Floyd haters: Isn't it about time to discuss him in the same breath as SRR?

The problem is the will of Mayweather to fight the best. He has been doing better as of late, but he has had a lot of moments where he didn't fight dangerous guys and took easier fights instead. Even this fight, which I think he would have won either way, was diminished by the catch-weight. Floyd always gives people SOME reason to doubt the legitimacy of the win. I know that isn't what people want to hear, but that IS why he doesn't get the same level of respect. I personally think he is probably the best defensive fighter the sport has ever seen, I also think he has some of the best rings smarts of any fighter ever. But he is also a little too cautious when choosing fighters, and he always leaves a little room for doubt because of that. Also, he isn't active enough (though that could be changing).

 

Floyd is one of the best, maybe the best, ever, defensively.


Offensively ?

Not so much.

On balance, the lad is loaded with skills but not the most skilled overall, IMO.

 

Look at the winning percentage of the fighters Ray Robinson fought and compare them to Floyd Mayweather, whose opposition have over a combined 92.0+% winning percentage.

I'm not talking about Ray Robinson when he was in his 40's and losing to guys with under .500 records which DID happen, I'm talking about his ridiculous reign at WW when he fought way too many tomato cans to list. I mean seriously, just go on boxrec and look at all the glorified club fighters he fought at WW and MW.

Now don't get me wrong, he has a lot of great wins under his resume. The Armstrong win isn't that big of a victory considering Henry was a shell of his former self by the time he took on a young, hungry SRR. But he has some terrific wins against HOF fighters.

But let's be real, over half of his fights were against tomato cans/club fighters. That can't be questioned, just gaze at his actual record and there's nothing to dispute there. Different eras completely as fighters back than could fight 3 or 4 times a month and get away with fighting guys who had 30+ losses on their resumes. FLoyd would get ostracized if he took on some of those club fighters in todays game.

but once again, different eras altogether. They didn't make much money back than and had to fight 10-15+ times a year. Had Robinson fought in todays era, he wouldn't fight more than 2-3 times a year and he would've fought guys with much better records.

Still has some great wins in his resume like Graziano, basilio, Gavilan, Raging Bull, etc. But FLoyd also has some good wins and I'd say at least 4 or 5 of his wins will be considered in about 10-15 years down the line to be great ones as they enter the HOF (JLC, Oscar, Mosley, Cotto are sure fire guys---and who knows how many other guys will find a way to squeak into the HOF after their careers are done.)

FLoyd in my eyes is getting very close to the top 10 fighters of all time depending on how he ends his last 4 fights. If he wasn't so inactive since 2007, he could climb even further.

Those ATG's that have 100+ wins should have their resumes dissected and its easily noticeable that over half their fights were against nobodies. If FLoyd fought in that era, He could've easily notched up over 100 victories. A lot of scrubs that help stat pad some of the ATG fighters resumes- from Armstrong to SRR to Greb, etc. The only guy in the top 10 who has quality wins in almost his entire resume is Ray leonard, especially after he won the WW title he didn't take on tomato cans.

The old time boxing fans don't want to include anyone from the new generations because they're so enamored with these 100 + win resumes. But seriously, the majority of their resume were against garbage AAU type of fighters, guys who wouldn't even be considered a top 25 fighter in their own division. But chalk it up to different eras I guess.

 

All fair and good.

And if you look back at JG's opening post, you will notice that, despite his disdain for Floyd, he is trying to give him props by comparing him to SRR, asking what more can Floyd do to be put up there.

I (and others) have mentioned his duck of Pac as an unfortunate barrier.

I won't say it wrecks Floyd's career, but it does cast a cloud. The one thing the man is missing is a signature win and a victory over Pac, after Pac-Cotto, Pac-Hatton and Pac-Oscar would have filled the bill.

Even without the Pac scalp, I think last night's win elevates him, and despite being a Pac fan, I have Mayweather higher than I've seen him ranked by his own fans. I think he will probably finish inside the top 20, and if he were to move up and clean out 160 (not impossible) he could be knocking on the door of the top 10.

