What's the best argument against FMJ being the greatest?

Whether their styles would have been a problem for Floyd is a purely hypothetical, though. I personally think Margarito would suit Floyd quite well. Yes, he was big and had a high output but was slow and and open as well. I think Floyd would have seen anything he tried to do a mile away. His jab to the midsection would be a great weapon against someone like Margarito.

Williams seems more of a handful to me.

 

Yeah.

I think Tony would have intimidated him though.

 

It does seem Floyd wasn't that eager to face him. He gave an interview where he hinted at that.

 

Do anyone know what happened 2003-2004? Peak years for Floyd but he faced no one remotely interesting. There probably wasn't that many good match-ups to be made, though.

 

For me, it's just a case of certain fights either not happening at the optimum time or not happening at all. I'd like to have seen Mayweather vs Margarito in 2006; vs Cotto in 2008; vs Pacquiao in 2010.

People can call it cherry picking or ducking or whatever they like. I don't care too much for the reason why these fights didn't happen when they could have; just that they didn't.

 

Sure, but where are the cases where every fight happened at the time one would have wanted it?

And the only ones of those which really is an issue is the Pac fight.

 

People were talking about Tszyu as lb4lb #1 at the time. Judah, Cotto and Hatton were at their physical bests, etc.

 

Paul Williams isn't getting much shine in this thread. He's definitely better than Margarito, and would've been a much harder fight for Mayweather. Without that Martinez-esc KO shot, I can't see him neutralising Paul's ridiculous workrate, he didn't really have the style at 147 to match it either; too minimalist.

 

I'm not saying it's uncommon for any ledger to carry a few question marks; whether it be potential opponents missed, or fights that took place later than when they would have been more relevant. But, FMJ's career is kinda littered with these cases.

I didn't mention Williams, Wright, Martinez, Hatton at 140 and Mosley, before he needed a zimmer frame. I've picked on the ones I personally thought robbed the boxing fans of much better fights.

Let's face it, Margarito in 2006 would have been a lot more intriguing than the Baldomir exhibition bout and "four-round fighter" Judah, put together.

Cotto in 2008 would have carried a much bigger question mark, than when they eventually met in 2012 (four years later).

Whilst I thought the FMJ/Cotto bout was one of his more watchable fights, what we got instead of the above was fairly routine and a lot less to get excited about, in my opinion.

To my mind the delayed Pacquaio bout is not the only real issue; it's just the biggest out of a crop of issues.

 

Tsuy was out for surgery during that period. Hatton hadn't won a title yet. Judah at this time seem like a interesting fight, though.

 

Wright and Martinez were several weight classes above. I can't really express disappointment in a fighter because he doesn't face every bigger fighter that could have been interesting. The same as I don't blame Robinson for not facing Burley, Williams etc.

Cotto was 32 coming off good wins when facing Floyd and Floyd beat him easily despite being 35. This is not an intriguing "what could have been" had this happened five years earlier. Floyd would have beat him even easier is what would have happened.

Hatton was in his prime too and undefeated.

What I do agree with is that Judah was a cherry pick. Margarito would have been better.

 

154 was a division FMJ wasn't too concerned about venturing into against Oscar, Canelo and [eventually] Cotto. I'm sure a bout with Wright at, 154, had been considered in 2005. There was also small window during which Martinez was recognized as the number 1 at 154. Again, it was a possibility.

Though, admittedly, whilst viable, neither of these match-ups, as interesting as they might have been, were the most significant of misses.

I disagree. Cotto was competing beyond his best fighting weight, had taken a shellacking off of both Margarito and Pacquiao, which I think changed him, and his good wins consisted of a one-legged Yuri Foreman; a Mayorga, who hadn't had a decent win for 8 years and a shell of Margarito.

To be honest - Cotto looking as good as he did against Mayweather, at that stage of his career, is a testament to him and the class boxer that he was - but, pre-Margarito and Pacquiao, it's a much better fight, in my opinion.

I am not sure Hatton was prime by then. Theories were abound, around the mid-'00s, that Hatton had probably peaked before he even faced Tszyu. It became quite apparent that he was capable of struggling against mediocre opposition, such as Urango and he'd surely had a tough time at Welterweight, before that, against Collazo.

The Castillo win flattered to deceive and Hatton wanted the money so, he's going to take the job at 147, isn't he? But, both the timing and the weight limit favored FMJ. Of that, I am certain.

Well - at least we agree on something

 

It's not misses not fighting guys two weight classes above. If it were everyone would look bad. It's a bonus when it happens.

