Yes I agree but I personally havent noticed his legs being gone, I mean B hop is almost 50 and his legs are pretty good from what ive seen of him. How do we determine if a fighters legs are gone when he is one of the greatest stationary defensive fighters ever? I think its hard to say definitively if his legs are anywhere close to being gone. Floyd is in supreme shape and runs (allegedly ) 10 miles a day
Tito's only losses were blowouts If we disregard RJJ because that fight was so far past his prime and so far above his best weight you are left with Winky and Hopkins. Both fights were so lopsided that he looked like an amatuer DLH wasn't officially a loss but he was taken to school in that fight also. What these fights showed is that a great defensive fighter could beat Tito and make it look easy. Floyd would have avoided engaging and kept him hopping on one foot all night waiting for the chance to launch that left hook
I agree with everything you said, but a boxer-puncher to me is a SRL, Hearns or DLH. Tito, not so much.
We have a couple of boxing gyms here. Think we have more MMA type gyms though. And our ever popular Thursday Night Fights. A couple locals have gone to somewhat big fights. Cody The Alaskan Assassin Koch fought Wlad Klitshcko. He got KO'd. And another solid MW, Abel Perry, was supposed to face Margarito before Margarito retired. I was pretty stoked upon hearing that fight made. shame it never happened.
Floyd did move up more weight classes & he has no prime atg on his resume in over 40 fights. Tells me all I need to know. I never said Tito Lost to Hop and Winky cause they were bigger. He lost to them because they were both better than him and both are great in their own right. But to say just because (they) did it means Floyd could is still ******ed cause Floyd wouldn't fair any better than Tito did against them. Winky's 6 ko's (which is totally false btw) is still a bigger, stronger fighter than Floyd who still can't punch his way out of a wet paper bag himself. You act if if Floyd is better than them or some other crazy crap. He is in no way a greater fighter, not better fighter than Bernard Hopkins, who has prime great fighters ion his resume.
mayweather is the easy pick because of obvious reasons there are some factors here to look and really the main one is size. Trinidad has been dominated and looked bad against more well rounded but they all they were all clearly bigger the mayweather like hopkins, wright, dlh and even jones if you want to throw that in there. And mayweather's more difficult fights have come against bigger opponents particularly at 154, de la hoya and to lesser extent cotto. even castillo at 135 was a problem, partly due to castillo having alot of size and strength for a lightweight. may likely wins but it probably wouldn't end up in a wide decision because floyd would be even more defensive then normal as Trinidad would be the biggest puncher hes ever fought.
Someone like Demarcus Corley rocked the hell out of Floyd , But when it comes to Trinidad , he has a 0% chance of doing the same ?
You don't think Tito was a boxer puncher? To me a boxer puncher is someone that sets their punches up conventionally and sacrifices the defense and discipline of a pure boxer for a more offensive edge. Trinidad wasn't a slugger always looking for one punch, he set them up with combinations and often threw at a distance. In fact, in a thread trying to think of the archetype for certain labels, Trinidad was one I picked for that label, and many agreed.