Why does everyone rate the fab 4 greater than Floyd

As for the initial point - it's partly historical bias, partly romanticism and partly valid.

Many of the Fab 4 were top 3 or 4 all-time at one weight, but most, if not all, were fairly average at the rest. I think they get the credit they deserve for fighting each other at those weights but the name didn't really mean much above the weight they were truly great at in my books.

Only really Leonard and Duran can claim to have big wins against one of the others at their best weights.

None of them really dominated more than one weight class, which is not something you can say for Mayweather and even Pac.

 

That was brutal.

FLOSADA?

:rofl

 

Is that supposed to be a breakdown?

Yes, Tommy had weaknesses. But could Floyd have exposed them?

Tommy's biggest weakness was his chin. But that wouldn't have mattered against Floyd, as Floyd was a small WW with no power, who wouldn't have fought Tommy in the way that Ray, Marvin and Barkley did.

You just can't seem to understand the old adage of "styles make fights"

You could tell me that Marvin wasn't as great as Floyd. And if you did, I honestly wouldn't argue with you. But Marvin would always have caused Tommy more issues due to his style and his attributes.

Why don't you understand that?

You can tell me that Tommy and Ray were better than Roy Jones. Again, I won't argue. But they wouldn't have beaten him at SMW.

Put Floyd and Tommy under the microscope, and Floyd could well come out on top as the overall better fighter. But he would not have been able to have beaten Tommy due to the factors I've noted.

 

Ray tried to outbox Hearns and started to get busted up.

He won the fight by turning up the heat and fighting him in a shootout.

Floyd would not have had that option.

Yes, Floyd being a defensive master, meant he could certainly have avoided a lot of Tommy's shots. But the problem would have been his lack of offense. How would have banked the majority of the rounds?

 

Butbutbut ... but Floyd is a DEFENSIVE MASTER :nut He's impossible to hit maaaaannn :nut

 

He hasn't even taken into account what Floyd would had to have done offensively to have gotten a decision.

 

:deal

 

What lack of offense, Floyd outlands nearly all his opponents, is Tommy Hearns superman to you? He was not unbeatable, why is it hard for you to understand that? Every fighter don't have to KO Tommy to win, he can be decisioned like any other fighter. And once again, at 147, Floyd has a great chance against dehydrated skinny Tommy.

 

My patience is wearing thin now.

 

How many people decisioned Tommy in a career spanning almost 70 fights?

Floyd would not have had a great chance.

Just look at how he fought at WW.

He wouldn't have out landed a great boxer who was 6'1, with a 78" reach.

What's wrong with you?

Floyd was much smaller, and at WW he wasn't aggressive and he didn't possess any power.

Tommy had an ATG jab along with his great reach.

So how would Floyd have been able to have outboxed him for a decision win?

What fighter who was significantly smaller than Tommy managed to outbox him?

There wasn't one.

 

And how many people KO'd or even knocked down Floyd? I will just be honest with you, Tommy not smart enough or disciplined enough to beat Floyd. He often fights stupid when things dont go his way. Floyd will take advantage of those weaknesses. Floyd is not as small as you think, I've seen Tommy KO'd, exposed, on the canvas too many times to believe a fighter like Floyd can't win against him.

 

How many people has Floyd fought with Hearns' raw power? If Mosley can clip Floyd I'm pretty sure that Hearns can clip him as well. Imagine if Hearns caugh Floyd with the same punch that Mosley caught him with. He would've knocked him out