Better top 5 wins? Mayweather or Ward?

You can't be serious pimp?

An excuse?

No.

We know that Floyd's your hero, but having a huge reach is very significant. It's not in anyway BS. The man is only 5'8" yet he possessed a huge 72" reach. A reach that is bigger than the top MW's of today. So don't pretend it's not relevant. Floyd's reach gave him a huge advantage over many of his opponents.

It's a relevant factor along with everything else.

That's how you truly rate a win.

You taking everything into account.

Every single factor either increases or decreases the value of a win.


A few examples:


Age:

Beating an elite fighter at an advanced age gets you more kudos that beating them when you were younger.


Injuries:

Beating an injured fighter obviously gives you less credit than if you beat a fully fit fighter.

Beating a fighter whilst being injured yourself gives you more credit than if you beat someone whilst being fully fit.


Weight:

Beating someone whilst being at a weight disadvantage alters the value of the win depending on the circumstances.


Reach:

Beating someone whilst having a huge reach advantage gives you less credit than beating someone without one.


All of the above is pretty simple.


Floyd beat guys like Canelo whilst being 36. And he had injured hands. So he deserves huge props for that. But then the win gets devalued by the fact that he enforced a C-W against a version of Canelo who isn't as good as what he is today.

Floyd gets more credit for beating Oscar than what he does against Hatton. (IMHO)

Oscar was a better fighter than Hatton, and he was much bigger than Floyd.

Floyd had an 8" reach advantage over Hatton, and he beat him at a weight which wasn't his best one.

That's how you should rate wins.

As well as looking at age, weight and reach etc, you should also be looking at the degree of difficulty and how the fighters matched up stylistically.

You should also specifically look at the versions of the opponents from the actual night, and not rate the win based on where the opponents rank historically.

That's how I rate wins and I think it's objective. Which is why I rank Floyd's win over Oscar higher than his win over Manny.

I'm not anti Floyd, but I'm not going to give him huge credit for beating Manny. I don't care where Manny ranks historically. I don't care that it's the biggest fight in the history of the sport. None of that is relevant. What's relevant are the factors above.

Now I'll give Floyd credit for being in such incredible shape at an advanced age. And I'll also give him credit for fighting with bad hands. But I have to note that Manny was injured and I have to note that the excuse that Floyd gave for the IV was absolute horse manure.

 

I agree with this.

This is fair.

But Manny was definitely injured, and it also appears that Floyd was naughty with the IV, despite having slandered Manny for years.

 

If that's the case should we just start rating wins based on he fought a guy who was faster a guy who had more power a guy who had better stamina a guy who was taller a guy with a iron chin a guy with better defense a guy with more heart a guy who's a better body puncher. You could literally do that for every measure it's ridiculous. Pbf beat guys with skill he knew how to use his physical traits yes but there are many who dont you cant penalize him because he did.

 

acie2g,

I respect your opinion.

I'm not saying that I don't rate his wins over Manny and Canelo etc, it's just that I think he has a better win in Oscar.

I like the Marquez win too. I was honestly shocked at how sharp he looked after being inactive. But the weight issue takes the shine off of it.

It's so annoying, because doing that with Marquez and Canelo was so unecessary.

He gave people the ammunition to downgrade the wins when he could have gotten maximum credit for them.

I guess that's just his persona.

Before the Canelo fight, he told the media: "We don't care what Canelo rehydrates to. We don't care what he weighs. It's skills that pay the bills"

Then he enforces a C-W, where people are still to this day claiming that Canelo was drained.

He should have let Canelo weighed what he wanted, especially for a title fight, where afterwards, he could have claimed: "I'm 36, yet I've just easily beat a guy who outweighed me by......"

I've brought up his age and the fact that he had bad hands.

Regarding Hatton and Canelo, their circumstances have to be put into perspective.

Yes, Floyd kept moving up. And he deserves a lot of credit for that. But Hatton wasn't suited to fighting elite guys above LWW, and IMHO, he made Canelo weigh 152 in the hope that he would struggle to make the weight.

I think Floyd is one of the greatest fighters who's ever lived, and I agree that he's got a great resume.

I do think you have exaggerated though, where you've said that Floyd's SFW wins alone eclipse Ward's entire career.

 

We can debate whatever you want.

We can use any relevant criteria you want.

Yes, we could get the microscope out. But I would say the staples of any discussion are: weight, age, reach, and where they were in their careers at the time etc.

Floyd possessing a 8" reach advantage along with Ricky's style, sure gave him a huge advantage in that fight.

I do understand what you're saying though. But if someone beat Floyd whilst he was injured, AND you thought that the guy who'd beaten him had also taken PEDS, then I'm sure that you'd be on this forum feeling mighty aggrieved.

