Floyd's record after these 7 fights??

Some of the fighters listed (SRR, Armstrong, Walcott, Napoles, SRL, Duran, Hearns) are bigger people than FMJ, who turned pro at 19 weighing 131 meaning they might be more "natural" welterweights. Against some of them FMJ would be giving up height and reach.

In FMJ's favor, he has never lost a pro fight, he stays in shape, and he doesn't have substance abuse issues. All of those things mean a lot in boxing where there is a history of fighters not showing up ready to fight because of their out of the ring lifestyle. To my knowledge, FMJ has never shown up for a fight in anything less than excellent condition.

Also in FMJ's favor, he has been around and trained at a high level of boxing since he was a child. He is extremely skilled, and he fights as relaxed as anybody, combine being relaxed with his conditioning, he's not going to have stamina issues. The fighters listed would all be major challenges but FMJ would be a major challenge for any of them too. I don't bet on sports but if I had to bet I'd as soon bet on FMJ as any of the listed opponents if they fought.

 

I don't believe Mayweather has a hope against Robinson, Hearns, and Leonard. Just awful stylistic match ups. They are faster then him at welter, have considerable physical advantages, and masters at taking apart technicians.

Napoles only really lost twice in his prime, a flukely cut and an ill advised challenge of Monzon, who would have whippped Mayweather too. I think Napoles and Mayweather are evenly matched at Welter. Would be a hell of a fight. Napoles might take 2 out of 3.

Armstrong, Duran, and Walcott are wild cards and maybe not at their best at welter. They wouldn't hold any physical advantage over Mayweather, however, these three guys are arguably the greatest three to ever lace them up and had success at even higher weights in certain match ups. I think they can beat May at welter, but it would take a top effort from them.

If forced to give a record..maybe he goes 1-6 at best, if damn lucky 2-5. Hell of a gauntlet.

 

you'd put money on floyd beating Robinson at welter?

 

Yeah, that's just crazy.

 

His ass would no longer be saying "There's no blueprint", that's for sure.

 

0~7 with 5 concussions. Proven 15 rd greats against a 12 rd fighter. Proven great against a cherry picker. Now, if they were all in their first pro bout, the 2-5.

 

Floyd and Napoles are not evenly matched at 147. Robinson, Leonard, and Hearns are the only three welters in history I'd favor over a prime Napoles.

I can't see anyway that Floyd beats the Napoles of the first Cokes fight.

 

Wow, tough lineup for anyone fighting three weight classes above his most dominant weight! Gut reaction is that he probably wins two or so, but who knows?

 

Split

 

I'd pick him over Napoles who was smooth, but not quick enough, and Walcott because he was so short, Mayweather would out box him.

Armstrong was just too active, and SRR too big and talented.

Duran could be out boxed and had issues with quick types in Benitez, and wasn't as great above light weight. We are talking welter weight, so I think Mayweather would win a decision that few would like, but most would say he earned.

SRL had amazing skills, speed, and power. I'd pick him, but leave a small amount of room for an upset.

Hearns is all wrong for Mayweather. Too fast, powerful and long. Probably Mayweather's toughest match up.

So I'd guess 3-7.

Mayweather was such a *****, it might take some time before the anti types watch him and again and say to themselves, he was special. Newer hard core boxing fans and future historians to be will view Floyd better than the older hard core fans and older historians do. That much I'm certain of.

The International Boxing Research did a member poll back in 2005 for the top 20 welterweights. A decent effort. I think they nailed the top three, but I'd have Hearns a bit higher and Walcott, Ross, Gavilan and Griffith a bit lower. I'd place Mayweather around #7-9.

Updated June 2005

Sugar Ray Robinson
Sugar Ray Leonard
Henry Armstrong
Barbados Joe Walcott
Barney Ross
Kid Gavilan
Emile Griffith
Thomas Hearns
Jose Napoles
Mickey Walker
Jimmy McLarnin
Jack Britton
Ted (Kid) Lewis
Carmen Basilio
Tommy Ryan
Luis Rodriguez
Pernell Whitaker
Wilfred Benitez
Charley Burley
Roberto Duran

 

I don't see how that works, a year after the Cokes fight he lost to Billy Backus. He didn't fall off the horse that quickly. He was only 29 and 30 respectfully in those fights. I would say his prime ended after the Monzon thrashing.

I still favor him to win a series against Floyd.

 

1-6,,2-5 at best gets killed against Leonard, Duran ,Hearns,,Armstrong,Ray Robinson, Walcott is the only fight I might call for Floyd

 

I'm guessing all these fights are taking place at 147? Because that's instrumental to a couple of my picks here.

If they're all at Welterweight, then I'd have Mayweather going 3-4. I'd take him to beat Duran (Lightweight is a different kettle of fish), Armstrong and Walcott. Think he more often than not loses to both of the Sugar Rays, Napoles and Hearns without being disgraced against any of them.

Floyd's a great Welterweight, but was an absolutely sensational Super-Feather, Lightweight and Light-Welterweight, where he hit his highest levels of virtuosity in my opinion. He's giving away a fair chunk of size to some of these guys listed above (who were virtuosos themselves), so at 147 I think you start finding just a few more historical fighters who could beat him than you would between 130 and 140. But as I said, I don't think he gets disgraced against any of them.

Hearns the toughest ask for me, in terms of size, style and how he matches up to Mayweather. Could see it panning out similarly to Hearns-Benitez, with Floyd boxing well, keeping Tommy honest and not taking too much heavy punishment, but struggling to get in to the fight offensively and getting a little intimidated and disheartened after a few rounds of getting stuck outside the scoring range.