Floyd Mayweather Jr. Vs. Ray Leonard And Thomas Hearns...

Would have to seriously study Hearns to find enough weaknesses. Dude had a scary jab.
But Floyd could beat Leonard.

Of course on ESB Floyd gets brutally KOd by every great.

 

srl tossup.

Hearns is the one fighter in history i think almost certainly beats floyd

 

Both beat Floyd

 

Why?
Not saying that he would but definitely could.

 

The classic "physical abilities" argument.
Leonard was taller, but not bigger. They didn't cut weight back then.
Too strong? Based on what? (if he is stronger, it wont be by much)
Too fast? Well, timing beats speed.
Too skilled? Now this is a good argument.

Would you break it down for me, as to how exactly is Leonard that much more skilled than Floyd?

 

Floyd's offense is a joke compared to Ray's.

 

Mayweather would be up against two naturally taller and bigger men. Leonard was as fast as Mayweather if not faster and moved far better than anyone Mayweather has fought. I think it's a competitive fight as Mayweather's defensive skills are sublime but I think he gets out worked, out maneuvered and out boxed by SRL.

Hearns' is the worst style match up I can imagine for Mayweather. Hearns can win rounds behind his jab alone and trying to pull counter a guy with such a huge reach advantage is not going to work. He'd have to do what Leonard did and abandon his boxing and take the fight to him. Not sure Mayweather could be effective enough trying to fight this way as when he does fight aggressively he's more about getting off first then using his head and elbows to manhandle guys on the inside rather than unloading with bombs, that methodical style might work against most but getting off first against Hearns isn't easy with his reach and being physical alone in close wont be enough to get the stoppage, he'd have to take far more risks to force a stoppage.

 

How exactly?

 

I wouldn't say Mayweather offence is a joke but SRL threw faster, harder combinations, his body punching was better, he hit harder, he had a better left hook and he threw more in general.

 

I think Floyd had the better timing. And on the inside, Floyd definitely had the better body punching.
I dont really know to comment on the left hooks. Floyd used his more like a jab at times(and brilliantly so).
And most fighters work rate went down vs Floyd. So i wouldn't cite that as something that wins Leonard the fight.

 

SRL's offence alone wouldn't be enough to win but along with SRL's speed, superior height, reach and movement I can see Mayweather struggling to do what he normally does. SRL's foot work will be Mayweather's biggest issue, he's used to guys chasing him, I think SRL's can get in and out like nobody else could.

I think SRL's judge of distance and timing as well is great. The Benetiz fight stands out for me the way he was able to land and then be gone against such a good boxer and defensive fighter like Benitez is impressive.

I see SRL/Mayweather playing out like a more competitive RJJ/Toney. SRL's makes the counter puncher struggle by getting off first and then getting out before the counter puncher can respond.

 

I'll just explain why I acknowledge Floyd as p4p the best ever.

Personally I feel like measuring men based of their successes alone and calling that prime is foolish because it disregards flaws and idealizes a man which is fine except we're meant to be discussing whose flaws could be exploited by who. Well, if I can't use their off nights wtf am I meant to do invent a flaw? I mean is it fair to say Rocky Marciano had bad timing because Joe put him down with a well timed shot? Not really he used the same shot to time his own and ended that fight....so even when a prime boxer looks bad it's hard to pin a flaw down that'd cause him to lose given he overcame that flaw when it came up. Which is why youse just argue about resume rather than actual techniques. Because right at the beginning of the conversation there is this agreement that you'll place yourselves in a situation where all you can really claim is my guy will do better than the guy who failed to end your guy because my guy is better than that guy and his resume or accolades is the proof....Well, **** that. There's no point in it and it leaves too much room for both sides to be right while still arguing with each other as if one has to be wrong. I mean more often than not both sides of a fantasy fight have logical outcomes regardless of which won you agree with. It's not like you often see "Floyd by devastating KO" or "Marciano by wide UD".

However slim it may be there is a chance SRL or TH show up wrong and with nothing viable to fall back on and get beaten. Wrong plans, wrong training, were wrong about their age, whatever, they were wrong. Floyd's never been wrong and I see no reason to forgive the guys who have just because they had a long and great series of being right. Having never been wrong is the most impressive feat in boxing. Having a great plan for a great fighter comes more often than always having a viable option.