Dunno why pac comes into it always when the thread is about floyd but floyd will ALWAYS and FOREVER be remembered in boxing history as better than pacman accept, feel at peace, move on
Whatever his resume, he gets knocked spark out prime for prime against any of your Durans, Leonards, Armstrongs, Hearns and would have lost against any lower regarded ATG's like a Napoles, Cervantes, Whitaker etc. Any truly 'upper elechon ATG' he loses by decision at best. His cherry picking myth would have been exposed in the 70's or 80's. He should have lost at least once for certain regardless. Good fighter sure, the fact he genuinely believes himself to be the greatest ever is just sad and detracts from his actual achievements.
Behave. There’s no logical reason why Floyd couldn’t have given him a cut off, which included an immediate after fight blood and urine test, which was requested due to what had happened with Morales 5 years earlier. In the end, Manny publicly agreed to EVERYTHING. Yet it still took about 2 years to make afterwards, after Marquez had iced him. And then there was the IV debacle. Floyd was spooked by Manny. If you can’t see that, I’m at a complete loss.
Some of them who are future hall of famers were in their 20s when Floyd beat them like todays pound for pound number 1 Saul Canelo Alvarez.
Pac is generally considered to be the greater fighter by almost anyone outside the US and many inside it.
Then he should've won. Nobody can watch that fight and say he was. When all the talking is finished, you have to win the actual fight.
Now this is a much more respectable debate and I want to commend you on the All time Greats you have referenced because this is a proper debate instead of the haters who drag up Margarito or Margacheato whatever his name is. You know what Christpuncher I am so impressed I think we should start a new debate thread to match Floyd hypothetically against the ATGs you have mentioned at the following weights all at their very best: Sugar Ray Robinson at Welterweight Roberto Duran at Lightweight The great Henry Armstrong at Lightweight or Junior Lightweight Sugar Ray Leonard at Welterweight Thomas Hearns at Welterweight or Light Middleweight Jose Napoles at Welterweight Antonio Cervantes at Welterweight Benny Leonard at Lightweight Pernell Whitaker at Lightweight Julio Cesar Chavez Sr at Junior Lightweight, Lightweight and Junior Welterweight Azumah Nelson at Junior Lightweight Christpuncher I would like to give you the honour of posting and starting this as a new thread. What do you say Sir?
That one is so subjective you will never prove it either way. Whos better the guy? The one who went undefeated his whole career or the guy who has traveled through the divisions carrying his power and speed with him. Do you prefer the boxer or the puncher. ETC ETC ETC. Does may beating Pac when both were fading mean a huge amount. Both great fighters Floyd's resume is terrific you could make a small claim that he brought the likes of Hatton or Marquez to division where he held all the advantages but its a weak argument at best. I'd pick him to loose V Duran - based on Durans ability to infight, his strength and power and Hearns based on Hearns Jab, range and right hand power. If Oscars jab troubled Mayweather then Heans would have had reacting all over and Tommy and that power that could still stop bigger guys coming behind it. I think SRL would give him nightmares as well but for his generation. ATG no question. Best ever? not for me but one of the best to do it ever and I got too see him do it.
