Holman Williams vs Floyd Mayweather jr.

You have not seen film of Willie Pep in his prime before his near fatal plane accident in 1947 ?...
Which is more impressive and more indicative of the caliber of fighters of different era's sir ?..
Fighter A having won about 150 bouts in a row with but one defeat to a HOF larger man, fighting every 12 days or so in a richer era of great fighters,
OR Fighter B, having 2 or 3 bouts a year in a 48 bout career, avoiding his main competition for over 5 years, in a much less talented era. ?

 

well technically and stylistically speaking what made pep superior to mayweather? you've only talked about his competition but when i watch the two fight, they both have that same shotpick then bounce out of range from a different angle style, they both have that scientific ring movement that nobody can duplicate. if floyd fought in that era what makes you think he wouldn't have the same success willie pep had when they had similar stylistic qualities. p4p pep is greater than floyd but h2h i wouldn't pick anyone over floyd under 147 where he was more of a boxer-puncher besides duran.

 

I have posted this before E. Willie Pep had more bouts in his first 3 years than your hero had in his entire career...As a featherweight Willie was uncanny fighting about every 12-15 days against some truly great experienced featherweights as
Chalky Wright, Joey Archibald, Phil Terranova, Sal Bartola, Manny Ortiz, Willie Joyce, Sammy Angott, Paddy DeMarco, Allie Stolz, Sandy Saddler etc. Willie had 230 bouts in his fabulous career most after he almost died in a plane crash, that he
miraculously recovered after about 6 monhs in a back brace,.
Yes Floyd Mayweather is a defensive whiz for his times, but Willie Pep was the Houdini of alltimes...

 

Can't imagine a guy who lost to cocoa kid 6 times beating Mayweather

 

He fought a lot of garbage in those first 62 fights.

 

Of course Pep starting out at age of 18 fought 4 rounders in his beginning career, but was soon fighting the likes of Joey Archibald, Bobby "Poison Ivy". Chalky Wright, a tremendous puncher, Bill Speary, Allie Stolz, a classy lightweight contender at MSG which I saw, Sammy Angott a TOUGH LW champion, who would have given Moneyweather absolute hell in close like glue, etc. But Willie fought about 20 bouts EACH YEAR those tougher competitive days...Compared to the Willie Pep of those early days Floyd Mayweather was a PART TIME FIGHTER...

 

****And a world champion by age 21 with only 18 pro fights and a win over a solid title holder****

 

so the fact that pep has more fights than floyd means that he can beat him, correct? so sam langford is automatically better than ali h2h just because he fought more often? i don't see a correlation at all.

 

You DON"T see a correlation because you don't want to see a connection...
Try to answer this simple ****ogy :
If Joe Smith does 100 one armed pushups and has to stop...
And Elmer Fudd does 400 one armed pushups, which athlete is the more impressive ???
Well Willie Pep had more than FOUR times the fights Mayweather had, DUCKING NO FIGHTER of his rich era, isn't that more impressive than Moneyweather ???...In your heart of hearts you KNOW the answer...

 

Seriously... what is wrong with you?
Cant a guy express an opinion that conflicts with yours... without you throwing a tantrum? Jesus!

 

didn't gene tunney beat harry greb three times? didn't harry wills beat langford like 12 times? both those guys have more than twice the number of bouts and wins than their opponents but they still lost to them. there's no correlation at all dude. willie pep is greater than floyd in terms of accomplishments but just because he had over 200 more fights than floyd doesn't mean he can beat him.

 

E, you just said it...Pep is greater than Mayweather in "accomplishments" because he was as unbeatable as Floyd for a much longer time...H2h there is no way we can accurately say who beats who in a Fantasy bout, but it is infinitely harder to maintain a winning streak fighting four times the amount of bouts... peace...

 

What to you seems a tantrum, but E is a good adversary and we get along with different points of view...And sir YOU are not my censor...

 

E, good try above but No cigar...The reason Harry Greb was rated above Gene Tunney P4P is obvious with a little thought...Gene Tunney[ who truly split 5 bouts with Greb] was a LIGHTHEAVYWEIGHT {Tunney] fighting a 12 pound lighter and
tired middleweight Harry Greb. That is WHY. If Marvin Hagler had the cujones to challenge a Michael Spinks, a top LH and lost, it would not diminish Hagler's all-time middleweight standings...
And yes Harry Wills beat Sam Langford a number of times, but Ole Sam was truly an overgrown MW=LH in those bouts. But no one could compare Harry Wills with Sam Langford as an alltime great fighter...This is why it is vital to have a knowledge of boxing history ALONG with record book stats...
P.S. E, you seem like a nice chap, so no hard feelings...:hi:

 

You seem to confuse " talent pool " with talent every time. You are not that much older than I am, but I'm of the firm opinion that the top 4 or 5 fighters, in any division, from any era could all give each other problems.

There are of course stand outs like Ray Robinson, but it could be argued by some ( not me ) that Leonard could more than hold his own with him. That is just one example from one division, I'm not too fussed to go through all of them.

However you consistently try to degrade fighters from more recent era's on the grounds that " back in the day " there were hundreds of fighters that fought every week or so therefore they must have been better.

Have you ever stopped to think that the overwhelming majority of those guys fought so often because they didn't have a pot to p-iss in, if they didn't fight?