Does current Canelo beat Mayweather he originally faced?

Canelo taught Floyd to fight on the ropes that night didn't you know

 

@shadow111 your lack of self awareness is legendary lol

 

A 9 -3 fight all day

Close only if paid to believe so

 

Thats your confused look everytime you watch boxing bcs.

 

Yeah i had it 9-3 to Floyd.

 

I can't believe this thread is still trucking along! Well givene it's about Mayweather / Canelo maybe I shouldn't be surprised.

Once more, and with feeling, this is pretty damn clear cut IMO (and should also be to anyone with any boxing savvy)

• P4P, where current Canelo and the Mayweather that beat him are magically shrinked to the same weight (either 152/154 or 168 who cares), Floyd still wins, although it would likely be a closer thing given the imrpovements Canelo has made to his stamina and style.
• If the 152 Floyd from that fight stepped into the ring with the current 168 Canelo (likely well north of LH in the ring), he is not going to get Canelo's respect and would get stopped IMO.

For the whole @168 argument, the basis for it is that Floyd has NEVER fought above 154 in a legitimate match, and that tells me that PBF, who was a savvy smart cookie and knew his limitations, did not want to risk his 0 by trying to win a title @160. I'm certain he could have clicked his fingers to make that happen anytime he wished.

Compare this to the recent Usyk vs Joshua, where for ages I was saying that Usyk was a terrible matchup for AJ and would get beat, regardless of the size difference; why would I not think Floyd would just be able to do the same with Canelo?

It comes down to what is the basis in reality for the analysis -

• Usyk had plenty of evidence of fighting bigger dudes in the WBSS and excelling - Floyd has no evidence whatsoever of being able to carry his power and punch resistance up to 168, where it seems Canelo is hitting much harder
• Uysk's movement and high-volume-increasing-tempo style is terrible for Joshua who has had clear stamina issues. While Canelo did have stamina issues at 154, it looks like these were due to the weight-cut (or his clen cycle is perfected now or both), his stamina was much improved thru GGGx2 and has looked very decent @168.
• If Floyd had for example ventured to at least 160 and still been dominant against e.g. Martinez, then there would be much more weight to an argument that he could maybe have pulled it off against Canelo @168. But he didn't and there's not

Just look at what happened to Kell Brook (arguably elite @147) who tried to go up and take on GGG - and whilst Kell is not Floyd and GGG is not Canelo, I think the outcome would actually be very very similar - Floyd would start well and maybe even win the first 4/5, but once Canelo starts working the body with those chopping shots and start the breakdown process, it would only end one way IMO.

 

How on earth do you know he was in his mental prime?

Answer, you simply dont

Assuming as always

 

9-3 sounds about right. Pimp said it was a shutout lol. There's a big difference between 9-3 and 12-0 don't you think?

As far as how close it was, lets put it this way : it was way closer than any of Floyd's recent opponents. Was it as close as Canelo's fights vs Trout, Lara, or GGG? Of course not, but if you look at the first 6 rounds, all of those rounds were close, and aside from Rounds like 7 and 11 where Floyd really stepped on the gas, the other rounds were not one-sided and generally hard to score. Hard to score because Canelo was landing clean shots and jabs to the body etc but Floyd was out jabbing him overall. I think a lot of people like Pimp were just giving Floyd close round after close round then pretending like the whole fight was one-sided. Theoretically a fighter could win all 12 rounds but if every round is close and competitive then overall you could still say it was close. In this case, it wasn't anywhere near 12-0 on any of the scorecards. So I would remind you that while Canelo didn't win many rounds convincingly, he kept most rounds relatively even. So anotherwords Canelo did well to "keep it close" but he didn't do enough to win. And his punch output wasn't really the problem, it was that Canelo's defense wasn't good enough that night, he let Floyd land too many eye catching shots.

 

Relatively even?, no he lost far too many clearly

And personally i dont think 9 - 3 is close like you say

Dress it up as much as you like, Canelo got beat pretty good and likely wont get bested like that again

 

I'm not dressing anything up. 9-3 is about right, but how many of those 9 rounds were really one-sided Floyd rounds?

For reference, I thought Canelo's best rounds were : 2, 3, 4, 6, 10 and 12. Round 4 and round 10 were Canelo's strongest rounds in my opinion, in terms of eye catching offense landed. I scored round 6 even and round 12 neither fighter landed much of anything. But Floyd was being booed for stalling in Round 12 and Canelo did land a couple decent shots in that round, while Floyd was running and doing nothing. I don't know which 3 rounds you gave Canelo, but I think many just gave Floyd round 2, round 3, and round 4 when at least one or two of those should have gone to Canelo. All of those were close, Round 3 and round 4 were closer from start to finish than Round 2, in Round 2 Floyd was winning it thanks to some good jabs throughout the round, but Canelo finished strong in the last 30 seconds putting several clean punches together making it hard to score.

 

To be honest, I've watched that fight 4 maybe five times and have no real interest in revisiting it right now

I thought most rounds Floyd won were quite clear each time i watched it

Can't name them right now as i just dont have the time to revisit a fight I've made my mind up on ages ago

 

Changed your mind @shadow111 ? Here's what you said in 2017:

 

@KiwiMan 117-111 is in the ballpark of what I would consider reasonable. I mean lets face it, you could give Floyd some of those close rounds I personally thought 116-112 is more accurate. But for Wiz to score it 117-111, I have no problem with that, that's a hell of a lot better than arguing 12-0 or 11-1.

 

9-3 IMHO is the correct score. I was just noticing that you used to argue that it was too wide, but good to see that we aren't too far apart now.

 

That's good but I didn't really say 9-3 was "too wide" I said that was "stretching it", anotherwords that's the widest I would consider to be within reason. 10-2 is what I would call "too wide".