Floyd Mayweather has never beat a HOF/ATG in their Prime this is a fact

MAB was only 26 when he went through an absolute savage war with Morales. Meanwhile Morales was only 23. Pacquiao at 26 had been knocked out twice. He had an incredibly intense war with Marquez at 25 and an even more violent war with Morales at 26. And he moved up to 130 where he was undersized.

Pacquiao too was not as physically dominant towards the latter part of his prime. Just like MAB, but their skills compensated up to a certain point. Which was about 2010 for Pac and 2005 for Barrera.

I believe the reason why Pac, MAB and Morales were not totally ruined after their wars was because they were not over 30. I agree, after 30 getting into a war finishes you.

 

Floyd has already separated himself from Pacquiao by a mile, he's easily regarded as the better and greater fighter of the two. That's irrefutable already.

 

Jesus Salud definitely was not on the slide. He was coming off a 7 fight win streak before losing to MAB. 4 of those fights were inside the distance. Jesus just wasn’t on level with a guy like MAB so he was a big underdog and rightfully so.

Kevin Kelley was definitely on the slide having lost to Erik in 2000 but bouncing back with 2 wins back to back against Raul Franco and Homberto Soto.

Naz was an epic win. He may have been flawed, but all fighters are. Part of Naz’s success came from his very unorthodox style that very good boxers couldn’t figure out. He was knocking out everyone and was one of the top p4p fighters at the time MAB pulled off the upset of the year while putting on a masterful boxing performance that showed the new wrinkles he added to his skill set.

Jose Luis Valbuena was a good solid opponent but again....just not on MAB’s level. MAB dominated over 12 sets.

Erik Morales II was a very close fight but I agree, Erik should have won. Irionically, I though MAB beat Morales in their epic war when they first faced off inside the ring.

Johnny Tapia wasn’t really on the slide. He had only lost 2 times to Paulie Ayala and was on a long win streak before. Those fights with Paulie were great fights and very close. Johnny was a very good win for MAB.

Enrique Sanchez was a decent opponent, nothing special and MAB obviously dominated.

There’s no deception going on. Most top level guys fights hard fights, then take on a mandatory or a light touch just to stay active and continue to work on securing big name fights. You won’t see many top level guys that have a win streak that consists of all world champions, undefeated fighters and young lions. It’s just not realistic so MAB’s win streak shouldn’t be scrutinized considering how he dominated in all of those fights minus the rematch with Erik....anothe top p4p fighter at that time.

There’s a difference between a fighters “physical peak” and being “prime”. Some fighters physical peak happens before they reach their overall prime. For MAB and EM they didn’t reach their prime until after their fight with one another. That fight gave them the kind of experience that enhanced their boxing skills and abilities, but they were at their physical prime being in their mid 20’s. Most athletes physical peak is in the mid to late 20’s.

There’s a fine line and balance when a fighter is still operating within the peak of their physical abilities while having the high level experience under their belts that improve their Boxing IQ and skills. MAB and EM were right at that point in their careers when they met Manny.

 

You just flat out make **** up to make yourself feel better because you lose at everything in life...go back to holdint conversations with your alt you wierdo

 

Salud was on a seven fight win streak over a collection of journeyman and also rans. He was five years removed from his last notable victory over Espadas Jr. He was almost 12 years removed from his lone world title victory. After Barrera he would lose three of his last four fights. He was a tough, dependable veteran who wasn't ever going to be on MAB's level, yeah...But he was certainly past his best by the time MAB got to him.

Tapia was most definitely sliding by the time he got to Barrera. His previous fight was a very controversial decision win over a tricky and tough but never particularly talented Manuel Medina in his featherweight debut. A lot of people, myself included, thought he should have lost that fight. This was following those battles against Ayala-and those years of self-abuse. He was still a fine and accomplished fighter, but he wasn't the same fighter he'd been at lower weights several years earlier.

Naz is an epic win, yeah. But you get the feeling that he was always gonna be there to be taken at that point by someone really good. Naz had been looking less than inspired and vulnerable for a while. That said MAB was really, really good that night, and was a lot more disciplined than he'd been in the past. Probably his career-best performance and arguably when he peaked as a fighter.

Agree with you about the first two Morales-Barrera fights. Interestingly, I'd say Morales improved his form for a while following the second fight while Barrera started to decline. Odd how their trajectories went in that regard.

