Would a retired Mayweather rank above Marciano, or not?

[lufcrazy]

Pp, stray away from henry v floyd comparisons. Do yourself a favour.

[Legend X]

Originally Posted by Flea Man

Marciano beat guys around his weight, Floyd has had 'P4P success', which I don't find particularly impressive in this day and age at all.

Mayweather hasn't done anything I'd consider a exceptional "pound for pound" victory, in the classic sense.
Most the guys he fights are close to his size, a lot of the good ones are smaller, (the biggest names are older than he too).

Marciano beating good men 12 or 25 pounds heavier than him is more impressive, in my opinion.
Mayweather is a legit welterweight, a big 140 man at the least. It's not like he's going around beating up light-heavies, or proper middles even.

[Flea Man]

Originally Posted by Legend X

Mayweather hasn't done anything I'd consider a exceptional "pound for pound" victory, in the classic sense.
Most the guys he fights are close to his size, a lot of the good ones are smaller, (the biggest names are older than he too).

Exactly. His best wins aren't up to others in the top 50 either. I could honestly rank Marcel over him and not be fussed.

[Legend X]

Originally Posted by Flea Man

Exactly. His best wins aren't up to others in the top 50 either.

Yeah, I'd have to concur with the sentiment that he wouldn't rate high in the overall historic pound-for-pound ratings.
I can see a much clearer case for Marciano to do so, the more I think about it.

[PowerPuncher]

Originally Posted by lufcrazy

Pp, stray away from henry v floyd comparisons. Do yourself a favour.

Why? Watch and compare the opponents they beat and see if you really consider Armstrong to have beat better opposition. Compare top wins:

Barney Ross - Delahoya
Garcia - Corrales
Ambers-Castillo
Angott-Mosley
Zivic- Judah
Arizmendi - Hatton
Sarron - G Hernandez
Joyce - Marquez

Ask yourself why Armstrong's wins are better, if they are better, objectively compare their abilities and resumes. You'll see it isn't clear cut

There's certainly an argument Mayweather beat better men than Armstrong overall, I'd say he already has more quality in depth with possible additions of Cotto, Martinez, Pacquaio, Khan, Bradley and Alvarez in the future.

Both also suffer resume wise from not taking on some of the best WWs of their era. Armstrong didn't face Burley, Cocoa Kid, Holman Williams. That was due to his management not him, but he didn't clean out any division really, much like Floyd

Then there's longevity, Armstrong only managed to stay as a world champion from 37-40, 3years, where as Mayweather has managed from 98-12, minus a 2 year hiatus = 10years. I already rate Mayweather over Armstrong, partly because Armstrong is overrated due to weight hopping and title defences against no marks

Mayweather>Armstrong

[Flea Man]

Originally Posted by PowerPuncher

Why? Watch and compare the opponents they beat and see if you really consider Armstrong to have beat better opposition. Compare top wins:

Barney Ross - Delahoya
Garcia - Corrales
Ambers-Castillo
Angott-Mosley
Zivic- Judah
Arizmendi - Hatton
Sarron - G Hernandez
Joyce - Marquez

There's certainly an argument Mayweather beat better men than Armstrong overall, I'd say he already has more quality in depth with possible additions of Cotto, Martinez, Pacquaio, Khan, Bradley and Alvarez in the future.

Both also suffer resume wise from not taking on some of the best WWs of their era. Armstrong didn't face Burley, Cocoa Kid, Holman Williams. That was due to his management not him, but he didn't clean out any division really, much like Floyd

Then there's longevity, Armstrong only managed to stay as a world champion from 37-40, 3years, where as Mayweather has managed from 98-12, minus a 2 year hiatus = 10years. I already rate Mayweather over Armstrong, partly because Armstrong is overrated due to weight hopping and title defences against no marks

Mayweather>Armstrong

Come off it PP

[lufcrazy]

Originally Posted by Legend X

Mayweather hasn't done anything I'd consider a exceptional "pound for pound" victory, in the classic sense.
Most the guys he fights are close to his size, a lot of the good ones are smaller, (the biggest names are older than he too).

Marciano beating good men 12 or 25 pounds heavier than him is more impressive, in my opinion.
Mayweather is a legit welterweight, a big 140 man at the least. It's not like he's going around beating up light-heavies, or proper middles even.

How many good guys did rocky beat who were a stone or more heavier?

3 of his top 5 victories were against guys who were at their best in the lhw division.

[Legend X]

Castillo as good as Lou Ambers ?

