Better resume Ali vs Mayweather

I actually agree with this completely, but my point is that if Canelo was in his prime, then it creates entirely new questions about him as a fighter. Such as, How long was his prime? If he was in his prime, did he improve at all over the following years? In his prime, was he simply on a level only slightly higher than Trout and Lara?

For me, all these questions are completely moot, as Canelo simply wasn't in his prime yet. Now I'm not saying Floyd should've used a time machine, I'm just saying it's not a win over an ATG in their prime. It's just simply not.

Imo, NoNeck having it as a greater win than Foreman, is delusional.

 

That thread is a pile of ****, and the fact you haven't learned that in 58 pages is worrisome.

As for the argument, nothing in that thread says why on earth you'd rank Tyson (or Vitali, Holyfield, Fury or Usyk) over Foreman. We're talking about a guy who destroyed two fighters who beat you're number 1 (including your number 8 heavyweight), and rewon the title 20 years after he lost it.

Anywho, regardless of whether or not Foreman is top 10 (which he is, and you're just being ridiculous), that still doesn't account for Liston and Frazier twice.

 

Corrales and Castillo, are Floyd's actual best wins imo. Especially when taking into consideration the context of the Pacquiao, De La Hoya, Canelo and Mosely fights.

As I mentioned in my other post, I don't think it's a 'bad' win, just not a great one. Canelo hadn't evolved into a great fighter yet; I'm not saying Floyd should've fought him in a time machine, just that I'm not giving him credit for beating a guy who'd go onto do the stuff Canelo has done. When he fought Floyd, he was barely better than Trout and Lara; and so I don't see it as all that great a win. Not bad, but no Rumble in the Jungle.

As for the others, it's a similar boat. Sure, Floyd was older than Pacquiao, but that doesn't mean he faced a prime Pacquiao. Just because they were both old doesn't mean it's the same as if they were both prime imo.

My fault with Floyd, is outside of a few names like Maidana, Corrales, Castillo and Hatton (maybe Marquez too), all of his best wins simply weren't at their best. Floyd suffers for that, whether or not it was his fault that they didn't fight in their prime is irrelevant to me. The fights didn't happen when they should've (in the Pacquiao fight's case), or could've (in the others).

Plus, NoNeck is a Floyd worshipper, and he hates when anyone goes against Floyd for anything.

 

5-3 in title fights with one win via robbery. And the loss to Jimmy Young. Methinks not.

 

Methinks? Listen, doc. I know you think you're being cool, but you're really just being extremely cringe. Like a Redditor.

Fact is that Foreman destroyed your number 8, and rewon the heavyweight title 20 years after he lost it.

Mike did nothing like that, the only reason you're not having foreman top 10 is either hatred for Foreman, or desperately trying to defend Floyd. Either way, it's hilarious.

 

I value title defenses and loss columns. Oliver McCall and Hasim Rahman have better singular wins if you want to go there.

 

Does the fact they both lost rematches take any luster off their wins?

 

If you value loss columns and title defences, why rank Tyson over Holmes and Foreman?

 

Yeah but all that goes both ways. If you’re going to point out that some of Floyd’s better wins were against guys on the way down then you should point out that Archie Moore, Floyd Patterson, Cleveland Williams, Sonny Liston and Zora Folley were past it. Ali additionally arguably lost two out of three to Ken Norton who wouldn’t be remembered today had he not beaten Ali to begin with. Ali lost to Leon Spinks at an age where Floyd absolutely schooled Canelo. And giving title shots to dudes like chuck Wepner, Jean Coopman, Alfredo Evangelista, and Brian London ? You also mentioned Floyd beating guys who rose in weight. You DO know that Mayweather started at super feather and ended up winning a title at junior middle don’t you ?

 

Judging an athlete when he or she is baked is an awful way to judge him or her. Mike Tyson lost his last two real fights against cans. I don't judge him by those fights. Sugar Ray Robinson was 45-O at one point? He ended up with 18 losses because he fought too long.

 

You need to win ten title fights to be a big boy. Foreman’s loss to Young is worse than any Tyson loss in the 90s anyway.

 

It affects their overall standing, not their wins.

 

There's absolutely no way Foreman's loss to Young is worse than Buster Douglas

And that doesn't explain Holmes. Spineless.

 

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/mike-tyson-had-a-better-career-than-larry-holmes.669560/

 

Another spineless response.