youre like a 12-year-old little girl.

seriously, for the like the 10the time, dont caption my posts anymore and stop stalking me


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> im annoyed with myself having conversed with a clown like you
> 
> youve been banned here twice in the last month
> 
> ...


Back when you were Capfunds I thought you were funny. When you came back as Roach I knew you had some mental disability but you were harmless. I dont like this quincy k persona one bit. At least before you were interesting. Now you are just boring, a long with mental deficiency its just not a good look.


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Back when you were Capfunds I thought you were funny. When you came back as Roach I knew you had some mental disability but you were harmless. _*I dont like this *__*quincy k persona one bit*__* .*_ At least before you were interesting. Now you are just boring, a long with mental deficiency its just not a good look.


i have no idea who capfunds and roach are.

unlike you i dont get banned from forums or any public places

and if you dont like "this quincy k persona one bit" why do you keep captioning my posts when ive told you on ten occasions that you are on my ignore list and that i want nothing to do with you?

youve been banned on the CHB forum twice in the last month, the most recent time no less than a week ago, and now you come back and are arguing with me and @Chacal at the same time in different threads?

what the fuck is wrong with you?


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

quincy k said:


> i have no idea who capfunds and roach are.
> 
> unlike you i dont get banned from forums or any public places
> 
> ...


He's a spastic.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy k said:


> i have no idea who capfunds and roach are.
> 
> unlike you i dont get banned from forums or any public places
> 
> ...


There's the mental disability Im referring too

You know how I know you are capfunds and roach, because he like you (along with the obvious mental disability thats easily noticeable) believed that somehow Kirkland and Angulo would beat Floyd, and you like him or you for that matter lol, believed that somehow size and activity was a decisive advantage in boxing.

Now, given the fact that I know you have a mental disability there is a great chance that you arent fully aware of your own mental state. You may truly believe you are someone completely different. However, the question must then be asked, why would any one in good conscience allow you access to a computer. You could really harm yourself.


----------



## quincy k (Oct 4, 2013)

Chacal said:


> He's a spastic.


trying to argue with both you and me at the same time on different threads about topics that have nothing to do with boxing

and after being banned two times this month

unbelievable that this type of behavior is actually normal for him


----------



## Hoshi (Aug 21, 2012)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Mayweather at 36 years old beat Canelo Alvarez who has beaten 3 World Champions himself and is the best 154lber in the world, which means you could argue Floyd is the best 154lber in the World.
> 
> Please explain to the panel why you think that Floyds win over Canelo is "desperation"


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> Rigo get hit


I sense your depsair, Hoi.

Rigo's career is in the shitter.

Nobody wants him, nobody needs him, he just stares at the world.

I know why you can't sleep at night.

- Is Rigo's prime over? Or was it an off-night?
- Was leaving Arum the biggest mistake of Rigo's career?
- Am I wrong in my over the top rants about Rigo's greatness?

You ask youself over and over and over.

These questions are like a little alien inside you - you can't ignore them forever.

Sorry, I can't help you.

Here's a Fedor gif to cheer you up - it's not much but it's all I can do for you at the moment:


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Lester1583 said:


> I sense your depsair, Hoi.
> 
> Rigo's career is in the shitter.
> 
> ...


:lol:

I sleep fine.

Were @Chacal and I pompous about Rigo for a long time? Yeah. I wouldn't necessarily say it was over the top though. Little fella just packs glass, I stand by all I said about him skillwise and he beat the brakes off Amagasa, really.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> I lost them, sorry dude. They were incomplete to begin with though as I'm very ignorant pre-60's. I would have Pac/Floyd roughly around 30-40 though at about the same place, very rough estimate.


You need to find it.



Hoshi said:


> :smile:deal Toney's elite wins are light years ahead of Floyd's. No Toney appreciation on this forum :verysad
> 
> Mayweather may have some depth but lets take a look at Toney outside of those two godlike wins.
> 
> ...


Based on Bogo FormulaÂ© he has to rate him.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> You need to find it.
> 
> Based on Bogo FormulaÂ© he has to rate him.


I'll look again. I sent you the list of fighters I felt comfortable judging but in a different order.

