Floyd Keeps Saying There's no "Blueprint" to beat him...

Yeah I can see what you mean, but on the other hand who at the time would have thought that Hopkins would be Jones biggest win?

What if a figher does great things after you beat him?

 

He will not fight a guy with a long jab. That would beat him. Easily enough. Guys who fight like Floyd have trouble with guys who jab like Hearns or Forrest. His team knows it. They will not fight a jab guy, and there is no Tommy Hearns quality at welt with that reach and I doubt there will be again with that effect.

 

To answer your question, I dont what the fans are infatuated with these days, I mean we have a fighter that boxes a defensive style and flaunts his material possessions, at the top of the sport. That being said, think about how many people follow boxing as closely as we do and actually have insight into the fighters themselves? Compound that with the fact that 90% of the press and a good amount of people that do in fact watch boxing dont know what they're looking at anyway. I dont think half the people even know at what weight Mayweather started his career at. In other words, people believe what misinformed people tell them, and for some reason people are coming back to the sport, but for reasons that are far beyond our comprehension. This would have never happened as early back as 8 or 9 years ago when Floyd was actually facing what everyone considered the toughest of his respective divisions, because people were programmed differently for boxing. Thats the reason why the MGM Grand was a 1/4 full when he faced Corrales who was the undefeated monster that was going to knock his block off. In some cases I agree like Lora said, that too much "greatness" is given to a lot of fighters too quickly and moreso lately, but I also believe its manipulated because of $$$. I dont think that is the case with Mayweather and thats where the understanding of the sport takes affect.
Max Kellerman is also a product of this misinformed new hip hop generation. He can recite every other outcome of past fights, but get into a real discussion of boxing styles and technical ability and hes lost. From annointing Stevie Johnstion to the next Pernell Whitaker to the other countless ridiculous statements hes made, I dont pay any attention to him. He still has to be given some credit for propping boxing back up in recent years and for that we have to applaud him.
The fact is boxing is a very difficult sport to understand, and proof would be your prediction of this past weekends fight , and I think if all the critics actually did in fact pay more attention to Floyd's longevity, level of opposition and where he started at, and how far he has come, they would think of him in a much higher regard.

 

^Give it to him, he made a good post, i'm going to bed now, thanks for all ignoring my post on Trinidad-Mayweather on the last page, haha.

 

Another product of the changing landscape in boxing. 40 fights is a lot these days. Boxing is different now with the television networks and PPV. We started calling Evander Holyfield an all timer in his 31st fight.

 

I meant to comment on this but I had to leave after my last post yesterday. I also think a tall upright boxer with a good jab is going to give Mayweather trouble. He has a style thats very difficult to kink unless you can just maul him, which was a possibility when he was fighting far stronger guys in the past. People forget, Mayweather is a small guy physically, and has just now grown into being a true solid welterweight. He probably could still make 140 pounds if he dried himself out. He came in the fight with Mosley at 146, yet he still looks bigger than he did against Hatton for example.
Trinidad on the other hand was a very strong welterweight, one of the strongest, so his combination of size, offense, and style not to mention he had a pretty decent jab at times to set that hook up, would give Mayweather a lot of trouble. Same goes with Vernon Forrest, who like me, Roger Mayweather felt would have given the sternest test to his nephew, because Vernon is a little better and smarter technically than Tito, but still possesses the height advantage and a better jab.
These short brawlers with no jab are going to have their hands full with Mayweather, because he can offset their speed by just picking them off at distance and keep them handcuffed in no mans land.

 

Yeah, well on the point of Vernon, i give him a much better chance against Mayweather from a stylistic point of view. It's the jab. Think, even if Mayweather does drag Forrest into the type of fight where they are standing off one another and pot-shotting, would Mayweather even win that? He has more versatility in that he has more shots from range to put to use, but Vernon's jab might just dominate that kind of exchange. The only thing in favour of Mayweather is that he is a bona fide great fighter and Forrest isn't, and sometimes that overrides a style advantage. Anyway, i reckon Forrest could get the win. But i reckon Trinidad would stop Forrest, and Mayweather would outpoint Trinidad, just my opinions on the, interesting matches.

 

I think Mayweather "now" would outpoint Trinidad. I think Trinidad would have a good chance of steamrolling the Mayweather that ODLH fought. He was pushed around by ODLH and Hatton.
With Vernon you just dont know because its all about which fighter could establish himself first and control the fight and Vernon was as good of a boxer as Mayweather with more size, but less speed.
With Manny Pac I just see a guy who gets hit a lot, doesnt fight with a lot of ring smarts, and gets by on his youth, speed and will to win. Other than landing something on Mayweather and stopping him, I just cant see anyway of him outclassing Mayweather.

 

i suspect that a tall, long armed spoiler/boxer/puncher type would have success against Mayweather..a Hearns type physically, only with a bit better chin, and with a spoiler's mentality..a bit dirty like a big Sammy Angott with a bit of Carlos Monzon thrown in there..in other words, a tough, tall boxer with a punch who can utilize their height and reach advantage to the max..and someone who was capable of going beyond what De La Hoya had to offer aginst Mayweather.. A guy who was resourceful enough not to just depend on a dumb offense and a big punch. Trying to fight an orthodox type fight and trying to knock out Mayweather would be a mistake.

 

What my first post was alluding to was basically a cloned/composite type fighter...the actual guy from history in the welter division that would have the best chance against Mayweather IMO, would be Thomas Hearns.

 

Sounds like a certain Super Featherweight champion of years gone by.

Sandy Saddler. How do you see them two matching up at Super Featherweight?

Sounds partially Paul Williams, your description, would you give him a good chance?

 

Yes GP...you're thinking for me lol,...Sandy Saddler would be a prototype of the type fighter I'd give a good chance to beat Mayweather...tall, mean, rangy, etc.,..and as for Williams, I don't know...does he, in your opinion , best utilize his height and reach like Monzon, for instance...Monzon, to my mind fought tall as good as or better than anyone...and Hearns, when in his "boxer mode" has done so, but less concistantly than Monzon, and in those cases, disaster struck because Hearn's chin was'nt made of the sternest stuff...certainly not like Monzon's or Saddler's. I would still put my money (or somebody elses:twisted on Hearns over Mayweather h to h. Actually Saddler fits the bill quite well.

 

Stonehands heres an interesting video which provides some good insight into the "business" of boxing specifically this false claim that Manny P is such a small guy and Floyd has always been such a big welterweight.

[url]http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=224811[/url]

 

Well, Williams fulfills some of your criterea, highlighted below.

He does not utilise his height and reach but he imposes himself on his opponent with his workrate and fights inside. Spoiler-esque. He can apply pressure but it can at times be 'dumb'.