Pac accepts to be tested 14 days prior to fight!!!

I just really know nothing of any fighter before Ali. You cant say whether Mayweather is better or worse.

I think Mayweather is the best fighter of the last 20 years. To me that puts him in the top 25 of all time no problem.

Gatti was a fantastic fight. Many people had it a 50-50. I just think even with a Pacquiao win Mayweather still won't get the credit he deserves and thats winds me up.

Post your thoughts on Galivan because it will be an intresting read but theres no way you cant put forward a proper arguement for who is better because i doubt you have seen anything but grainy images of a couple of his fights. There rest is just hear say from those who like to live in the past.

 

Nah, there's loads of footage of Gavilan looking absolutely sublime mate.

I didn't realise you only rated from the last 20 years :good

Here's a bit of Gavilan :good He doesn't look 'old fashioned' in any way IMO, and hi level
of opposition, from 140 to Middleweight is absolutely brilliant.


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imPJLHLt5EM[/ame]

Not a gigantic puncher by any means, but like Floyd, a spiteful and accurate one. He could box, he could fight, he had an iron chin, and even though a natural Welter, fought some of the most dangerous middles of all time (including Lausse; an ATG puncher)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BPrEW1_GyU[/ame]

Some Lausse footage; including a brief bit from his fight with Gavilan :good

 

Theres a lot of decent footage of a lot of fighters from the 1940s onwards from which to base opinions Rob. Its when you get back to the 1920s/1930s you can end up with "grainy images from a couple of fights".

If you're not into the history side of boxing then fair enough, but to just dismiss it as "hearsay from those who like to live in the past" is way OTT and a little close minded.

 

Canzonerideal:deal

 

I meant generally Flea! I uploaded a few Canzoneri fights to WVBA a year for so ago and got a "thank you" off one of his distant relatives.

 

Watching those clips theres no way Gavilan would get away with so many mistakes against Floyd imo. The speed of the video is slightly off too which can affect judgement

 

These are just small clips.

Watching Floyd, he won't be able to keep Gavilan off him. Gavilan can dictate range and close range expertly, as he proved against elite opposition. He'd win a decision against Floyd IMO, too varied and proven, even though it wa a resume discussion not a h2h :good

Johnny Bratton was an aesthetically wonderful boxer to watch; Gavilan annihilated him.

 

:good

 

I just reckon he is too open to counters to ever have troubled floyd. He telegraphs his shots and would play into PBF's hands.

Fighters of the past are always gonna have better resume's due to the fact they fought far more often and these days its too much like a business with all the politics etc hence only fighting once or twice a year. Thats probably where we differ then, I dont judge on resume alone but try to guage a fighter on talent and how I predict they would do against whomever. Theres not many fighters as polished as Floyd imo and he gets stick more coz he's a pain in the ass who never shuts up about $$$$ (it bugs me too).

Manny Pacquaio gets more credit for his resume than Floyd which is arguable (although I dont rate it as highly as most) but in a fight against each other I see an easy nights work for Floyd. :good

 

To be fair, Gavilan could box AND trade. Most of that is footage of him trading, although I can assure you there is a LOT of video evidence showing his defensively capable, with an equal (or IMO better) jab than Floyd, fast hands, and most importantly, Floyd won't be able to dissuade Gavilan, who has one of the all time great chins (literally) and was far too varied/nuanced a boxer to fall into Floyds traps all night. Floyd is amazingly conditioned, over 12 it'd still be close, but over 15 Gavilan would pull away convincingly. Gavilans two-fisted combinations, very hard to read, explosive and sustained, would show Floyds defence up at times methinks.

I mean, didn't Floyd spew up after sparring 15 rounds with Baldomir? Over 12 I feel Gavilan would win 116-112. He is fairly easy to find footage of, where, IMO he looks consistently more impressive than Floyd against better opposition. That is about as good a definition of being greater than I can think of :good

all opinion, of course.

 

I was just giving an obvious example to solidify your claims.

Nice anecdote :good

 

Sorry mate, I thought you were getting picky over my saying there were good clips in the 1940s by picking out a fighter who had clips from the 30s..atsch

 

What does me is people saying 40's fighters were less skilled.....would they say the same about Robinson?!?

I used to say old timers were pathetic until I realised I couldn't pinpoint a cut-off date. Fighters I said were 'primitive' had beaten fighters that appeared 'modern'. It's not the same as football or athletics. Someone from the 20's might deliver a punch in a different way but they're still punching you in the face. I tend to think some old timers would be an awful and awkward proposition for a so-called modern fighter stylistically.

I now like fighters from all era's, and how wrong I was about 'primitive' old timers, I mean, if Mayorga can beat Vernon Forrest and Frochy can pick up a scrap, it can't he one rule for them but not for older fighters.

Of course advancements in conditioning are brought up, but I don't think the conditioning of fighters up until 24 hr weigh Ins can be disputed, 15 rounds and more regular fighting and all that.

I'm an atheist but I will pray for Rob tonight. There's so much enjoyment for him to be had from the sport he clearly loves, and no Rob I'm not taking the ****.

 

you need to understand sparring means **** all, and should not be used to analyse fighters capabilities

 

You need to understand I also gave stylistic analysis over 12 rounds.