Why is Mayweather not the greatest of all time?

Retroactive TUE’s are needed for acute crises.

 

No, he was likely using masking agents all along.

 

Hearns was taller, with a bigger reach, and who was prime in a bigger division.

 

Ha!

We know what the crisis was.

Nobody has one put into their fight contract.

Just have a little think of how ridiculous that is.

Think about how ridiculous it was, that USADA found the IV, but then didn’t notify the commission of it, until almost a month AFTER the fight.

Disgraceful.

There was a reason why Floyd used USADA and not WADA/VADA.

 

This just exposes your lack of knowledge.

 

Hearns wasn’t fighting 147 fights at near 168.

 

He wouldn’t have needed an IV to pass a drug test if that were true.

 

What??

 

The IV’s of saline are used as flushing agents.

It’s why they’re banned.

 

An IV is a masking agent FFS.

 

Good luck.

 

I don't think he understands that saline is used as a masking agent.

 

I don't think Tommy fought anyone as good as Floyd at welterweight...the only person he fought who was as good/better was Leonard, and we all know what happened there. I think Floyd can take the jab away, I think he can exploit the holes Hearns leaves as Tommy was an aggressive fighter who was not particularly defensively minded. I don't think Tommy can catch Floyd clean, but I think Floyd can catch Tommy who has not dealt with an efficient, sharpshooter defensively like Floyd in his career. Genuinely think you have made some brilliant points but I feel Floyd outpoints Tommy in a defensive masterclass, but not comprehensively. Although they are the 'same' weight, this is David beating Goliath the same way he always did, a cool head, smart skill set and big bollocks...

 

I respect your opinion, but I don’t agree.

But that’s cool.

It’s what makes the forum so great.


Tommy did fight a Floyd type fighter.

He beat the great Wilfred Benitez, who like Floyd, was a defensive counterpuncher. A fine technician.

Tommy could fight a defensive fight with his size and skill set.

He could play chess behind his great jab.


Tommy was only defensively irresponsible/vulnerable, if he was put under immense pressure.

Again, Floyd didn’t fight like that, and certainly wouldn’t have done against him.

Tommy wouldn’t have had to have fought Floyd aggressively at all.

He could have just boxed behind his jab in a slow paced fight.


Yes, we saw what happened with Ray. But Floyd didn’t fight like Ray did.

Now Floyd never saw anybody in his career like Thomas Hearns. Nobody.

Tommy Hearns was a freak of nature.


Now why would you believe that Hearns couldn’t have landed clean?

Why would you believe that Floyd would have taken away his jab?

Just look at the issues that a faded, end of career Oscar gave Floyd, with his jab.

That fight was level before Oscar stopped throwing it in the final 2-3 rounds.

Yet we’re talking here about a prime Tommy Hearns, with his great jab, from a huge 78” reach.


I’m also not sure why you think that Floyd would have outboxed him, when it couldn’t be done at various weights, by great technical fighters such as: Roberto Duran, Ray Leonard, Marvin Hagler, Wildred Benitez and Virgil Hill.


At the end of the day, Floyd wouldn't have fought him aggressively in order to have taken him out of his rhythm. His comfort zone.

He wouldn’t have taken the risks needed to have made Tommy vulnerable.

Floyd had zero power to have bothered him, and at the higher weights, he was more cautious than when he was in his prime, as ‘PBF’


IMHO, it would have played out in similar fashion to the Benitez fight.

 

It doesn’t mask. It dilutes.