P4P Floyd Mayweather Jr Vs Sugar Ray Leonard

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by BitPlayerVesti, Oct 19, 2018.


  1. BitPlayerVesti

    BitPlayerVesti Boxing Drunkie Full Member

    8,584
    11,099
    Oct 28, 2017
    Alverez was older and had more fights than Hearns with some solid wins and two versions of the Super Welter title, it was a smaller weight drain than Lalonde, and Canelo had a massive size advantage and an absurdly favourable judge, and he got completely schooled.

    He more than a bit out of shape. How much credit would you give mayweather for beating anyone naturally smaller and out of shape? Let alone after loosing to them.

    You're not really selling it as a great career defining win.
     
  2. BitPlayerVesti

    BitPlayerVesti Boxing Drunkie Full Member

    8,584
    11,099
    Oct 28, 2017
    People keep making H2H arguments. I'm sure Stanley Ketchell could beat Henry Armstong too.

    That's. Not. How. P4P. Works.
     
  3. KuRuPT

    KuRuPT Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,462
    2,814
    Aug 26, 2011
    I agree with most of what you say, but a lot of the dislike for Mayweather came later in his career. Early on, when he was just Pretty Boy, before the Money May, he wasn't the polarizing personality that he later became. So I agree to an extent with what your saying from the mid point of May's career to the end. But from the jump, he wasn't disliked, and he still never even came close to the love SRL got at his start.
     
    Jel, BitPlayerVesti and PhillyPhan69 like this.
  4. Tin_Ribs

    Tin_Ribs Me Full Member

    4,406
    3,884
    Jun 28, 2009
    Floyd was a great fighter, I'll say that. Slick, honed, defensively astute, fast, intelligent and tough. But there a lot of asterisks and caveats that crop up too often throughout his career, mostly post-Castillo, that you don't see on the records of the great fighters that some hold him in company with. It's easy enough to pick apart the record of lots of good fighters, great ones even, but I find easier with Mayweather than with almost any other universally accepted great fighter. And it's not through bias or the weird insistence that other fighters get free passes where he doesn't etc. He has no wins on his record against a fighter who was great or even near-great at the time he faced them. Not De La Hoya, Castillo, Corrales, Alvarez, Hatton, Pac or Cotto. Oscar is still his best opponent for me, but the 154 version of Oscar even in his early days there wasn't a great fighter any more, not by some distance I think. Cleverer maybe and with a bit more rounded ringcraft, but too declined physically and lacking the size edge, speed, sharpness, all round movement and drive/focus that he had in the late nineties. His right hand had improved a bit from his early days but he was still very one-handed overall and lacking the key straight, fast and well-timed power punch to open up a defensive talent like Mayweather respite having a bit of an edge in size. That fight was very close, though it's fair to say that Mayweather adjusted over the second half, especially as DLH tired, and did enough to win. I think I scored it a draw iirc.

    I was never an advocate of Hatton, Corrales, Cotto, Alvarez as overall talents, good fighters though they were/are. Not even Marquez at lightweight and above despite his splendid achievements there. Not a great fighter anymore, didn't put the weight on correctly and ended up not in the best shape, naturally smaller and at a severe stylistic disadvantage due to his slow feet and difficulty in leading effectively against movers and skilled defensive operators.

    There's nothing hugely wrong with not having any outright great names on your win ledger. Floyd isn't the only one, nor is he the only one to be called out on it. It just doesn't sit well with me that he felt it necessary to have to stage-manage his career to preserve his undefeated record and fragile ego when his era has been largely mediocre in comparison to past ones. His reputation hangs on his longevity and how good he looks, which is obviously very bloody good, but he's bound to come under fire and severe scrutiny with the mixture of opponents being past it, weight-drained, undersized, lacking in the necessary skill to seriously threaten etc when he never took on allcomers in a way most greats do. And got pushed close against some of his better opponents who weren't great themselves at the time of the fight.

    I'm starting to ramble now, so am extricating myself before I lose the plot.
     
    surfinghb likes this.
  5. andy

    andy Member Full Member

    132
    15
    Oct 3, 2007

    Read back what you have just written. You have just listed an all time great resume.
     
    BitPlayerVesti likes this.
  6. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,524
    9,525
    Jul 15, 2008
    Ray Leonard.
     
