Yes very true. I think the game changed for Floyd when he got all the power and started dictating. On the way up remember no one really wanted a piece of him. Duran would hate Floyd. Hearns would be very confident, fought them all. Hagler vs Mayweather would never happen so enough said. SRL would maybe not take the chance if Floyd was not established. Similar to what he said about Mike McCallum, "not enough money and too dangerous." SRR would not like Floyd much either. Would do what has to be done. Them too at the negotiating table would be torture.
The problem I see for Floyd is that Robinson was a brilliant boxer himself when given the breathing room to do his thing (see his fight with Bobby Dykes for an example), with a height/reach advantage roughly equivalent to Vernon Forrest. Robinson’s speed, feinting ability, jab, offensive creativity, footwork/ability to control distance and set traps coupled with his size advantage should keep him from getting outboxed at range. Conversely, if Floyd tries walking Robinson down, he’ll be inviting a gutter war with arguably the greatest offensive fighter ever in the ring. Floyd is a terrific boxer, though, so I do see him having moments of competitiveness in the fight, and might even win a few of the breather rounds. Nothing in Floyd’s resume suggests him actually winning, though.
I fel it`s a matter of fractions and inches between these two, but yes if Floyd tried to walk Robi down it would be suicide.
Floyd v SRL would be one of the biggest fights in history, Ray would have been desperate to get Floyd in the ring, his ego was huge.
You can't go through the back half of your career ducking every threat and completely avoiding risk, yet hope to be rated at the end of your career. Floyd apologists are blind if they think his resume stacks up against SRR. If Floyd fought as often as SRR and against similar level opponents he ends up with a worse record.
I think there's some people who deep down worry that Floyd may indeed be the greatest of all time (I'm not saying he is) so feel the need to leave threads like this or Floyd vs Tommy Hearns. It's a comfort blanket.
I don't get why we can't have just Mayweather Vs Armstrong, Duran, Gans, McFarland etc. much fairer match ups.
Yes Mark of course it would, however I was referring to if SRL was already established and Mayweather wasn't. If so, very good chance Sugar doesn't go ahead with the fight. Also Floyd would not have been marketable in the '4 Kings' era as Duran, Hagler, Leonard and Hearns were much more exciting. Floyd gained great success in a totally different era.
This argument that Floyd owed his success to selective matchmaking is pretty silly. The guys he didn't fight are no better than the guys he beat. Not fighting Pacquiao earlier is a valid criticism but beyond that I don't see who he was ducking.
I agree. Maybe an argument for Tyszu and Paul Williams but other than that, he has a very good resume. Most boxing greats have names or fighters from their generation that they could and should have met but didn't for one reason or another.
I partly agree. The idea of Floyd being a serial ducker is somewhat overblown. For starters, Mosley and Delahoya were a generation before him, so it’s no wonder that the fights didn’t happen in their primes. I even give him a partial pass for “retiring” in 2007 and not fighting the big welterweight’s right way. After achieving star status with the Delahoya fight, I thought it was reasonable for Floyd to wait in the wings while an outstanding challenger emerged from the current crop of contenders – in hope of landing a big, juicy mega-fight. The fact that this didn’t happen, and that Mosley, Cotto and Margarito ended up beating on each other in a game of rock, paper, scissor, reflects the relative weakness of the era, and is not Floyds fault. He did end up fighting (and dominating) Mosley who had done as much to earn a shot as any one else from that group, even if he didn’t match up all that well stylistically. Where I maybe differ from you is the Pacquiao situation. The failure to face his outstanding challenger of the generation in his prime (not because of timing or promotional issues, but entirely through his own choice) is a total ****ing disgrace in my opinion and will forever be a black mark against his legacy. Had he fought and beaten Pacquiao in his prime, I would have rated him very highly, possibly up there with Ray Leonard or thereabouts. Now I don’t know what the hell to make of him. His skills were undeniably great, his willingness to prove his greatness when it mattered, was not.
Exactly my view on Mayweather as well. People try and rationalise his avoidance of Pacquiao but he ducked him plain and simple. I think Manny could have and should have pushed Bob Arum harder for the fight, but I don’t see this as a 50/50 split of blame. You don’t get to walk around calling yourself the best ever when you avoided the guy who was the main threat. If Floyd had met Manny in 2010 or even 2011, and beaten him, I’m with you - he’s be up there near the very top. The Leonard comparison is a good one. Ray was like Floyd in some ways in that he had the power to call the shots but other than the Hagler fight, where he managed to dictate terms, he fought guys like Duran and Hearns on an equal footing. Imagine the impact on his legacy if he’d avoided Hearns in 1981. That would be the equivalent of what Floyd was doing by not meeting Pacquiao when it mattered most. And people have the temerity to call Floyd no. 1 p4p ever. When you’re comparing the very best with the very best, this kind of thing absolutely matters.
Don't get it twisted Sugar Ray Robinson didnt fight 200 times because he was so noble and courageous. He had to. If he were around today he would be Mayweather's biggest fan. At 47 Floyd could last the distance. He would make it a good fight. He would want to slow the pace down. Robinson wouldnt let him though. Ray's power was scary. Mayweather was quick enough to score some counters. Just not busy enough