If Mayweather beats Mosely, will that be his best win?

I can't stand Judah and think he is a mental midget, but to say he was never any good is just ridiculous. Never as good as hyped, absolutely. But you don't knockout Cory Spinks, get five major world titles, and become the linear welterweight champion of the world if you were never any good...But just so we're clear if you call him a stupid little classless twat I will agree with you 100%. :yep

 

Think hes been involved in about 20 world title fights too, while arguably having the fastest hands in the sport and certainly faster than Floyd

 

You could argue osley is the best Welterweight in the world at the moment

 

It always depends on the circumstances. When I say he was never any good than of course to what he was hyped up to.

 

Thats right. He probably should have stayed at 140 where his height and power were more suited, but he went looking for bigger dollars.
To this thread I would say ODLH is his biggest win, and if he beats Mosley it will be up there as well. He has some good wins at the lower weights, just not as popular name fighters.
Remember Corrales was undefeated and highly touted coming into their fight and Mayweather made him look silly.

 

He was hyped up to be Whitaker with power

 

could be so... Mosley is probably the best Welter at this moment... Castillo, Corales, Hernandez, Judah, Hatton and DLH were pretty good wins too.. But i do think Mosley tops them..

 

I'm glad that's what you meant, because I enjoy your posting. I know what you mean. As powerpuncher said, with having him hyped up to be a power punching Whitaker at the time he became famous. :rofl Old Max Kellerman was slightly off on that, I'd say.

 

I actually wanted to believe it at the time Judah was an undefeated champ, lightening fast, radar defense, countering skills, and murderous power. He also had a workrate back then to. He really had the potential to be the best of this generation, if he worked to develop the fundamentals, stamina and defense like Floyd, maybe he'd be better than FMJ, instead he got hayemaker happy

 

Easily. He doesn't have any other great wins IMO. Diego Corrales was a good but not great fighter, Floyd's winning performances against Jose Luis Castillo and Oscar De La Hoya were not remotely impressive, and the rest of his resume is mediocre. Thus, he doesn't have any great wins so even a win over a past-prime version of Mosley who has already lost to Cotto would still automatically become the best on Floyd's rather feeble ledger, if he wins with any sort of style or authority.

 

Yeh I think so.

 

By beating Margo he proved he is. And I though Castillo won the first fight. I expect Shane to win by KO, but don't ever forget that Ma. has lived in Vegas for a long time and is well liked there. I just hope to worst judges in history are not on the fight: Duane Ford or Jerry Roth. and for the third I only like taptap boxers judge and the third blind mouse, Harold Lederman.:good

 

Those were both hard fought clear wins, if you don't like Floyd that's fine but don't try to undermine him by saying that his performance was not remotely impressive as though its a prerequisite for a good or great win.

Give credit where it's due.

 

No. Credit is not due for a disappointing performance where a fighter was underwhelming.

The quality of a win is always determined by quality of opponent + quality of performance. If either category gets a low mark, the quality of the win suffers. That's why dominant performances vs crap opponents aren't great wins, and it's why underwhelming or unconvincing performances against good opponents often don't make the grade as truly great wins.

For example, I still count Kessler as a better win for Calzaghe than Hopkins. Hopkins is a much better fighter than Kessler, but Calzaghe was superb in the second half of the Kessler fight whilst he was woefully ineffective throughout the Hopkins fight. Taking everything into consideration, I think Kessler was the better win.

By the same logic, Oscar was not a great win for Floyd, nor was the 2nd Castillo fight (Floyd didn't even win the 1st JLC fight so that one doesn't even come into it IMO). Vs Oscar, Floyd was languid, lethargic, seemed unable to nullify Oscar'a jab till Oscar got tired/frustrated and stopped throwing it, and PBF basically did the absolute minimum required to take a decision win. Vs JLC, Floyd refused to engage at all. He did not try to master Castillo, he used his legs and the clock to run out the fight while putting himself in as little danger as possible. He had the ability to outfight Castillo and emphatically beat him, but he chose not to. In short, he stunk the place out rather than engage.

Neither are great wins by any stretch of the imagination.
(also because Oscar was not even a great opponent by then anyway, at least not compared to what he once was. The 2007 version was well, well past his late 90s prime)

 

The ODLH win definitely deserves credit. Floyd had only a few fights at welterweight against what most considered smaller welters. Moving up to 54 and facing Oscar who had been competing at 160 and 154 for some time was certainly a challenge and a good win. Oscar was inconsistent but look who he was fighting and he wasnt considered as shot in my mind as he was in and after the Forbes fight. Realistically he had no business at 160, but coming back down to 54 he looked pretty good against Mayorga and had performed well against Mosley.
Oscar in my opinion did little against Mayweather except use his speed and size advantage to get close to Mayweather and land poor ineffective shots that were over scored in the fight.
As far as Mayweather, he always boxes from the outside and moreso against fighters who are bigger and stronger than him, and Castillo and ODLH were bigger and stronger than most of his opponents. The first fight with Castillo was close, but Floyd had hurt his hand, and he should be given credit for taking the rematch and winning more one sided.