Better Win Roy or Floyd

????

What are you referring to?

Look at where Hopkins and Canelo both were respectively when they fought those fights. Hopkins didnt win a world title in his attempt after Jones, had no world title experience, fewer fights and wins and no big names on his resume. Canelo had far more wins, had been a world champ, mixed in world class.
As said I didnt like the catchweight situation but cant dispute the win

 

I agree about the catchweight thing but Canelo was far more established. Hopkins had no big fight experience. Canelo has also remained undefeated since including a fight with Golovkin who many compare to Hopkins.

Roys win over Bernard looks better over time but at the time it wasnt what you make out. Hopkins didnt win in his next world title attempt. Canelo in 3 fights after was the lineal MW champ having been a LMW champ and 2 fights after was a LMW champ again

 

What do you mean it's a non argument?

If you want to be objective, you have to take absolutely everything into account.

I already gave Floyd huge credit for being 36, being outweighed, and fighting against a stronger opponent.

I'm just noting that he wasn't smaller than Canelo in terms of height and reach.


Regarding Tommy, I give a guy like SRL huge credit for out-fighting Tommy after he was being outboxed due to Tommy's size and skill.

Again, everything needs to be taken into account.

There's only a handful of people in this debate that has acknowledged that Roy had a fractured hand when he fought Bernard in 1993.

 

These are fair points, but you like comparing stats more than I do.

I concentrate more on the abilities of the fighters.

Bernard didn't have a great resume, but I saw how good he was as a fighter when I watched him fight Roy. Afterwards, he struggled against Mercado in Ecuador at altitude. Yet he clearly beat him 3-4 months later, before going on his run.

On paper, yes, Canelo had the better wins and he achieved more. But winning the lineal MW title doesn't mean that he was a better fighter than what Bernard was. It looks great on paper, but he beat a faded Cotto who was never a MW himself. So I don't class that as a great win. The fact that he was also a LMW champ doesn't mean a lot to me either. Wins over Trout and Smith etc doesn't mean that he was a better fighter than the version of Bernard which Roy fought. It just boils down to circumstances and opportunities.

 

You mean the same Canelo who just came off a win a against Trout the same Trout who just beat Cotto that canelo? What do you know anyway? You picked Pac to beat PBF and wrote a novel saying how he would do it. How did that work out for you?. You don't know **** about boxing just an irrational PBF hater with no credibility log off.

 

That didn't stop you from picking Pac to beat PBF and making thread after thread about how he would do it. You stupid SOB. Now after PBF tooled him you have an excuse, typical. I owned your ass here back then during that time I tried telling you that Pac had no chance because he couldn't deal with PBF's ability to control range and dictate distance but you wouldn't listen to sound logic because you don't know **** about boxing and are an irrational PBF hater. I mean how many times does this man have to keep proving you wrong before you realize he's the truth?

 

I agree. It seems to be the height of hypocrisy to ignore that Jones entered the ring with a broken hand, yet at the same time bang non stop on the Floyd was 36 years old drum.

That said, it's not Canelo's fault that Mayweather was 36 years old. He can't change that.

 

Cotto was shot and small. Pac destroyed Cotto. After that fight he never cared about boxing. All he did was complain about his cash, his mandatories and Margarito.

Everybody knows that Cotto was never same and lost his hunger after Pacquiao.

 

Which actually makes sense, but I guess if you have an agenda sense gets brushed aside.

 

Cotto won a lineal championship 160 years after he lost to Pac and PBF he wasn't shot. Shot fighters don't do that.

 

Floyd beating Canelo was better, Canelo was actually more proven than B-Hop was at the time Jones fought him. Plus Floyd was 36 and past his prime.

 

Well he wasn't going to beat a prime Roy Jones at any point of his career regardless...

 

By beating a shot fighter... And then barely beat that shot fighter. He beat a guy with 1 leg who was given a gift against Martin Murray.

 

roy is on anther level to floyd he took tough fights when the fighters were at their best he fought as low as light mw and went up to heavyweight anyone who knows boxing knows the high you go in the weight classes the harder to move up

 

You think Hopkins was better in-ring than Canelo, fine. Do you not care that "before they were great" fighters have been beaten since the existence of boxing whereas 36 year olds beating a unified, undefeated titlist in their fifth division is a singular achievement as far as I can remember?