So, Floyd Fans: Who Do You Have Beating Floyd at Welter in Boxing History

DLh fought Quartey 2-13-99 and SSM 6/17/2000, SSM clearly beat the best and prime DLH the first time. From that performance it was clear that DLH could be outboxed. Neither DLH or Quartey were the best of that class. SSM and Forrest were AT THAT TIME.

Floyd would have beat Oscar and Quartey then imo. I dont think Floyd beats SSM or Forrest THEN.

While Quartey was on his way to winning? Almost the only late rally and the KD edged it out. I was rooting for Quartey:good

 

So Forrest would beat Floyd but Quartey wouldn't? Explain then how a well past prime version of Quartey beat the bigger Forrest at his own game only to be robbed of the decision?

 

Likewise

Mayweather learned from the first Castillo fight, and properly adjusted, but even in their rematch, he dropped 5 rounds. I'd definitely say that Floyd is most vulnerable to technical pressure.

Castillo had decent speed, but definitely not the speed of Cotto. Look at Cotto's handspeed against Mosley. It wasn't as fast as Shane's, but it wasn't far off. Then watch his fights with Gomez, Quintana, Malignaggi, and several others; to me, it's clear as day that he's quicker than Castillo.

Mayweather is so relaxed in the ring, it's a thing of beauty really. But here's the deal, he'll be tired too because Cotto will make him dig deep and fight like never before. Both have excellent stamina. Cotto will have to work too, harder than he's ever worked before, but if his fight with Judah is any indication, he can go 11 or 12 hard, no problem.

I think we agree that it would be a taxing fight for both men.

Cotto is harder to hit off the backfoot. I'm not going to classify him as a defensive master or anything of the sort. It's just that when he's going forward, he leaves himself open more because he's more occupied with aggression and throwing punches.

Mayweather wouldn't make him fight backing up though, the way Mosley was able to or the way Margarito will make him fight.

Cotto does move into range with the jab. If you rewatch his fight with Judah, they'll be in the center of the ring, Judah will be circling, and Cotto led with his jab, doubling it up on some occasion, then stepping inside where he threw his combinations upstairs and downstairs. He led with the jab against Quintana too when Quintana was utilizing lateral movement and it allowed him to close the distance between them, and land with hard right hands.

Mosley was always in range, as was Gomez. Neither of these fights were a case of Cotto tracking down a slippery defensive fighter, so it became a boxing match where Cotto's more authorative jab became the key weapon in winning from that distance.

At this point, I believe Oscar's jab is inferior to Cotto's.

Cotto will take his licks, there's no question about it, but I can't see him getting badly hurt or deciding to back off for good. His chin is much improved at 147, and unless it's a real accumulative job, Mayweather won't stop him.

We'll just have to wait and see, I guess.

Castillo isn't faster than Cotto, and he did a great job in both fights pressuring behind a jab consistently.

That's your take. I, for one, think he can have serious success over the course of the entire fight.

Yes, at mid-range, he is. But he's not the pressure fighter Cotto is, nor as good from a closer distance, where I see this fight being fought.

He can't do it too much, because it will leave him vulnerable for right hand leads, but switching it up a little bit to give different looks and angles wouldn't be a bad idea.

Mayweather's better defensively and much more varied from that standpoint, but Cotto has the timing, speed, and accuracy to penetrate his defense. The combinations will aid him too because they're not easy to defend against. It's constant shifting from the body and the head. I haven't seen him get sloppy with his pressure like Ricky Hatton or Jesus Chavez. He's always aware of the situation and fights accordingly. I don't envision him jumping in with wild left hooks or looping overhand rights.

Mayweather's an underrated body puncher, no doubt. This goes overlooked by a lot of people.

He'd score on Cotto, but I see Cotto's pressure and workrate carrying him in this fight over Mayweather's potshotting.

True. And I have a lot of respect for the way you see these fights going.

 

Comparing today's to 1940/50/60's athletes is plain silly. Given that boxer's performances, unlike these of - say - track & field athletes, are not measured in absolute values (i.e. time, length, height, weight, etc.), we allow ourselves to make such comparisons and believe we're on to something, but...

If we were to ask on a athletics forum who between Emil Zatopek (2:23:03) and Stefano Baldini (2:10:55), both gold medallists respectively in 1952 and 2004 would win the marathon, everyone would laugh and rightfully so.

Today's standards in sports are far superior than those back in the 40/50/60's and boxing is no different. Athletes are far better prepared nowadays than they used to be in the old days. Advances in strength and stamina training, nutrition, etc. as well as technique makes it that today's boxers are stronger, faster, more resistant and better schooled than those of the past.

For the above reason, PBF (but not just him) would beat any of the above-listed 40-50-60's boxers, which takes nothing away from the great boxers of the past.

 

Watch videos of Kid Gavilan, Jose Napoles, and Emile Griffith at welterweight and tell me they aren't impressive, even by today's standards. Nothing has changed since then in terms of technique.