 

Great discussion,John.You say here what I think.I wanted Alvarez to win,and he got toyed with.Theres been talk of activity here.I only remember Robinson in his decline,over here in Britain against Terry Downes and Mick Leahy,2 good fighters he'd have handled at his peak.Same with Denny Moyer and Joey Archer.This will never happen with Money Mayweather,hell go before he gets to that stage.Different times.But yes,he's up there with Ray,I think.Hes more consistent.Robinson should never have lost to Turpin.Itd be a bit like Floyd losing to Amir.Just aint gonna happen.A victory over Garcia would seal it for me.Not keen on him,but he's a truly great fighter.

 

Just read Cuchulcains post,speculating on a move to middleweight.If he DID manage to beat Golovkin,that seals it altogether for me.Best fighter who ever lived.And Id hate to say it.

 

I think Floyd will keep fighting until he finally gets his brains beat out. Floyd will never have enough money to retire. As 50-Cent says: it fight-spend-fight for FMJ.

 

I just find it odd people rate so many fighters so highly and yet they've never actually seen them fight.

How many people have actually seen Sam Langford fight aside from maybe 2 or 3 very choppy, grainy videos of him? I know a lot about his accomplishments, being one of the most avoided fighters in the history of the sport and fighting guys from lightweight to heavyweight and never bein able to ascertain a title because no titlebelt holder wanted to fight him (Jack Johnson seemingly had no interest in fighting him except once when Langford was very raw still and only about 180 lbs,) yet he's rated SO highly on everyone's P4P lists?

I don't bother going into the classic forum because none of those guys saw the ATG's fight unless they're 80 years old or older and aren't suffering from dementia. They base their knowledge from reading books on boxers and old newspaper clips of newspaper decisions made by columnists who were heavily influenced by the mafia. They never saw Dempsey or Tunney fight in their primes yet they speak about them in such volumes as if they were actually ringside at their fights.

Seriously you think someone like Jack Dempsey would've been able to handle a prime Lewis? Lewis would've had him out of the ring by the 6th or 7th round.

None of the so called "historians" want to factor in that fighters today are stronger, faster and have much more versatile training regimens at their disposal compared to fighters of the past. Also, fighters of today who are considered tops in their divisions can't get away with fighting some of the AAU fighters that the supposed "ATG's" have on their resumes that helped them stat pad up to 100+ victories.

I'm in my 30's and have been watching boxing for 25+ years now. I saw some of the greatest fighters in their primes and I can say without hesitation that Floyd is an ATG. He would've mandhandled guys like Joe Gans and Benny leonard at 135 if they were in their primes.

 

Rojo,I sincerely hope you're right,and that I live to see it.

 

hahaha wtf

 

Seriously, though. I wouldn't wish what happened to Muhammed Ali to happen to anyone - not even Floyd who I consider a disease.

In fact, nothing would make me happier than to see Floyd change...to change his outlook, to rid himself of all those sychophants that hang around him, sell his stupid cars and bling and start banking some money so he can retire comfortably.

Men can change for the better before it's too late. George Foreman did.

 

He would have definitely had a shot with his natural abilities if he hadn't had been such a cherrypicker for so long. SRR fought just about every tough opponent there was too fight, and usually more than once, Floyd's career has been so spread out over the last several years, and he has not fought quite a few tough opponents that he should have when it was time to define his legacy. Floyd should have been the one to bring Pacquiao back down to earth. He was willing to fight a much bigger, stronger, younger harder punching opponent in Alvarez last night. No reason he shouldn't have given the fans and the boxing historians what would have been the fight of this century.

 

You're a lunatic if you think anyone will believe your bull**** that you even met and spoke with SRR in real life, much less in his prime in the 40's.

 

Mayweather is without a doubt the TBE, the best ever.

 

No,wouldn't wish permanent injury on him,just defeat.I think he may be trying to court a better image for himself in GB as he was on Bunce saying how much he appreciated his British fans.Of course,theres money in that as well
You mention Foreman.Good example.Ali wasn't too popular at the start,either.