How will boxing history remember Floyd Mayweather?

I have always understood why you don't have him in your top 100. I think that post should have come a few pages ago because the impression i get from you and Beeston is that you think he is wouldnt be in your top 10 P4P between 2000-2009.


How do you think he fares against Azumah Nelson, Alexis Arguello, Marco Antonio Barrera, Emilliano Fegatilli, Roberto Duran between 130-135lbs.

Where would you rank him post war in those divisions?

 

My point is how did they allow the WBO & IBF to get established.

I am talking more domestic scene mate. Also no tinternet so no ESB and no ishy RBRs and nutjobs website.

 

Having Floyd not in a top 100 is just silly. That's taking the whole idea that he's overrated to ridiculous extremes. You can't name 100 better/more accomplished fighters, you just can't.

 

He'll go down for me as the best boxer I've ever witnessed in the flesh, he is the greatest fighter of his generation without doubt, IMHO I think he's right up there with the all time greats...

 

Duran is a poor matchup for him. His defensive radar is out of this World, his head movement enough to evade even some of Floyds pinpoint and well-timed shot, probably the best jab taker of all time, iron chinned and non-stop. Duran would probably win a mid-range, can cut off thering and punish Floyd when he gets there. He'd win 116-112 or summat over 12, over 15 he'd get Floyd out of there. At lightweight he's an animal, at Welterweight a master.

Nelson was a jack of all trades master of none. He was sturdy, workmanlike and intelligent. But Floyds lateral movement, sharper punching and ability to pick his moments sees him win on points over 12 in a competitive fight where Floyd is in trouble when Nelson manages to pushthe oace. And with a fighter with his knowledge, that will happen a few times throughout the fight. And Nelson had a sizeable whack with either hand and knew how to make adjustments himself. Floyd takes a points win here.

Barrera at 130 would struggle to build his unorthodox bursts of rhythm combinations enough to beat Floyd. He probably suffers a flash KD or two, Floyds movement, jab and combinations seeing him win fairly comfortably on points IMO.

Arguello was fairly flat footed, but not straight forward. Vilomar Fernandez outmanouvered him at lightweight. Over ten or 12 rounds, Floyd can probably sneak a decision. It's Arguellos timing though that makes this so interesting. Flash knockdown aside, Arguello is making Floyd work harder than ever here. Arguello can set traps, is one of THE greatest combination punchers of all time, has a formidable jab, and is a top five P4P alltime puncher to both head and body (IMO) and whilst hittable, but so gutsy and durable at his peak (130, not 135 IMO) that this levels out Floyds stylistic advantage.

It would be very, very tight IMO. Arguello was a true 15 round fighter. In the oace he's setting as the fight goes on, it would be he, simply more proven, taking a hard-fought decision over 15. Over 12, Floyd really has to survivesome horrible moments to take the decision based on him having done enough sharp punching to stop Arguello planting his feet. But Arguello was no plodder. He could utilise slick upper body movement and parry punches to set up his own shots.

I don't think it's out of the question Arguello stops him either. Arguello is a true ATG though. Great fight, both men have to try their hardest to impose their fight on the other. I go with Floyd over 12 though, just. Floyds precision would see Alexis marked up, the shots Arguello would land would shorten Floyds career. The shoulder roll on the ropes would be barely ineffective here, it would have to be constant sharp shots/counters and re-setting to keep command of centre ring and stop Arguello from getting off consistently. Even then I might not be enough.

Great fantasy matchup there, one of my favourites.

 

IBF was established in the early 80s. No.1 Heavyweight Larry Holmes ditched his belts and became the IBFs, a brand new organisations, champion.

 

I have got him in my top 100!!! He's not in my top fifty.

 

This is more reasonable. Though personally, I have him, Hopkins and Roy Jones in my top 50 of active fighters. And Pacquiao the highest.

 

What's your criteria in terms of eras though TFFP? Where do you start with ranking fighters? Would you exclude the likes of Fitz and focus on post-Walker Law, even post-war fighters? Just a bit lost when you said top fifty 'active' fighters that's all :good

 

Sorry if my grammar was a bit poor there. I meant of active fighters, they are the ones that would make my top 50.

I rank everybody from Fitz to modern day. As long as they wore boxing gloves...

 

It's manner of victory. Sven Ottke was also winning consistently against very good opposition. He was also shite, my own eyes can see that.

Floyd would get into a top 100 with his consistent wins over very, very good fighters and the skillset displayed. But not into a top 50 equally skilled (different styles doesn't mean inferior) and with better resumes.

People always assume I try hard to omit him. I just try hard to be fair when ranking, I clearly think about things. I hope, even when people do not agree with me now they will also agree that I am not working off an 'anti-Floyd agenda' :good

 

great fighter with a great defense and incredible skills but he didnt want to be a legend as he morphed into this ultra **** called money may.

 

No worries, I assumed that's what you meant anyway :good

Which is fair enough, I know you will have your reasons. Hopefully you understad mine and don't think I'm the bitter psycho some seem to think I am. I have no reason to be.

For everyone else, I also rank 'gloved pugilists' only as well.

 

What about Roy Jones, where do you rank him?

I see among many people his light has dwindled a little bit, and Hopkins has far surpassed him (in many peoples eyes).

But I personally, forget everything he's done in the last few years, and remember the phenom that he was. A bit lacking for depth of wins, but outclassing Toney (no matter what the excuses were) and young Hopkins is good enough along with the obvious freak of nature that he was to give him a good ranking for me.

 

I can't get past the fact that in my opinion, Castillo beat him. Close but clear too.

Even the Oscar fight was crazy close, floyd was rendered ineffective by wild rushing from Oscar early on.