"Cotto was fighting beyond his best weight". Floyd was smaller than Cotto if anything, so in that case it was a worse weight for him. He was also, of course, older

And you forgot to mention that Cotto went on to destroy Martinez and Geale and give Canelo a good fight. But of course those will mean nothing because everyone is a "shell" "shot" "green" or whatever. Cotto has the unique distinction as the only former JWW to win and defend the lineal MW title while shot.

There really is no basis to make this out like Cotto was the one more past his best.

He was younger and probably bigger in the ring and won, what, three rounds? Floyd handled him easily.

He wasn't prime undefeated at 29? Two years after his best win?

And the higher weight limit is going to favour the smaller fighter in the ring? It was a plus for Hatton not to have to drain extra?

If we assume something not apparent at the time was wrong with everyone of Floyd's opponents, then, yes, his resume will suffer.

 

I have always been a fan of Ray Leonard. And I was never really much of a fan of Mayweather, because of his style.

Frankly, I was going to hop on this thread and say the biggest argument against him being the GOAT was his terrible KO percentage. He just wasn't much of a puncher at all.

But some of the bashing of Mayweather here is a joke. Honestly.

For instance, how did Mayweather beat a "green" Canelo but Leonard beat a 'prime' Hearns?

How was Hearns PRIME? HE was 22 years old. He was a goddamn skeleton and weighed 145 pounds THE DAY of the fight (which Emanual Steward apologized for). Hearns never fought at welterweight again. He moved up to middleweight three months later. And he fought off and on for another 25 years!!!! But that was prime Hearns? 22 years old and 145 pounds?

How does a 36-year-old, nearing the end Mayweather beating Canelo NOT count because Canelo was "green" but Leonard beating a 22-year-old emaciated Hearns DOES count?

And Juan Manuel Marquez was the REIGNING Lightweight champion and Mayweather was the Welterweight Champion who had been out of the ring for two years when he faced Marquez.

Lightweight champs have moved up and fought welterweight champs in boxing FOREVER. Hell, Marquez moved up to super lightweight to win titles there in his next couple fights, and moved up to welterweight again and lost a bad decision to Pac in a welterweight title fight after that.

How was the Marquez fight not a good win? Didn't Robinson beat some lightweight champs who were moving up? Was Robinson coming off two years out of the ring when he did it? Didn't Duran move up from Lightweight and beat Leonard?

Did the Marquez win "not count" because Marquez lost so badly? Is that why? Because Marquez was good enough after that to pick up two more world titles and knock Pacquiao cold. So he certainly wasn't shot.

And how is Mayweather beating Cotto not a good win but Leonard beating Benitez was somehow great?

Benitez had JUST turned 21 when he fought Leonard. It was his last fight at welter. Benitez had one win on his record over Cervantes when he was 17 that made him a star in boxing and a decision over Palomino in Carlos's last fight before he tried to become an actor. But Benitez wasn't dominant in either and didn't tend to dominate anyone. Most thought he lost BOTH fights with Bruce Curry.

And most thought Benitez didn't hit his "prime" and didn't fight his best and wasn't at his most powerful until he got to junior middleweight, where he headed immediately after the Leonard fight, and which is where he wanted to rematch Leonard. But Leonard preferred Kalule, which apparently isn't considered a "duck" anymore but wasn't "praised" at the time considering a Benitez-Leonard rematch at 154 was certainly a natural.

Cotto, on the other hand, was a three-division and a very established champ when Floyd beat him. And Cotto moved on to win the WORLD middleweight title after that. But defeating a 21-year-old Benitez in his last welterweight fight was a "great" win for Leonard and an older Floyd beating Cotto wasn't?

And was Hagler "prime" when Leonard won a controversial decision over him? (LOL) But people complain about Floyd outpointing Oscar and say Oscar wasn't "prime?"

Long story short, I think this "his opponents weren't both prime and at their best weight" stuff is a garbage argument. Mayweather fights were "happenings." He raised the bar in terms of viewers and purses. He beat at least 10 different fighters who will end up in the Hall of Fame.

There's plenty to argue about regarding Mayweather. But arguing about his quality of opposition is a dead horse. His opposition was great.

Complaining that he didn't fight them all on exactly the perfect night of their fighting lives in the perfect division for them is assinine.

 

Hatton never had to drain to make 140.

With his lifestyle between fights, he was past his best by the time he even fought Tszyu and got dramatically worse with each fight each year. He lived the opposite life of a professional athlete the vast majority of the time.