But we’re dealing with people on here who probably believe that Floyd would have beaten Hearns, based on the fact that a guy like Barkley did, and that Floyd was levels above Barkley. That’s how they think.
Ha! Yeah. I’m really enjoying this debate. But these guys aren’t in any way realistic and they completely ignore what Floyd did and didn’t do. To say that Floyd would probably have beaten Hagler is baffling. Nearly as baffling as saying that Floyd could have pot shotted Marvin to a U/D.
No, I dont agree with it. You're essentially saying that only Sugar Ray Leonard is able to pull out a win over a slow, stiff, washed up Hagler if a fighter is washed up, a fighter is washed up and ready to be taken That is why I used the example of Leon Spinks If anyone had reason to lack confidence, it would be Leon. Only 7 fights. Never went past ten was facing the biggest draw in boxing or any sport. To invent something like "Leon Spinks was a rival HW to Ali, who had nothing to lose and everything to gain. " and that Leon had more reason to be confident vs Ali than Floyd is actually INSANE!!! Do you not realize Leon was a novice while Floyd is a multiple title legend with NO LOSSES??? why would anyone in their right mind say that a NOVICE has more reason to be confident than someone with Floyd's rank and reputation??? Essentially what you do is take out the relevant factors of a matchup between two fighters, then substitute your own invented on the spot, hoping that the person you're debating is some dumb ape who won't question what you write. So only Leonard could pull it off? Need I remind you that Antuofuermo took prime Marvin to a draw, and Duran took him to within two points with neither adopting Leonard's strategy Now you are saying Floyd has no chance with a used up Hagler? You are just flat out wrong
It's a few steps above attempting to prove points by pretending that Mayweather lost to Jose Luis Castillo.
1) No it isn't. 2) Castillo was mentioned only once in this thread. I posted that he almost beat Mayweather, which he did. I didn't post that Mayweather had actually lost to him. 3) You are a delusional fanboy with moronic opinions.
No he isn't. Do Mayweather's fanboys have zero reading comprehension Ahhhh, you are a BoxRec warrior. Only someone completely clueless about boxing wouldn't know that Hagler was robbed in that bout.
Floyd via brutal stoppage is there any other answer? I mean Marvin was seventy five when Leonard beat him and in his last two fights fought a pair of second rate contenders coming up stairs.
And therein lies the problem. An utter lack of perspective. Mayweather already fought guys as big as Hagler. Therefore, size wouldn't be an issue. Hagler was stylistically similar to Canelo. Therefore, this is a slam dunk for Mayweather. Mayweather beat several Southpaws (Canelo not being one of them). Therefore, Mayweather beats all Southpaws. It took Hagler 15-Rounds to beat Duran. Therefore, Mayweather beats Hagler. And on and on... Typical, agenda-driven nonsense.
I think if Norris had been able to reproduce the 'circumstances', in which Mosley landed against Floyd, in the second round of their bout, there's a chance Mayweather doesn't make it out of the round.
Mark Dunham, 1. Again, Marvin wasn’t completely washed up. He had declined. He was faded. He wasn’t washed up like the guys I used in my examples though. 2. I never even suggested that no other fighter couldn’t have beaten Marvin. I simply said that Floyd couldn’t have, simply due to styles. You’re so defensive of Floyd. I could list guys who’d have had more chance of beating Marvin, but who we could both agree that weren’t better fighters than Floyd on a P4P basis. Nunn is a great example which you used. Floyd was a better overall fighter than Nunn was, but Nunn had a better chance of beating Marvin due to styles. I haven’t got a vendetta against Floyd. It’s just that he’d have needed a similar game plan to the one that Leonard had, yet he didn’t possess the same attributes or fight in the same manner. If a former great is vulnerable due to declining, it still requires the right style to beat him. The issue with your example, is that I believe that Marvin had far more left in the tank than what Ali had at that stage. What I said isn’t in any way insane. There was no pressure on Spinks. He was young and inexperienced. He had a free shot at the title. If he lost, no big deal. And he was fighting a HW, whereas Floyd would have been fighting someone from a different weight class. And despite what you try to convince yourself of, Floyd was never supremely confident. He was insecure. He wouldn’t fight Manny, and he wouldn’t even let a rival belt holder weigh-in at the limit. He was obsessed with his zero and his reputation, where he needed Andre Berto and an MMA fighter to reach his goal of 50-0. In real time, he’d never even have considered fighting even a declining