Anyway, the point I was making was that while this collection of fighters was solid, Barrera's run through them doesn't necessarily indicate that he was at his peak throughout the entire time. He could still be slightly past his absolute best and still produce same results against this group. That's not even to diminish his career or Pac's win over him, either...It's just to note that he might have already peaked when Pac (who probably had his number anyway) got the chance to face him the first time around.

 

Tapia’s Drug abuse is definitely something to be considered but with only 2 losses in close fights with Paulie who was a very good fighter isn’t a real indication he was on the slide. His fight with Medina was a step up in weight and I agree, he lost that fight.

MAB’s opponents shouldn’t be a measure of whether or not he was past his peak, his level performance against these opponents should be the indicator of where he was at that stage. He dominated in all of those fights outside of Erik. Which should be expected because that was his equal.

 

I'd say Barrera's level of performance dropped off slightly following the Hamed fight. That's not to diminish him as a fighter though. It's simply to dispute the fact that he was at his peak when he met Pac.

He was still a formidable fighter, and the manner in which Pac decimated MAB makes it one of the best wins of the past two decades. The fact that I view Barrera as being slightly past his absolute best doesn't change that in any way.

 

OP is spot on.

Name me an ATG that May beat at their optimal weight, in their prime. You can't. It's "irrefutable".

Besides, the idiots on here LOVE to say that there was no such opponent. But I'm CERTAIN there MUST have been ONE for a guy (Floyd) who competed in THREE DIFFERENT DECADES and 5-7 DIFFERENT DIVISIONS!

90's
00's
10's

130-160

50 fights

And you're telling me there wasn't a SINGLE opponent from 1996 to 2017 (let that sink in) across FIFTY FIGHTS (also let that sink in)?

Your boy is overrated, simple!

 

this post is right on. He never beat a prime great, which is the problem with his legacy and record. He fought them at the right times and waited for Manny to get old. I just hope he stays retired. I am tired of his games of handpicking at the right time for big money and boring fights.

 

well name them......name these " Prime Optimal Weight ATG's" who fought in Floyd's weight class.

then you conveniently added 160...you ought to be ashamed of yourself

 

Barrera's an interesting case as it pertains to him in his best form. IMO he's the most versatile fighter of his generation. The guy was a swiss Army knife and arguably (IMO) the most offensively skilled fighter his era. With that said, he's had a couple incarnations. At first he was a pure pressure fighter who bulldozed his way through the 122 pound division. But lacked the big talent fighters on his resume. His only fights in the 90s were McKinney and Jones. And those two were not on the level of fighters that he faces later in his career. So I just can't say he was at his best in the 90s.

Rumsfeld believes that Barrera was in his prime for a year. In 2000, and then as a result of too much punishment taken against Morales lost something and never regained it. Is that true that he lost something physically? Perhaps. Maybe his workrate, stamina and his aggression took a little dip. He also moved up to 126 where he was fighting bigger men so that's a thing we need to consider as well. But he wasn't crippled physically. Far from it. It's not a Hagler situation where the guy looked like a shell of himself after the Hearns and Mugabi wars. Where he looked like a shot snail as a result of punishment taken. Barrera still maintained solid reflexes, speed, etc. Even though he was never a physically overwhelming talent in the first place.

A fighter is a combination of his physical tools, skills and heart/desire. His prime occurs when these things come together forming their best combination. I believe that from 2000-2004 Barrera had some combination of these elements that put him in his prime.

We could honestly say the same about Manny Pacquiao. Towards his latter fights at 122 and his brief run at 126 Roach had been with him for a few years now. And taught him the fundamentals of boxing. And at that point he was fresh, fast, strong, powerful and extremely motivated, durable and indefatigable. But he wasn't as refined as the 2008/2009 version of Pacquiao. Which as a result of wars, attrition and moving up in weight was forced to change his style. Could Pacquiao have fought Cotto the same way he fought Marquez and Barrera in the first fight and live to have the same results? I don't know and I don't think he could have. Fighters evolve. It's what they do. We're just trying to figure out which version of them is the best. As for me I'd put the young 2000 version of Barrera on the same level approximately as the more polished, but more damaged 2003 version of Barrera. Likewise I'd put the young, wild 2003 version of Pac roughly on the same level as the less physically dominant 2009 version of Pac. Barrera caught the young wild version of Pacquiao. When they met in the rematch in 2007 Barrera said that Pacquiao didn't feel as strong as he did the first fight. An indicator that the Marquez, Morales wars and moving up in weight took a toll on his body. IMO, no doubt.

 

Hey, Floyd fought for a belt there. End of discussion.

 

wha

you sound like the guy who lists B-Hop......you're right...end of discussion.