Of course I rate Toney.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> I'll look again. I sent you the list of fighters I felt comfortable judging but in a different order.
> 
> Of course I rate Toney.


Was JCC on that list? :huh


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Was JCC on that list? :huh


Yeah I believe so.


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> :lol:
> 
> I sleep fine.
> 
> Were @Chacal and I pompous about Rigo for a long time? Yeah. I wouldn't necessarily say it was over the top though. Little fella just packs glass, I stand by all I said about him skillwise and he beat the brakes off Amagasa, really.


Rigos fucking career ain't over nor was it an off night. An unusual terrible post by Lester


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> :lol:
> 
> I sleep fine.
> 
> Were @Chacal and I pompous about Rigo for a long time? Yeah. I wouldn't necessarily say it was over the top though. Little fella just packs glass, I stand by all I said about him skillwise and he beat the brakes off Amagasa, really.


Rigo is not packing glass. Thats not fair, hands. Hes been rocked and knocked down a few times, yes... but Donaire is a big hitter, amagasa is a respectable hitter also. Maybe an average or below average chin, not glass.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Chacal said:


> Rigos fucking career ain't over nor was it an off night. An unusual terrible post by Lester


That is actually a usual post from him :lol: He's heavy into sarcastic musings whereas tommygun is one of the most literal and cardiac arrest-serious. I haven't been playing along much with Lester lately though.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> I wouldn't necessarily say it was over the top though.


Nah, not really over the top.

Maybe a bit too confident at times.

The Donaire victory was excelent but flattering stylistically.

And other fighters were way too inept to really exploit Rigo's flaws to say with 100% certainty "his punching power and quickness would stop anyone in his tracks".
One Agbeko is not enough. He's not good enough.
We've seen Rigo thrown off his game against Cordoba (although that may've been due to inexperience), we've seen him looking less than stellar against an utterly mediocre Amagasa (height, off-night, glass chin, aging - you chose).

Some things he does great, some things not so much.

Meaning the jury is still out on Rigo.

What if someone tries to rough him up?
What if someone is quick enough to close the distance?
What if someone is tall&good enough to consistently jab him to the face without commiting to the punches too much?
How bad is Rigo's chin? Is it Joe Louis-bad/Tito-bad or Alfonso Lopez-bad?

Luckily and sadly for Rigo nobody wants to ask him these questions in the ring.

Right now, he's an excellent counterpuncher with a highly questionable chin who stuck in the middle of nowhere.
Nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## Powerpuncher (May 20, 2013)

Lester1583 said:


> Zapata, baby, Zapata.
> 
> That's one the biggest Whitaker's strengths.
> 
> ...


Great post, especially about the less hair :rofl

Alongside having that greater workrate Whitaker was so much more of a natural than Floyd too, more fluid and a better use of angles, comparatively Floyd is a little stiff. Floyd's punching technique is a bit sloppy too and doesn't set himself aswell. But he makes near no mistakes, is a good given talent, quicker than Whitaker, longer arms and maybe stronger. It's 1 of the most interesting fantasy fights

I mean there are a few distinct versions of Floyd though. As he aged he did less and less and as he went up in weight he didn't quite add the weight in the right way imo. Pre WW he's more of a phenomenon. At WW the pre retirement versions, who's gameplans were pretty poor against Judah and DLH and then the slower declined post retirement version who's gameplans generally improve, either that or maybe those styles are always an issue. Whitaker himself could have aged better with greater dedication with the natural stamina he had.


----------



## Powerpuncher (May 20, 2013)

Lester1583 said:


> Right now, he's an excellent counterpuncher with a highly questionable chin who stuck in the middle of nowhere.
> Nothing more, nothing less.


How many have been in that position? If Pacquaio hadn't ducked Guzman there never would have been a Mayweather Pacquaio sub forum


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Powerpuncher said:


> How many have been in that position? If Pacquaio hadn't ducked Guzman there never would have been a Mayweather Pacquaio sub forum


Far too many.

I don't know about Guzman-Pac, to be honest.

Guz's offense has always been far too sloppy and weak to really keep good opponents off of him.
And he never was that good at moving and punching at the same time.
A younger Pac missing plenty of shots, landing some powerful shots, Lampley screaming in ecstasy and Guzman showing his reflexive defense and landing welsh-looking punches while getting booed.

