Does Mayweather Deserve More Credit? (READ)

I agree and I think Floyd could take more risks if he wanted to, but I dont think he wants to be in a tough grueling fight. I believe thats the reason he avoided Margarito, not because he couldnt win, but because what he would have to go through to get the win. Thats what seems to tarnish his legacy and something he has to live with if he doesnt take the fights the public wants to see him in.

 

As a Floyd fan I'd concede McCallum/Nunn are better than anyone he's faced. I'd also concede Toney has the better shoulder roll. That doesn't make Toney the better boxer or better overall defensive boxer. Mayweather is more dominant, undefeated and more complete

The Corrales excuses are just that, he was the red hot favourate, P4P top5, destroying everyone in his path before and after. From what I hear he didnt make weight, weighing 132 and the fight went ahead anyway

 

So was Joe Calzaghe. Was his resume much cop? Nope.

Edit: I clearly rate Mayweather higher than Calzaghe but I think Kessler is a tougher opponent than Floyd has ever fought. Undefeated, optimum weight, good skills and power. Floyd has never fought anyone with all those attributes.

Just saying how undefeated means jack ****.

 

No they didn't, he was a huge underdog going into the first two Greb fights; and in general he fought an uphill battle to get respect for much of his career.

No he wasn't, he had lost it earlier to Pete Latzo.

 

I don't really understand how that would figure into anything here.

 

:good

 

Sven Ottke.

 

For me Mayweather cemented his greatness at 130. There are levels of greatness, but he clearly made his case for the greatest of that division's history in my personal opinion. People forget what he achieved there. The wins he chalked up are the type that make for what people call a 'stacked resume', and people like to say Corrales wasn't great, but if someone like Tony Zale is, then Corrales is in my perception. Within his own limits, the man was a great warrior to say the least. You don't have to be ultra skilled and complete stylistically to be one of the best of your era.

Anyway, moving back to Mayweather, after 130, he has moved up and had some good wins, they are not as good as what some of the champions of past years have achieved, and likely Pacquiao's are better respectively. Mayweather is a great fighter, and for a while i've been really pissed off with people saying 'he has to fight Mosley/Margarito/Cotto' otherwise he's not great. Wrong. It would be good if he fought them whilst he was lineal welterweight champion becasue that is what is right by the sport. But in order to prove he is great on any level? No. However, i have sort of changed my stance of late. Fighting Marquez was fine by me, as a novelty fight and that only. But this talk about him being the greatest if he beat JMM riled me, clear bull****. I actually want him to 'man up' like the rest of what seems the boxing world now. I hope he fights Pacquiao, who i like so much, hope Pac gets the win there.

Also, no a different note, there was some talk of Mayweather on Ali, about his not being a complete fighter. This seemed to be a way of convincing the world that, because Mayweather is more complete than the perceived greatest, then he must be the greatest himself. Wrong. If he wants to talk the 'best' fighter ever (different to 'greatest' by definition), then a comparison with Sugar Ray Robinson is unavoidable. Robinson is clearly better than Mayweather for me, at everything bar purely defense. If any of you remember me comparing the offensive abilities of (the great) Ray Leonard and Robinson, think along them lines and it's so apparent who is undoubtedly better.

 

:tired:tired:tired

 

Does Mayweather Deserve More Credit?

No. He beat a declining former featherweight who was slow as molasses due to the extra weight and who had no business being in the same ring with him. Before the fight I thought as long as JMM still had that snap in his punches and timing he had at the lower weights he would pose some problems to Floyd, but once the bell rang it was very evident that Juan had no business fighting at welterweight.

And frankly Floyd has been cherrypicking his opposition for several years now and he has yet to fight a genuine welterweight with a pulse so far, and I ain`t expecting him to take one on anytime soon. His one and only concern is to retire undefeated at any cost so that he can say after he has hung up the gloves for good that he is the best fighter to have ever laced them up, which is a crock of **** of course.

And while he has moved up in weight succesfully, let us not begin to compare his achievements to someone like Armstrong who moved up and made it a point to face THE BEST fighters at each weight he moved up to unlike Floyd who has been carefully picking his opposition to guarantee victory. There was no such guarantee when Henry moved up to face Ross and Garcia, but he didn`t give a **** and fought them anyway to try and prove that he was better.

I`ll say this, had Floyd had the same mindset, iron will and determination that Henry had he may have actually gone on to have a notable career punctuated with many stellar wins, he would have lost a few though here and there but that is to be expected when you face the best of your era in several different weight divisions.

But no, Floyd is all about his image and how he is perceived and not about achieving greatness the legitimate way by facing the best fighters of his era, he cares about retiring undefeated first and foremost, period. For all his ability there is very little substance to little Floyd, he simply isn`t cut out of the same cloth as the fighters he claims he is leaps and bounds better than, and he never will be either if he keeps cherrypicking his opponents and taking no risks.

 

I don't deny that Mayweather was the bigger man, but i think it should not be forgotten that it was a ****ing whitewash, in that he basically dominated every second of every single round. I mean, Hagler had a close fight with Duran when having a way bigger size advantage. Of course Duran was greater than Marquez, but fact remains that the way in which Floyd won (after a 2 year lay off) is impressive as hell.

 

That in a nutshell is the difference between Floyd and Duran. Duran lived for those type of wars, Floyd avoids them at all costs. As for Floyd's legacy however, I was quite surprised by the relatively easy win over JMM, so he deserves prop's for that. But unless he gets into the trenches with guys his own size or bigger than him, the was Duran use to, he's never going to hit the top eshlons of the sport (ie top 10 ATG status) An older Mosely would be a good start.

 

Wether Marquez is great or not isn't even the question -- he's not an elite welterweight. Floyd beat a welterweight that you'd be hard-pressed to rank in the top ten.