  7. Tin_Ribs

    Tin_Ribs Me Full Member

    4,406
    3,884
    Jun 28, 2009
    Alvarez had looked pedestrian against Ryan Rhodes and Matthew Hatton. Hearns had bombed out a feared long reigning titlist in brutal fashion and had absolutely cut through the division, being voted Rings Fighter of the Year in 1980. He'd beaten better fighters than Alvarez had and done it in more convincing fashion. The number of fights carries less significance. He was just a better fighter regardless.

    Duran looked like he carried the excess weight and poor conditioning no worse than Marquez did, and Leonard didn't stipulate catchweights and then break them. Duran had more than grown into a solid welter anyway by that point and didn't look outsized against Leonard, nor was at a stylistic disadvantage or as significantly above his best weight. Yeah, Duran wasn't at his best by a ways, though you're over-egging the situation. I've already stated my position on this and don't need to repeat myself. Duran is one of my favourites and I don't care for Leonard tbh, but you seem intent on discrediting the win, so crack on.

    I don't need to sell Kalule as a career-defining win for Leonard when Leonard beat legends like Hearns, Benitez, Duran and Hagler. Just as on par or thereabouts with Floyd's best wins, and I've seen more than enough of his career to feel comfortable in that stance even if Ayub wasn't on the level of some of Leonards other scalps; it doesn't alter the fact that Kalule was an excellent fighter himself imo. Now if Mayweather had beaten a fighter of Kalule's calibre at the stage Kalule was when Leonard beat him, that's pretty easy to put that win near the top of Mayweathers list even if they were the same size. How many of Kalule's fights have you seen other than his past prime efforts? I'm not saying you've seen little or nothing, it's a genuine question. I actually like you as a poster, but you seem to have made your mind up on this rightly or wrongly, and I don't do pointless drawn out debates. Especially when I think someone doesn't want to hear. Peace.
     
  8. Tin_Ribs

    Tin_Ribs Me Full Member

    4,406
    3,884
    Jun 28, 2009
    I dont need to, me old flower, I read it carefully enough as I was typing it. If you think it's a list of atg fighters who were still near-great/great at the time of the fights, bob on for you.
     
  9. Tin_Ribs

    Tin_Ribs Me Full Member

    4,406
    3,884
    Jun 28, 2009
    I'm hysterically tired and probably haven't said what I wanted to in the way I wanted to. That's a 60 hour week for you. And a great, fizzing, ****-off caffeine crash while looking after a small, demented child who makes me sniff his slippers for laughs.
     
  10. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    53,036
    44,984
    Apr 27, 2005
    Jesus :eeeeek:
     
  11. KuRuPT

    KuRuPT Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,462
    2,814
    Aug 26, 2011
    I think the first part of this is a little disingenuous. I mean, Alvarez having more fights than Hearns at that stage in their careers means F all, when most of those guys were tomato cans who nobody even knows who they are. The caliber of competition they faced in the part of their career pre SRL and pre May for them respectively, aren't even close caliber wise. Just because Alvarez had more fights, doesn't mean they were fights good enough to equal the experience Tommy got by slaughtering Cuevas alone.
     
  12. BitPlayerVesti

    BitPlayerVesti Boxing Drunkie Full Member

    8,584
    11,099
    Oct 28, 2017
    Read the last line. The entire point is how people are so quick to inflate the asterisks of Floyd's wins, while negating the asterisks of Leonard's wins.
     
    PhillyPhan69 likes this.
  13. BitPlayerVesti

    BitPlayerVesti Boxing Drunkie Full Member

    8,584
    11,099
    Oct 28, 2017
    Hearns maybe had the better win, though Canelo had a solid win over Trout, but most of his opposition pre-Leonard was terrible, Fighting Jim, Eddie Gazo, Luis Primera, Randy Shields, Pablo Baez, not exactly the elite.
     
  14. KuRuPT

    KuRuPT Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,462
    2,814
    Aug 26, 2011
    Have you seen Canelo's pre Trout and Lara? It's a joke.
     
  15. BitPlayerVesti

    BitPlayerVesti Boxing Drunkie Full Member

    8,584
    11,099
    Oct 28, 2017
    Jose Figueroa was a beast though.