Why is it so that these guys were able to go 15 hard rounds and De La Hoya and Hatton tire after about 8 rounds. And to add on to that, guys like Peter and Briggs fade after 4. The new training and nutrition you speak of isn't doing them much good.

 

I've watched countless of videos of boxers from the past and still do and - yes - I'm impressed but not the way you might be.

SRR (especially SRR), Gavilan, Napoles and Griffith were impressive to me in that they each in their own time represented a breakthrough in terms of boxing skills. They contributed more than any of today's star, PBF included, to make boxing an art of skills.

But technique, like in any other sport, evolves - not anywhere as fast as it did in the 50's and 60's but still does.

Here's an analogy: ice hockey. Back in the 70's and earlier, players appeared to have just as much stamina as today's except they would play with no helmet, thin shoulder and chin pads; few goalies would wear a mask. Playing with sucH rudimentary equipement (or lack thereof) would be suicide nowadays. The game is faster, harder, players are stronger and more resistant.

Same can be said about boxing. The equipement hasn't changed but the total output in terms of force and resistance is nonetheless superior nowadays than 50 years ago therefore boxing takes a greater toll on stamina than it used to.

Keep in mind that the last 50 years greatest evolution in sports science touched more the domain of strenght than endurance. To go back to the marathon analogy, it is an established fact that runners are faster nowadays because they are basically "stronger" and more "resistant" than before (not necessarily because they are more "endurant".

A statement such as "1950 boxers are as good or better than today's" would suppose that, contrary to every other sport, boxing hasn't evolved in the past 60 years. I strongly disagree with such a statement.

 

A lot of welters would beat Mayweather. This is simply not his weight class and it is amazing that he collected belts there and at 154.

At 130, however, he beats everyone.

At 135, he beats most except the All time greats.

At 140, he beats anyone except Pryor, maybe Chavez, De la Hoya and a couple more.

 

+

:good

 

Roberto Duran, Pernell Whitaker are toss ups IMO.....I cant agree with ..., Oscar De La Hoya:huh , Shane Mosley:-( , Felix Trinidad (floyd would box circles around tito) , Ike Quarteyatsch , Vernon Forrest (this guy lost to Mayorga twice:yep ), Miguel Cotto???:verysad

 

Whitaker and Duran are not tossups in the least bit. Whitaker has a significant style advantage with his southpaw stance, jab, and workrate. Mayweather couldn't win in a boxing match with a jab being the most important weapon, nor could he pressure or potshot Whitaker. Duran would maul Mayweather on the inside, seriously outworking him, putting him into a defensive shell, and roughing him up. This is a bad matchup for Mayweather.

De La Hoya fought a close fight with Mayweather. I realize that was at 154, and therefore not Mayweather's best weight, but it was a past-his-prime, inactive De La Hoya, too. A prime De La Hoya had the tools to beat Mayweather; speed, a rangy jab, and more stamina than he showed in their first encounter.

Mosley would lose in my opinion at 135, but not when he was at his best at 147. He'd have the speed, physical strength, and workrate to take Mayweather out of his comfort zone, outhusle, and outmuscle him. Hatton's speed of foot were able to make it a competitive fight for 6 rounds and we all know Shane is miles faster. But it's a close fight, I'll give you that. And it's also the most winnable for Mayweather out of the late 1990s, early 2000s welterweight crop.

Explain how Ike Quartey loses to Floyd, since all you have given me are those emoticons. I've already given my analysis and will continue to make points if need be. Quartey would be absolute hell for Mayweather and everybody else in the division at the moment for that matter.

Trinidad fares well against Mayweather at 147. Given Floyd's decreasing speed and movement, along with his tendency to lay against the ropes and counter, Trinidad would find him. People forget that Trinidad had an excellent jab and fast hands. He'd be able to impose himself, land on Mayweather, keep him on the defensive. And rest assured, he'd hurt him. Mayweather's potshotting routine wouldn't work against a prime Trinidad at welterweight. P4P, a 130 pound Mayweather is far more equipped to beat a 147 pound Trinidad.

Forrest lost to Mayorga for several reasons. 1) pressure is the way to beat Forrest, who is strictly an outside boxer and 2) his shoulder injuries were hurting him, preventing him from throwing his jab as consistently as he was in previous fights. Mayweather doesn't bear any stylistic resemblence to Mayorga and he sure as hell doesn't carry the same power. He wouldn't be able to win a jabbing contest as Forrest is much longer, he wouldn't be able to pressure him effectively like he did against Judah, and he wouldn't be able to potshot him as Forrest's jab and range negate this. Simply put, Forrest had the size, athleticism, timing, and technical skills to beat Mayweather.

I've already listed out the reasons why Cotto beats Mayweather and I'll stand by this and make more points should the need arise.

It's time for you to step away from the emoticons and give a logical, in depth analysis as to why you believe Mayweather wins against the aforementioned fighters.

 

Perfect list Brooklyn, some of the fighters on there beat him up badly.:good

At 147 Floyd does not stack up to alot of the ATG's, at 130 he beats everybody.