Floyd Mayweather vs Julio Ceasar Chavez @140

Maidana gave Floyd issues due to his style.

When he fought Maidana, it was only 8 months after he’d easily beaten Canelo, and the year before he fought Manny.

So how can you say that he did fine against Manny and Canelo, but that we have to discard the Maidana fight due to his age?

 

Few are.

 

He was past prime for all of those fights, and coasting without legs, power, or punch output for every fight after Canelo.

 

Chavez will be unpleasant for Floyd when he turns up the heat

 

Just to clear things up I think Chavez beats Mayweather. However @NoNeck does present some arguments it’s just his delivery makes things hard for himself. I notice a lot of his points however valid you think they are, are simply dismissed as “You’re an idiot” or some version of that without challenging much of anything he says, like it’s some kind of trump card.

 

London’s thing is coming out with wild analyses that aren’t backed by anything. He’ll say things like the guy with the shorter reach who weighs less has the physical advantage in whatever fantasy fight, invariably favoring his favorite fighter. If you ask for examples, you get a walls of text without examples instead.

 

I’ll leave you to debate with him.

You’ll quickly see for yourself what he’s like.

I’ll give anyone a fair chance, but this guy takes the biscuit.

 

Mayweather and Wilder bring out the hate like no one else from arm chair pistoleros.

Mayweather looses every fantasy fight yet in the real world he never even came close to loosing................after he defused the One Trick Pony Pac like a sparring session most posters were diagnosed with FMJ Derangement syndrome.

Now, unless you are sitting Ringside you have zero credentials to score a fight, zilch nada, the couch don't count, period..............so all this nonsense of claiming FMJ "lost" to Castillo or Maidana due to some Basement Dweller watching and "scoring" it on his phone is just...........nonsense, end of.

 

Get real you fool.

All of my points are always backed up with logic and facts.

I give realistic, concise breakdowns, allowing for styles etc.

I apply context, and I appreciate context.

I also allow for circumstances.

I always give examples.

Always.


Regarding your quote above, I merely acknowledged that SOMETIMES, the shorter guy may have an advantage over a much bigger guy, based upon styles.

I was referring to Mike Tyson and Joe Frazier having fought Wilder, noting that in those specific fights, Wilder’s height wouldn’t have been a huge advantage to him.


I actually said that about Wilder-Frazier just last week on a thread.

You then scoffed at my post, saying that I didn’t know what I was talking about.

Yet the very same day, I read an old post where you’d said that Mike Tyson would have destroyed Wilder, which actually proved the point that I’d made, which again, you’d scoffed at.

You are a joker.


You are nothing but a stat man.

The very definition of a BoxRec warrior.

I’ve never ever once seen you have an objective debate, where you have applied intelligence and shown any knowledge.


The fact that you think Floyd would easily have beaten a prime Chavez tells us all about your level of boxing knowledge.

 

How many people are hating?

I can’t see many. And the ones who are should just be ignored.

Also, they’re no worse than the guys who come on and rubbish these opponents, claiming that Floyd was simply untouchable etc.


Regarding your post, yes, of course Floyd came close to losing.


Anybody who would have dismissed Chavez as a nobody to Floyd, obviously knows nothing about the sport.

 

This would be an extraordinary contest.

His time at 140 spanned a large part of Chavez's career and I think it would be fair to suggest that he peaked in that division.

Mayweather was also in his pomp, during that brief time he spent in the Light Welterweight division - his hunger for the big money on display, clearly. But Mayweather never faced an elite class opponent, at their peak, and certainly not anyone like Chavez.

So, to whom goes the advantage? In this case, the viewing fans, because Mayweather would be forced into an actual fight, and it would be fascinating to witness Mayweather's technical prowess put under this kind of test.

I wouldn't bet on the outcome - just savor the event.

 

Aka you pick Floyd. Corrales, Canelo and Cotto were peak elite fighters.

 

I do not consider Corrales to be an elite fighter. He also resembled a famine victim at 130.
At the same time, I'd suggest that neither Canelo nor Cotto were at their respective peaks when Mayweather fought them.

 

The only two guys who Chavez fought who may have been above the level of Floyd’s opponents were Oscar (who Floyd beat) and Whitaker (who Floyd beat in sparring). In three chances, Chavez got the worst of it three times.

 

Nobody thinks that Canelo and Cotto were peak against Floyd.

Canelo was young and had hardly done anything. He barely beat Lara and Trout around that time.

Cotto had been bashed up by Manny and Marg.

Both great fighters, but definitely not at their bests.