Mayweather vs Zivic....in the 50s

Would probably look a bit like the Maidana fight who's a throwback to the fighters of that era.

 

I'm not sure Mayweather would box rings around Zivic, who was known to be pretty cagey and had a nasty counter right hand. Anyone who fights that often against high level opposition knows his way around the ring.

By the same token, I don't believe for one second that Mayweather in the 50's wouldn't be the least bit shy about employing his own brand of the dark arts. Frequent use of the forearm to create space? Check. Willingness to hold and hit? Check. Immediate response in kind to getting fouled? Check.

Springs Toledo said it best after the Mayweather-Ortiz fight; "I no longer believe that Duran would make Mayweather cry."

Neither would Zivic. And, unlike a prime Duran, I don't think Zivic beats Mayweather, regardless of the referee's attitude.

 

Under the rules and permissiveness of the 1930's through
the 70's when the referee may tell you to" Handle it like a man"?
If Maidana ,Baldimir, and Castillo gave Mayweather Jr. Hell
how would he deal with a fighter that make them look like
choir boys?
So you're right it isn't far fetched , but I would like Zivic's
chances in those era's.

 

Just like you, I'm here to discuss boxing and exchange opinions about this sport, that we all love. And just like you, I make it a point not to attack anyone with childish name-calling - as I don't really see the point of such nonsense!

Anyway, thanks for the nice words... after being accused of having 50 ***** up my ***, they are much appreciated!

 

This post is out of order and completely unnecessary. There is no need to talk to anyone like this, let alone in response to a politely worded post by a gentleman in his 70's.

 

I echo Mike's comment. There was nothing in your post that justified you being spoken to like that. Like Mike, I appreciate your posts and the respectful tone of them.

 

oh cry me a river .. His Agenda in trashing every fighter pre 1990 is just being exposed for the millionth time ... follow along

He is getting called out on his " modern day boxing only " bull****,
If Floyd has any case of actually taking this fight to begin with then present it
because if you actually followed his career , he doesn't take this fight at 147 against a prime tougher bigger stronger fighter in Zivic.. so I'm simply calling the " blowhard" out his bull****. because Floyd played more dodgeball at 147 then he actually boxed

No need to match a fighter if he aint going to take the fight ... let alone give him the W

 

A few quotes of mine, that you can find on this forum:

"Skill-wise, boxing hasn't significantly changed in the last 80 years".

"Tony Canzoneri was an amazing boxer."

"Joe Louis' short, powerful combinations is a thing of beauty"

"Tommy Burns, on the other hand, is a pleasant surprise! Once again not a lot of film to go by - but he doesn't look all that bad for his time, if you ask me."

"Ross, McLarnin look very good... as do Tunney and Canzoneri, just to mention a few. In the late 30s Louis took heavyweight boxing to a whole new level, and by the early 40s we of course have Pep and Robinson, who (imo) were both the "finished product", so to speak. I don't see anyone taking boxing to another level since then."


How you can interpret this as trashing every fighter pre 1990, I'll never undestand!

 

I have no problem with you thinking Mayweather would not fight and/or stand a chance against Zivic.

I've had multiple debates on here with posters who I believe overrate Mayweather. Yet, I can see a Zivic who lost 65 times, including 7 in a row against Joey Ferrando x 2, Tony Herrera, George Salvadore, Billy Celebron, Eddie Cool and Chuck Woods, losing to Mayweather. So I think you're wrong. But I'm not going to become abusive towards you because I think you're wrong, you're entitled to your opinion.

I called you out for becoming unnecessarily abusive towards another poster, not because you favour Zivic over Mayweather. I wonder if you become abusive to people in person each time you encounter someone who has a different opinion to you.

 

You do realize if Floyd was fighting back then he would also be fighting dirty etc. It’s highly unlikely he would fight with his current style if he entered a ring 100 years ago.

If your going to spend all day thinking up mythical matchups where the outcome is always the same (modern day fighters lose to older fighters by brutal KO) then at least be slightly impartial.

 

You beat me to it …I saw this thread …and that’s my first initial thought

 

It’s annoying on this forum when people compare the worst version of a fighter against the best version of another. Or in this case people thinking that Floyd mayweather couldn’t bite down on his gum shield and have a tear up.

I used to work with a guy who was a 16 stone doorman (his second job).he genuinely believed he could beat Joe Calzaghe as he was “too small”. He also believed these fighters would miraculously forget how to fight if they didn’t have gloves on!