version of Marvin Hagler. I’ve just explained that to you above. Leon Spinks had no pressure on him from the public. He had nothing to lose and everything to gain. Whereas Floyd had nothing to gain and everything to lose. I’m debating with a hardcore fan of Floyd’s, who has zero objectivity. A guy who debates on emotion rather than logic. A guy who can’t comprehend what Floyd did and didn’t do in his own career. A guy who can’t appreciate the psychological aspect of the sport, and who can’t appreciate how two styles would mesh. You’re that guy. Ignoring everything that Floyd did, whilst trying to defend your hero by pulling out the stats. This was Floyd’s career in real time: He wouldn’t fight a prime version of Manny Pacquiao. He deliberately cheated JMM on the scales. He ran his mouth off about fighting Winky, before backing out at the last moment after everything had been agreed upon. He deliberately retired when the WW division was hot. He wouldn’t let Canelo weigh-in at 154. He wouldn’t let Maidana wear his normal gloves. He needed an MMA fighter to help protect his precious zero. Hello! We don’t need to be qualified psychologists. We don’t need to hire Columbo to figure this out for us. Yes, Floyd was one of the greatest fighters of all time. Hell, I wouldn’t even argue if you labelled him as the GOAT based solely on a H2H basis. But the guy was a safety first fighter. A careful businessman. A guy who only took certain fights at certain times. Now the above isn’t just my opinion. It’s a stone cold FACT. Yet in your fantasy world, the very same guy would have fought Marvin Hagler with CONFIDENCE. Well, no. He clearly wouldn’t have would he. He wouldn’t have had the confidence to have fought him, nor the style to have beaten him. I don’t debate on statistics like how you do. I debate on STYLES and the CHARACTERISTICS of the fighters. NO! Once again, READ what I’ve written. I believe that there’s a fair few candidates who could have pulled it off. But again, Floyd wouldn’t have been one of them, purely down to STYLES. Do you understand that? Once again, I’ll give you the Barkley example and hope that it sinks in. Floyd was levels above Iran Barkley on a P4P basis. Levels above him on paper. Yet Barkley did what Floyd couldn’t have - due to styles. Don’t be so defensive. Everybody has a stylistic nemesis. It’s why Frazier, Ali and Foreman produced the results that they did. Pretty simple stuff to any knowledgeable boxing fan. Styles make fights. Need I remind you of the following: Floyd didn’t fight like Vit. Duran had Marvin’s respect and he was more confident than what Floyd would realistically have been. Marvin was content to box guys who he was comfortable with. If Duran had been out boxing him where he’d have been in real danger of losing the fight, he’d have turned the boxing match into a fight and put the pedal down. In the end, he just controlled the vital last rounds, similar to the way that Floyd did against Oscar. The only time that Marvin made a real strategic mistake, was against Ray. He started out in an orthodox style, where he stood off of Ray and showed him too much respect. He went with the wrong strategy, which shocked guys like Gill Clancy. If he’d have started as a southpaw and pressured Ray from the outset, he’d probably have won. You still haven’t offered an actual breakdown. You still haven’t said how Floyd would have won. You still haven’t said what Floyd would have done had Marvin had put the pedal down and pressured him as a southpaw. I’m simply saying that Marvin would have been a significant favourite based upon their styles and their characteristics. Despite Marvin being faded, he was still an elite level southpaw who fought at a weight that Floyd wasn’t comfortable at. If you truly thought that I was wrong, you’d prove it by giving an actual, realistic breakdown of what you think could/would have happened. The fact that you haven’t done this in ten whole pages, speaks volumes. The only thing that you have said, is: “Anything that Ray could do, Floyd could do” A terrible statement, especially considering that Floyd didn’t possess the attributes or the style that Ray had. The difference between me and you, is that I’m a boxing fan, whereas all you want to do is to defend Floyd. It doesn’t matter if Floyd couldn’t have beaten Marvin Hagler at MW. Floyd started out as a SFW. It doesn’t mean that Marvin was levels above him on a P4P basis. You could even say that Floyd was a better overall fighter and that he ranks higher on a P4P basis. I wouldn’t fight you on that. Just accept that great fighters can lose to other great fighters based upon styles. On another thread, I’ve just read some convincing arguments that Duran should rank higher than Ray on a P4P basis, despite the fact that Duran had losses to Ray, Marvin, Hearns and Benitez. Stop being so defensive and let’s continue with an objective debate.