 

Well you are bringing up the weight like if it would've made a difference or something, idiot...

 

No moron, I simply made a comment on what taints that win. And in your messed up head, you changed it to me making an 'excuse' that I never delved in to. Floyd intentionally missed weight to come in heavier. Are you going to deny that? Or are you just a punk b*tch who needs to argue over nothing?

 

This does not change the point you're trying to make but Keith was not the #1 WW at the time he fought Pac.

 

Mayweather and it's not close...

I always see Arthur Abraham on victims lists as a top supermiddle win but the reason for that is all he did at Supermiddleweight was lose unless he was fighting the likes of Robert Stieglitz and other blown up Euro middles, if Arthur Abraham is one of your top 5 wins at Supermiddle you don't have a better resume than Mayweather

It must be said though, like Abraham Hatton fought Mayweather at welterweight, where he has a record of 2-3 with one win being razor close and all losses being by KO, Hatton was a career light welterweight

 

Floyd easily beat Manny. I don't recall that ever happening since Manny became relevant.

Manny beat Bradley and others with the same shoulder injury, which was longstanding. Manny raised his arms at the end of the fight indicating that he, at worst, had a partial rotator cuff tear; it is physically impossible to do that with a complete tear. IManny also was permitted to take WADA banned corticosteroids in training to further take care of the injury, which he'd had for years. The surgery was elective. I have the same injury and can assure you that Manny is full of ****.

Re:Canelo. The argument that you're making is coming from the place of person who never boxed. You have little concept of the physical exertion it takes to fight someone heavier. Even landing punches is tiring. 36, 5th weightclass, schooling an excellent champion while giving up 15-20 pounds. That is a singular feat in boxing history as far as I know.

You seem to have an issue in your reasoning where you see Floyd win a fight easily and go searching for reasons why that could have happened. Take it at face value. He had the tools to shut down certain other elites.

 

Hatton fought Floyd in the high 150s and Floyd came in the high 140s. That is the exact same fight night weight for Ricky as a 140 weigh in fight. Neither Floyd nor Hatton had to drain as much for as for a 140 weigh in so they were both in equal or better form than for a 140 fight.

Boxing is based on weightclass. Reach is one God given factor, just like chin, power, and hand speed. I do not discredit boxers for fighting the best in and around their weightclass.

 

Ok when comparing Oscar, Canelo,and Manny I can respect how you decide to look at fights, me personally factors i look at are, where was the fighter heading into the fight such as (any recent loss, how they lost, who they lost to, and how long ago), what they did after, where they were rated at the time, where they a champion or title holder and things like that, while I rate the Hoya win higher than most he was the current #2/3 JMW WBC Champ coming of a KO win over Mayorga who was the WBC JMW Champ and held a win over Forrest who was the JMW rated above Oscar. But still comparing that to the Canelo fight, Floyd had the age advantage vs Oscar, where he didn't vs Canelo and Manny, Manny was and still is P4P rated and is still top 3 at WW Currently 4 years later, whether prime or not Manny always had the physical disadvantages, but as an overall fighter I'm not even a Manny fan but have to respect his class, Canelo could potentially become a LHW Champ and Mayweather holds a win over him, Canelo has fought and beaten the best fighters in his generation and is still only 28/29. fought Trout when he was unbeaten and ppl thought he would duck, fought Lara, fought GGG 2x, fought Jacobs, is fighting Kovalev, sprinkle in fighting Cotto and Mayweather with only 1 indisputable loss to Mayweather in which I thought Canelo was a bit more competitive than given credit for. even if you feel Lara or GGG beat Canelo all 3 of those fights are close enough that they an be argued for Caenlo so just as much as he struggled with them they struggled with him, only difference is Canelo was expected to struggle, Lara and GGG was supposed to blow out Canelo and ended up at best scraping by a razor close 7-5 win or imo losing.

 

Lmfao it's the same thing, your throwing excuses tossing things around, moron

 

Something you struggle to cope with, but ok lets look at it

Straight away, its your opinion rather than the factors you so want to preach but npt follow

Why rightly?
Oscar was coming off an impressive win

but you want to look at all factors and dont note Froch was coming off a Mdec over an old boiled down faded fighter.

All factors of course.

Do you really think Ward beating 28-1 Froch was more impressive than Floyd beating 33-0 Corrales?
I dont
Corrales went on to beat casamayor, Freitas, Castillo who I think many would rate higher than Bute

Watch how Loudon cant debate anything that goes against what he thinks in his own mind

 

Dont waste too much time with him Pimp. He struggles badly when people dont agree with his every post.
You will see how he will say he respects opinions but he doesn't. Very easy poster to work out. He got exposed for trolling a while back and I can see it now. He'll say that's a get out clause to not clearly answer my questions posed.