Ray Leonard v.s. Floyd Mayweather ...

Which is why I think he'd make it to the final bell and avoid getting dropped. But SRL proved he could figure out and even at times outbox a master technician against El Radar. I think Leonard does the same against FMJ.

 

Well the common opinion is that Floyd ducked Pac, so you are in minority. Anyway, that is simply not the point.

The point is that beating a prime Pac would have greatly improved Floyd's legacy. He would be a TOP 20 ATG, in my book.

 

You can't beat a guy that won't fight you.

Is that clear enough for YOU to understand?

There are hundreds, if not thousands of threads on this board dedicated to the Pac / Mayweather saga.

They mostly mean less than nothing, because Mayweather originally made ONE demand. A particular type of testing for BOTH fighters. Arum, and the Fillipino made all kinds of weird demands and excuses to avoid the fight happening.

 

You refuse to look at the events of what actually happened. If we agree on a 50/50 split and I ask for testing to be given to both fighters in the steroid era of boxing and you decline run off to fight Clottey only to test years later for Rios then you didn't want the fight period.:deal Then you have Roach who comes out years later and admits that the reason why the fight didn't take place was because they didn't want to test and it was mostly their fault as to why the fight didn't take place and people like you refuse to acknowledge it and look right over it because you love Pac and hate PBF. The fact is back in 2009 Pac did in fact duck PBF because of testing anything else is bull**** and hate. So rightfully so the blame should be on Pac for not fighting PBF when both were still prime.

 

I could care less on who the blame is.

Certainly beating prime Pac (who is an ATG) would have greatly improved Floyd's legacy. Now obviously you do not want to deal with that.:deal

 

What part of a prime Pac did NOT want to fight Mayweather, and therefore Mayweather can't be judged on that is so difficult for you to understand?

You could just as easily say if Jones Jr had fought Lewis in 2003, instead of Ruiz it would have looked great on his legacy, but Jones wanted no part of Lewis, in the same way Pac wanted no part of Mayweather in 2009 / 10.

It is not so difficult to grasp if you weren't hell bent on looking for reasons to slate Mayweather.

Why don't you go for the other peoples favourite, and slag him off for fighting an Argentinian muppet, instead of the Mexican muppet that Arum promoted.

Both were big, useless, and slower than treacle. Maybe Muricans dislike Argentinians more than Mexicans who knows? But they certainly got their panties twisted because the guy picked his own idiot, to humiliate, instead of the idiot they thought he should have fought, and humiliated.

 

Correct if Jones had beaten Lewis, he would be a much higher ranked ATG, probably a TOP 10 ATG.

Had Floyd beaten Prime Pac, he would be a much higher ranked ATG, probably be a TOP 20 ATG - TOP 25 ATG without dispute.

Legacy is based resume and longevity.Now deal with that.

 

The fight did not take place. Prime Pac would have been the best opponent on Floyd's resume. Now deal with that.

I do not know who you are trying to fool by repeatidly indicating that in your opinion Pac is the one to blame.It is not the point I was trying to make. If it matters so much to you, my point of view is that Floyd and Pac are both to blame for the fight not happening. But everybody has a different opinion on this. At the end, it should have little significance in terms of legacy as legacy is based on resume and longevity.

 

ray beats floyd like he beat benitez

 

so i guess timothy bradley is a top 20 ATG

 

I do not agree.Floyd 's resume has more depth.Also, most people think Bradley lost against Pac.Also Bradley did not exactly "beat" a prime Pac.

 

I can't understand how handily beating a top 3 pfp fighter who is coming off one of their best years, while you are older and likely farther past prime than the fighter, can get written off.

 

It should not.Floyd deserves credit for that one.It ranks among his best victories.

 

This was in response to a poster, likely you, saying that Mayweather and Duran fought about the same number of fights (which is a ridiculous comment), I'm merely educating those who have that misconception. I can only assume the purpose of such an assertion is to discredit Duran for the losses he had after going 72-1.

As for years of activity Duran wins by a landslide. He certainly didn't retire in the middle of his career.

 

Wasn't the assertion about the comparison if you take into account all of the fights/rounds that Floyd fought as an amateur? (wasn't my comment)