Mayweather has reached the age where a loss may not effect his place in history

I hate this "naturally smaller fighters" thing.

Ortiz outweighed Floyd entering the ring by 14 pounds, 164 to 150.

So, 2 of the past 4.

If you don't agree with Ortiz for some reason or another, then you have a displayed a double standard. By definition of "naturally smaller fighters," then add in Hatton. Hatton started his career at 140, Floyd started his at 130. Hence, Floyd would be the "naturally smaller fighter."

 

i dont know how much a loss would change his legacy

a lot of his current legacy at the moment is based on that 0 and being the best and so on so forth

a loss now would hurt but in 20 yrs who knows

as said earlier it also matters to who and the result is it a UD, SD, KO, TKO, is it a robbery

any way i dont have him in the top 20 or 25 to me the legends that are there are almost set in stone

anybody saying hes top 10 now or had a chance to be if he fought certain guys is wrong

but history is something remembered in the long run not the short term time will tell and thats if he loses

 

I don't rank the Marquez win as one of his best or anything.

Having said that, the opinion of Marquez's ability to fight at his 142 lb weigh in weight has to be bolstered tremendously by his future exploits at that weight.

 

He'll never fight Sexy Sergio so he'll never lose...

 

i agree

and seeing as when he retired Cotto, Margo and Williams all lost to each other and then Mosley beat the man Margo who beat the Man Cotto

then Floyd beat Mosley doesnt that kind of validate him, he beat the guy who emerged after the retirement

the only guy Floyd really hasnt fought is Pac and that one needs to happen

 

Ok people have differen opinions on this , Floyd at 5 , 8( and a bit) longer reach , wider shoulders.

Hatton was short stocky with pretty big legs. I dont take this as bigger , just heavier and finds it harder to lose the weight (slower metab).

Oscar started at 130 and he certainly isnt smaller than Hatton and never was , lighter yes.

On another note have a look at Manny's stats against Hatton , its surprising.

 

The Most Talented Boxer of the entire Century but did not use it properly for the sake of Boxing. That person should be in a business field not in the ring.

Is this a pre-emptive topic for that person's coming loss ?

 

sorry man, some people tends to equate legacy to the number of loss and who started this argument? You know who these people are.

now since This boxer is coming to a "critical" point and a "possible" loss is coming, these people now start this thread to "validate" that it is okay this time to have a loss in the record

but then again who started the equation of legacy to number of loss? these people

 

So we should demand more from him due to his height and reach?

He was the lighter man and/or conceded the dimensions in many of his fights. Genaro, Corrales, Castillo, Oscar, Baldomir (13 pounds heavier than Floyd), and Ortiz (14 pounds heavier than Floyd) come to mind. The first three are (in my opinion) his three best wins.

 

Yeah. Good post.

Dudes logic was flawed as hell. I mean Kelly Pavlik is about the same height and reach and **** as say David Haye. So he must think they are the same size?

 

It's a struggle between finding a balance in emphasis.

Well, you and I both know that Floyd fans and those who dislike him will BOTH contradict themselves heavily should he lose.

I must point out that this era is one in which one loss is detrimental to ones' career (regardless of if it should be or not). Mayweather is the best undefeated fighter of all time. Period (the only others that can hold a candle: Lopez, Marciano, Calzaghe). That is extremely significant. His 42 fight win streak is one of the very best win streaks of all time. That is extremely significant.

A loss ends that, but, at the same time, most agree that Ezzard Charles is a top 15 ATG. He didn't exactly, ehem, end his career on a hot streak. And his streak of many losses to end out his career began before he was as old as Floyd is now. I know that last sentence is an unfair comparison due to eras' standards, but nonetheless.

For Ricardo Lopez, one can say "oh, he was 105 lbs, that shouldn't be a weight class, doesn't count." For Marciano, one can say "oh, he only had 10 relevant fights and 7 were against really old guys." For Calzaghe, one can say "he fought a whole lot of low level guys, fought European talent rather than global, only has a handful or less of great wins, and only had success against non-40 year olds in one division." If Mayweather retires for good undefeated, he would end the one liner: "everybody loses." There would be no argument to support that anymore, and the fact that Floyd Mayweather, not Robinson, Louis, Ali, Hagler, Jofre, Saddler, Greb, etc. might be able to say that is a terrifying thought for some people, not something they like to consider or would be able to stomach.

 

This is one of the best posts, I have ever seen in ANY thread-

Good fukin post:good

 

That undisputed stuff is a little overrated as far as greatness, although in Hagler's case he held the titles for 7 years and defended against the best, that would be tough for any man. A guy many years ago only had to fight the fellow titlist in his division to be undisputed, but I am not talking about a reign of defending. Manny has fought the best and Floyd has not. it is easy to see.

 

Manny took on everyone without playing games. I do not agree with all the weight consideration and weight agreements especially for titles, but he did fight the best regardless.

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!


A ***** stroking another *****!!!!!!