Roberto Duran vs Floyd Mayweather's opponents- does he reach 49-0?

Hearns certainly has greater physical tools (length and power). Is that what you mean by skill?

 

Have you actually watched Barkley fight, you make him out to be some kind of amateur class C fighter. He wasn't. He was a legitimate belt hold with all kinds of size and power. Hell he probably hit Duran with about 75-80 body punches during their fight and that's probably a lower estimate. He was throwing combinations, imposing his size, etc. He's not the most skilled of fighters, but his size and the attributes mentioned would mean he would very like stop Mayweather. Why don't you start a poll on that?

 

Do you agree that Floyd was smarter in the ring, superior defensively, and less likely to get hit flush? (from what you've read about him)

 

Seals what deal? :huh You were arguing that Hearns wasn't more susceptible than Floyd to getting knocked out against Barkley; N_ and I were arguing that he was. atsch

 

You're a little too quick, after rereading your comments again I quickly edited this but you're jumped on it before I was even done. Patience my friend.

 

If you're certain then you're also crazy.

Who are the most skilled boxers that Buchanan and Benitez ever outboxed? Who's come the closest to outboxing Mayweather?

Fighters far weaker defensively and far worse all around boxers than Mayweather have gone the distance with each of the fighters you named, especially Palomino.

 

I've seen quite a few Barkley fights. You're overrating him a great deal. He was a big, game fighter who was completely outboxed by the most skilled boxers he faced, including some who were smaller and had shorter reaches than him, like Kalambay. Why do you keep ignoring my Kalambay comparison? Is Kalambay after your time too?

 

Sure within a certain weight limit. Once he's beyond that limit, then no. I don't think he's outboxing Hearns at any weight.

Do you see why you leave me the impression that you believe Mayweather would beat Hearns, you keep implying he's got superior boxing skills and that he's a much better fighter than Hearns, which is simply not true. On a p4p basis it could be true, but not if they were to step into the ring together.

 

You're naïve if you think Benitez couldn't beat Floyd. It would be a very good fight, but Benitez isn't called El Radar for nothing, and he has far more pop in his punches than Floyd does, and I think, he may even have a reach advantage. Either way it's a pretty close call in my books.

 

Nobody's talking about them in the ring together other than you. Wait--are you just unfamiliar with the terminology as most people use it? A fighter who "has more boxing skills" than another won't necessarily beat the less skilled fighter if he can't overcome a gap in physical talent.

 

So what is your point? That Mayweather would beat Barkley, or that Mayweather would go the distance with Barkley?

 

I'm very familiar with it because that's my basis of saying why I think Barkley would beat ( maybe even stop) Floyd.

I'm certainly not arguing that Barkley's a better boxer than Floyd, my whole point is that Floyd couldn't overcome the physical disadvantages. I'll be damned we're starting to be on the same page.

 

This is the closest you've come to actually mounting a coherent argument for why you think Benitez beats Mayweather. Sadly, you are incorrect. Floyd has a longer reach. He also has faster hands, faster feet, quicker reflexes, is harder to hit, and punches even more precisely.

Anyone who thinks that picking Mayweather over Benitez is outlandish, just doesn't know much about Mayweather, or boxing.

But none of this really matters. We both know that the real source of your conviction is the fact that Benitez made Duran look so amateurish and you would hate to contemplate that Floyd may be even more skilled and talented than Benitez.

 

The short answer to this question is no.

 

My position has been clear: I think that Floyd probably outpoints him.