It's a recipe for SD in favour of the asian singing sensation.



Powerpuncher said:


> more of a natural than Floyd too, more fluid and a better use of angles, comparatively Floyd is a little stiff.


I'm trying to remember examples of similar fighters who were as well-schooled and as good but who were even stiffer than Floyd.
@Bill Jincock

Canto, Kalambay, Locche, Ballas, Toney, Benton, Chocolate - all of them were more fluid and relaxed than Floyd.
He's the most tense fighter of them all.



Powerpuncher said:


> quicker than Whitaker


Single shots, yes.

Was he quicker with combinations?

I'd say the fastest he was with combos was against Corrales - when he tried to finish him after one of knockdowns - it's one of the few times, maybe the only time he threw a combination that quick - it was almost Camacho-like.

It's a part of his nature and style - he rarely commited fully to his combinations - always minimizing risks and mistakes.



Powerpuncher said:


> gameplans were pretty poor against Judah either that or maybe those styles are always an issue


Speaking of.

Judah had what it takes to beat the welter Floyd version he was facing.

In theory.

He was countering him and Floyd had to resort to that very poor imitation of Curry/Winky of his that he uses against southpaws - high static guard, slow pressure and forced combos.

A counterpunching faster low-output southpaw is a very hard style for a welter Floyd.

Zab's left hand counter was an excellent weapon - almost impossible to avoid.

Zab just never had the heart, patience and mental focus to suck it up and stick to the gameplan no matter what.

And Floyd just broke him down and showed what separates a natural talent from a hard-working champion.


----------



## Bill Jincock (Jun 19, 2012)

Maybe Harold Johnson? he's not that much like Floyd because he has the jab of doom, but he's going for the same kind of textbook perfection....just he's too musclebound to get under punches consistently like most of the great defensive fighters do, so relies much more on his subtle footwork, upperbody shifts and picking punches off.Tends to make things tough for him late against someone like Moore or Foster though.

i dunno really.Floyd's got quite a distinctive style in his way.I've noticed he's tried the Donald Curry thing quite a bit above 135 too though, but he's not really got the offensive threat to excel at it.Maybe him? Curry was stiff in his own way, especially if he was fighting someone non-textbook, just really elegant about it.


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Lester1583 said:


> Far too many.
> 
> I don't know about Guzman-Pac, to be honest.
> 
> ...


LOL

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Bill Jincock said:


> Maybe Harold Johnson? he's not that much like Floyd because he has the jab of doom, but he's going for the same kind of textbook perfection....Tends to make things tough for him late against someone like Moore or Foster though.


I'd say H.Johnson is too mechanical but smoother at the same time - he's closer to your classic textbook fighter like Lopez (Finito was much stiffer though) or Winstone, as in confined by his textbook perfection too much - he is incapable of deviating from it.

With Floyd it's more mental than technical - he is just set on not making any mistakes.



Bill Jincock said:


> I've noticed he's tried the Donald Curry thing quite a bit above 135 too though, but he's not really got the offensive threat to excel at it.


It's the most unnatural weapon in Floyd's arsenal.
It always looks like it would only work with lower-level talents or non-threatening fighters.



Bill Jincock said:


> Maybe him? Curry was stiff in his own way, especially if he was fighting someone non-textbook, just really elegant about it.


Curry is closer, I guess, with his sudden explosive attacks and stiff but not overly stiff textbook approach.

And while we're at it.

Pryor is the fighter I've always had trouble with finding similar fighters.
That mix of unorthodox sloppy offense combined with good jabbing, aggression and movement, instinctive moves and extensive amateur background, versatality.
Chang - closer to the young Duran; Armstrong - not even close; Hatton - nah; Pac - no, Pryor is not Ebihara; argentine school - too different.

Slobodan Kacar is the only logical answer here, probably.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Rigo is not packing glass. Thats not fair, hands. Hes been rocked and knocked down a few times, yes... but Donaire is a big hitter, amagasa is a respectable hitter also. Maybe an average or below average chin, not glass.


I love Rigo, but he's packing glass


----------