[Legend X]

Originally Posted by lufcrazy

How many good guys did rocky beat who were a stone or more heavier?

Walcott was 12 - 13 pounds heavier.
Louis was about 30 pounds heavier.

[PowerPuncher]

Flea, take off the rose tints.

DLH-Ross - both are all time greats, both had size advantages against FMJ/HA, DLH more so. DLH arguably faced better opposition than Ross, I think he did

Castillo was the top lightweight against a who's who of his era beating Stevie Johnson, Casamayor, Corrales, Lazcano, Bazan, Julio Diaz and for some arguably Mayweather himself. Ambers certainly didn't achieve more than Castillo

Are you rating Zivic over Judah? Very different fighters, but Zivic actually has worse losses. Judah has 1 of the best speed and power combos in the modern era, was lineal WW champ and has 20+ title fights

Angott-Mosley - again very different fighters. Both were lineal champions when FMJ/HA fought them. Angott was nearer prime but coming up weight. Maybe Angott-Marquez/Hatton is a better comparison in that sense?

Originally Posted by Legend X

Castillo as good as Lou Ambers ?

So I take you completely ignored the LW division in the early 2000s? Yes Castillo is

[orriray59]

Originally Posted by Legend X

Who are all these tougher opponents Mayweather fought ?

It's not that Mayweather's opponents are so much better than Rocky's, it's just that he's beaten more of them.
Charles, Moore and Walcott were his three top wins and they were all past prime. They were still great boxers and Walcott arguably was better in his older years.
I'm not saying that all of Floyd's wins were prime, but it's hard to argue Cockell, LaStarza, Charles, Moore and Walcott against Hatton, Gatti, Hernandez, De La Hoya, Ortiz, Mosley, Corrales, Castillo, and Marquez.

Honestly, who have we got ? Corrales and Hatton aren't going down as ATGs,

Well shit, they're far closer to it than Cockell and LaStarza are.

and were not undisputed champions in the traditional weight classes.

What does being an undisputed champion or being in a traditional weight class matter to how good an opponent is? Would you rank the wins better if they were in a traditional weight class but everything else was the same? That's stupid logic.

They were good fighters. Baldomir and Gatti were not great fighters.

Gatti is a good win, considering how he got badly beaten up.

Mayweather has fought across 17 or 24 pounds, and every five or seven pounds there's another multitude of "champions" and "world contenders", maybe that's why he's being credited with superior opposition. You've got men there picking up titles and #1 ratings who would have struggled to get a top 10 rating back in the 1950s, when there were 8 champions and only 80 places for contenders across the whole sport.
Marciano fought in 1 division, and faced guys who were 10, 15, 24 pounds heavier than him.

All valid points.

[Legend X]

Originally Posted by PowerPuncher

Castillo was the top lightweight against a who's who of his era beating Stevie Johnson, Casamayor, Corrales, Lazcano, Bazan, Julio Diaz and for some arguably Mayweather himself. Ambers certainly didn't achieve more than Castillo

So I take you completely ignored the LW division in the early 2000s? Yes Castillo is

Lou Ambers has more and better wins.
I won't even list them. It's a very long list. Go check his record.

[Flea Man]

I'm rating Zivic over Judah on the basis that Zab is shite.

[orriray59]

Originally Posted by Legend X

Walcott was 12 - 13 pounds heavier.
Louis was about 30 pounds heavier.

Let me just chime in that in the higher weight classes weight disparity doesn't mean as much.

200lbs compared to 230lbs doesn't seem a massive difference.
How about 130 compared to 160?

[A.J.]

Originally Posted by orriray59

Mayweather. C'mon now, Marciano had his wins but Mayweather has Marquez, Corrales, Castillo, Ortiz, Mosley, Gatti, etc. He has dominated for many years now and rarely loses a round.
Marciano was great too but his resume was lacking.

Wow. I couldn't disagree more. Rocky's resume lacked?

Ask an old-timer if the likes of Gatti--Gatti!!??-- and Marquez, an old Mosley, and an Ortiz are within the same solar system of talent as Ezzard Charles, Jersey Joe Walcott, Archie Moore, etc., even an admittedly old Louis. Not to mention Rocky's proven ability to take the worst beating and yet Floyd's never having stepped in the ring with anyone expected to be able to land a solid punch on him because . . . uh . . . boxing is so weak today.

Marciano ranks much higher p4p than Mayweather on my list. Weird that I seem to be the only one favoring Marciano here . . . There are just so many ATG's that I can't picture Floyd surviving against, much less beating.