Marquez sparked Manny at an older age while at welterweight. If he looked like he didn't belonging the ring with Floyd, it would be pretty obviously a bad matchup for Manny, and it was.
Manny never was a dull fighter. Damn near every fight he's had in the last decade had plenty of action, except when he fought Floyd.
You're trying to make associations between versions of fighters, fights and their results, which were years apart, look like they were collective predictors of what would have happened in 2010. It's a cobbled-together case, if I ever read one.
1. You’re talking about a fight between Mayweather and Manny in 2010. 2. Mayweather outclassed Marquez in 2009 3. Marquez took Manny to the wire in 2008 and 2011. Sparked him in 2012 while in his late 30s. This is basic logic.
2nd Round KO over Duran at 154 trumps everything that Floyd has accomplished. Floyd would have lost to Leonard and it wouldn’t have been close.
Duran was 32. What is the argument? Duran was always great on the inside. Tommy was great on the outside and picking his shots with the jab. Duran was third in his division? Hearns was number one. In a pretty stacked. Take a look at junior middleweight in 1984. Benitez was also a year from Maurice Hope and outboxing Duran over 15 rounds. Benitez was great at 154 and probably the best he ever fought there. I remember Manny being more like 5 ranked in the world then in a very thin era. Floyd waited for Marquez to knock him out. And what a shock he fights him.
How old was Benitez when Hearns fought him? 24? How old was Mosley, Oscar and Cotto and Pacman when Floyd fought them? I don't see an argument. Mosley beat Margarito.. making him the best? According to most people no one beat a prime Duran. For one reason or another, but the fact is Tommy Hearns knocked out Duran which was a great accomplishment. No one stopped Duran like than when Duran was even in his 40s. And Tommy did it when Duran was relatively young. Everyone Floyd fought was older and not prime and handpicked. And you guys know it.
It's not just age, it's miles on the clock. Benitez would never have a meaningful victory after Hearns. So if that was prime Benitez it was his very last night. I'm not saying Floyd didn't hight faded versions, I'm saying the same argument can be made about plenty of others including Hearns.
Benitez when he fought Hearns was a great champion and better at 154 than he had been at 140 and 147 in my estimation. Whether he moved up one division too many and fought the wrong guy, the fact is he was fighting his best fights in his career. He was fighting his best fights. Whether he moved up and fought bigger and bad styles, I cannot say anything about that. But the Wilfred who fought Hearns was one of the best fighters in boxing then. Whether Hearns affected his confidence I don't know. I think Benitez who fought Duran was the best Benitez there was. I am not a Floyd fan. I respect his defense and ability to control the ring and win the fights each round at a time. I think he knew how to control inside and outside the ring in a very brilliant way. He did what Ray wanted to in his later career, but didn't quite do it. Ray tried to avoid tough guys but he got them and couldn't hide the slide, even fighting a fighter in Hearns who was sliding like he was.. Floyd actively avoided tough guys and he was not ashamed to make that obvious. Now he says undefeated and all this as though he didn't make it obvious. He did. I respect guys who take on all challengers and lose than a guy who sets up wins.
Hearns didn't take on McCallum though. He didn't attempt to unify at SMW or LHW. The fact still remains that people love to pick holes in the career of certain fighters. The same holes can be picked in anyone's.
