Why does everyone rate the fab 4 greater than Floyd

Floyd didn't fight Hagler or Leonard.

Hearns destroys Mayweather. He's too good for Mayweather. There's levels to this stuff.

 

It's not about who beat Hearns mate, we're looking solely from Floyd's perspective here, against the WW version of Tommy.

Tommy was beaten by Marvin and Barkley who were stronger, more aggressive, and much more powerful than Floyd. They out fought him to get the job done. Floyd couldn't have replicated that though, because those fights were at higher weights, and as great as Floyd is/was, he doesn't possess those same attributes that they possessed.

I think Tommy would have found it easy against Floyd. Because he'd have known that Floyd had no power, which would have meant there'd have been no chance of a shootout like the one he had with Leonard. I also believe that Floyd would have fought very defensively, due to his lack of power and the disparity in size.

I'm not hating on Floyd, it's just that it would have been a horrible match up for stylistically. Again, I have no issue with anyone ranking Floyd as the overall better fighter.

 

How can anyone watch Hagler vs Duran and not be impressed, especially Duran? The dude was a pure fighter.

You have to go way back to find a better pure fighter than Duran. Pacquaio comes close, but Duran is just a straight up pure fighter.

They don't make them like that anymore. Contrast that with Mayweather who is scared to fight. End of story. He won't "fight" anyone that can fight. ****, Broner would beat the **** outta Floyd if Floyd actually didn't run.

 

I've seen Hearns destroyed in the ring many times...I aint never seen Floyd destroyed in the ring though and Floyd been fighting 20 years professionally and considered P4P since 1998. So I dont think you can make an argument that Floyd aint fought nobody.

 

His best win is JLC. So compared to Hearns he fought nobody.

 

Maybe not in a P4P sense, but Floyd would have been at a disadvantage against those guys.

 

The welterweight version of Hearns was not the best version of Hearns, if anything he was better at 154 where he didn't have to burn as much weight! At 147 he was skinny, lanky, malnourished and any solid punch to the body or chin had him on ***** street!

 

You're just being silly.

Floyd would have had zero chance against Tommy.

Look at their styles.

Look at the size disparity.

You're seriously telling me that you'd have bet money on Floyd?

 

147 is not the best version of Hearns, but 147 isn't the best version of Mayweather either.

 

How you figure that, what advantage at 147 does Leonard or Duran have over Floyd? Tommy is taller and longer, okay I'll give you that, but Leonard and Duran would just be two more evenly sized opponents for Floyd to face at welterweight. 147 is 147.

And if you think by chance that they are somehow bigger, stronger, faster, etc...than Floyd then show me when Floyd has ever not been able to defeat a bigger, stronger, faster, taller opponent. Wasn't Canelo bigger and stronger? Oscar, Cotto, Mosley, Castillo, Chico, Ortiz? Weren't they all bigger and stronger than Floyd? You know what Floyd has that none of them...even the Fab 4 have...superior IQ and ring intelligence. That will never be easy to defeat, ask any of Floyd's 49 opponents

 

Dear me.

Would Floyd have FOUGHT Tommy like Ray, Marvin and Barkley did?

No!

Why?

Because they were all bigger, stronger and more powerful than Floyd.

Do you understand?

Floyd doesn't possess their attributes, which means he couldn't have replicated what they did.

We are looking solely from Floyd's perspective here and nobody else's.


Tell me how Floyd could have beaten him. Give me an opinion that's based on logic.

 

I recall that Floyd vs Chico was being billed and compared to Ray vs Hearns. Now your going to tell me that Chico not as good as Hearns arent you. Okay but who was saying that in 2001 when Chico had won every fight by Knockout using his taller, longer more powerful frame to destroy all his competition. Well he got in the ring with a superior IQ and got demolished by the smaller weaker Mayweather. Floyd would more than hold his own against Welterweight in history. Thats what ATG's do!

 

We're talking about a fantasy fight where both guys were at their best.

 

You've lost all credibility when you attempted to compared Chico to Hearns.

We cannot allow you to do that.

 

Ray was just as skilled as Floyd, just as fast, but he was bigger, stronger, and MORE POWERFUL. Those were huge advantages.

Yes, Floyd beat guys who were bigger and more powerful than him. But he never beat an ATG who were in their prime, and he never faced anyone who was as good as he was.

He fought nobody who was anywhere near the level of a peak version of Ray. So listing the fighters you have doesn't mean much here.