Why does everyone rate the fab 4 greater than Floyd

Duran lost to DeJesus, Benitez, and Leonard, quitting. I can't see him winning unless Floyd sits on the ropes. Floyd was extra careful not to do that in riskier fights like against Pac and Canelo.

 

because the Fab Four were fighters, although Leonard on occasion did play safety first. Mickey Mouse Floyd's running, clinching and ducking however, are legendary.

 

atsch atsch

I'm saying it's unfair to do a fantasy fight between Floyd and Tommy at WW, because Floyd peaked at the lower weights, and the cards would have been stacked hugely in Tommy's favour.

Reading comprehension isn't your strong point.

Now why do you keep mentioning where Ray, Marvin and Barkley had Tommy in trouble?

What relevance does that have in a fantasy fight between Tommy and Floyd, when he did not possess the strength and power that those guys had?

atsch

Floyd could not have replicated what they did. He's a 5'8 WW with zero power.

F*ck me!

How many more times????????

You say Tommy gave up his height and reach when he was clipped and hurt.

How would Floyd have hurt him to have taken him out of his rhythm?

You can't even answer any simple questions that are put to you.

Wilf had no offense? What offense does Floyd have a WW? Pot shotting slower fighters who he had a reach advantage over?


You're a joke!

 

Why don't you list every welterweight that beats Floyd easy? Apparently beating Floyd is simple

 

I bet all the fab four could fight his resume in the same condition he fought those fighters and definitely come out undefeated and in better fashion

 

Why don't you stop answering questions with questions and getting all upset just because someone predicts a defeat for your hero?

I don't think there's a huge list of WW's I'd have comfortably picked to have beaten Floyd.

It would have to be someone who'd have held significant advantages over him.

I've never said nor implied that lots of fighters would have easily beaten Floyd at WW.

Once again, you're behaving like a small child.


My predictions aren't based on bias, hate or nostalgia.

My predictions are based on a CLASH OF STYLES.


Where's my breakdown?

How many times do I have to ask you?

PLEASE give me a logical breakdown of how you think Floyd could/would have beaten Tommy Hearns.

 

Use his speed, use his experience, use his IQ, use his natural born skill and talent. Is Tommy Hearns a great inside fighter? Does Tommy have great defense? Does he have freE stamina? Does he make a lot of mistakes in the ring? Does he ever punch himself out? Tommy is a great fighter and is formidable but he has many weaknesses, Floyd would simply have to exploit his weaknesses, which is exactly what Floyd does.

 

My breakdown is big right by Hearns followed by a PBF stanky leg, standing 8 then about 12ish seconds of predator-wounded prey til the ref waives it off

To me fantasy Floyd belongs at a lower weight

 

Do you think Floyd could make Hearns miss badly and frustrate him? Peak Floyd, or even the Floyd from the Marquez fight, was very hard to hit unless he didn't respect your power.. He would definitely respect Tommy's.. Unless you think Tommy could throw enough or land enough per round to keep Floyd's output very low, this is something to think about.. He could do it for enough to win the fight or he could not.. I don't think Floyd's style is Taylor made for anyone...

 

My thoughts as well. The idea that Floyd could beat Hearns or SRL is laughable if you've actually watched all three fighters for any length of time. Truthfully I don't see him beating Duran either, but at least it's plausible.

 

Still no breakdown.

Why am I not surprised.

Just more blanket statements.

Was Tommy Hearns an inside fighter?

Did he ever punch himself out? No, not when he boxed. He was only in trouble when he fought. Again, Floyd wouldn't have fought him. Because Floyd didn't fight. He was a defensive BOXER.

Again, Tommy's biggest weakness was when he was fought under pressure. Again, how could Floyd have FOUGHT him to have exploited those weaknesses?

Come on, give me a laugh.

Floyd could not have fought Tommy in the way Ray, Marvin and Barkley did. How many more times?????

Floyd is a defensive minded, 5'8 boxer with zero power. Smaller boxers did not faze Tommy Hearns. Powerful, pressure fighters fazed Tommy.

So no, Floyd simply couldn't have exploited Tommy's weaknesses.

Stop embarrassing yourself and turn it in.

 

You haven't broken anything down either. All you keep doing is discounting what he's saying and basing your opinion off of what other guys did to Hearns, what Hearns did to other guys and the caliber of opponent Hearns fought. The same damn thing Code Red is doing. You'll be able to talk boxing when you understand his point.

 

First off, in my honest opinion, Floyd would never under any circumstances have signed for the fight. I'm only assuming he would have done for the sake of the debate.

No, I don't think Floyd would have frustrated Tommy, because I think he'd have been so wary of Tommy's firepower, he'd have been in a defensive mindset from the opening bell. I think Tommy would have kept him at range on the end of his jab, which would have nullified Floyd's offense. So I think Floyd's punch output would have been so low, there's no way he could have put enough rounds in the bank.

If Floyd had been bigger with more firepower, I'd have given him a huge chance, because his fighting style would have been completely different to what we saw. Floyd had the skills and the speed, but he didn't have any power to gain Tommy's respect. But I don't envisage a blow out for Tommy like many other people do. I envisage quite a lacklustre, cagey fight where Tommy would have decisioned him.

 

What are you talking about Billy?

We're having the same debate across 3 different threads.

I've given him a breakdown, I've given him facts, I've given him logical opinions, and I've given him lots of examples and an*alogies to back up my points.

He's offered nothing in return.

I gave him a huge page full of text and asked him for a breakdown, yet all he could muster up in response, was:

"Floyd's never been beaten, he could adapt"

He's so upset, he's accused everyone who's picked against Floyd, as being biased haters who are on a nostalgia trip.

Basically, he's an idiot.

His main argument for Floyd winning, is that lesser fighters than Floyd beat Tommy.

He's just a rider who can't accept his hero may have been beaten.

 

Yea beacuse Hagler looked shot right :rofl