What separates Mayweather from every past fighter...

Yes, they are worth re-watching more often than the later stuff.
He was a sublime boxer but I he padded out and dragged out his era with a lot of dross, performance-wise and sometimes opponent-wise.

 

Mayweather's boxing hasn't given any inkling that he's a violent person for years. I guess that's why some people find the woman-beating revelations so shocking.

 

His record and his name, 100% unique, never before him, likely none after

 

Considering the astronomical success of the Pacquiao fight, I think it's arguable that Mayweather, for his part in delaying then making that event, might be regarded as one of the greatest boxing promoters of all time.

 

I say good riddance to him, yes he was always well prepared for a fight but then again he's had less fights than 20 year old Les darcy yet fought a career what, six times longer or something ? point is like all moderns today he had long breaks between fights so he should be prepared well every time... try doing that when you fight every two weeks for years on end like a Langford.

 

Yes I agree although Robinson fascinates me I cannot abide criminal behaviour but not too aware of his dark side. I know there have been many in boxing like Australia's Frankie Flannery who I hear was also a bit of a gangster and also heard some really disturbing stuff about former champ Lester Ellis and I know Fenech is no saint.

 

Sure he is. Those records should be taken with a grain of salt though since they don't take inflation into account though.

 

Spot on. But even they didnt match the incredible duration of Mayweather's career. To never falter in preparation or conditioning for so long in a sport where an off training camp or a dietary lapse can affect performance is unprecedented. That can't be taken away from him.

To put this Spartan devotion to training and fitness in perspective, applying this level of fanatical dietary, fitness and skill preparation to some other atgs is illuminating.

1) Ali

Ali might have pulled out FOTC. The Thrilla in Manilla would have been more decisive. Leon Spinks might never have been champion.

2) Duran

Duran might have beaten Leonard in New Orleans, or failing that, would certainly made it a very competitive loss. Arcel would probably have stayed with Duran a few more years. There would be no loss to Simms. If we assume the Benitez loss was in part due to his preparation (he appeared listless in this fight), he might have at the very least looked more respectable in losing. If we can take away the Simms loss, turn No Mas into a sequel worthy of Morales/Barerra, Pacquiao/Marquez,( or even Froch/Kessler), and replace a torpid performance against Benitez with a competitive loss, then Duran's latter career preparation inconsistency would not be as divisive an element as it is now in evaluating his place among the atgs.

3) Pryor, Chavez, Whitaker

The tail end of their careers were impacted by drug use. Would Pryor have retired ? Would Chavez have lost to Randall? Would Dela Hoya have "beaten" Sweet Pea? Or Trinidad?

It's because of this remarkable consistency I have to grudgingly give him his due. My biggest knock on him is the cherry picking the latter years of his career. If he had fought Pacquiao in 2010 and won, it would more than make up for not facing Williams, prime Cotto, and Margarito.

 

I agree with this.
I think elite modern athletes across the whole range of sports are achieving more consistency/longevity.

But then they do have some advantages, apart from the massive paychecks. Namely medical science (and I'm not just talking PEDs, which is controversial, but complex surgery and injury rehab), and professional career-planning teams and investors.
In boxing, it's possible now for top fighters to pick and choose their titles and move up weight classes is easier because there are so many, and a top fighter can always get a shot at a title, so strategic retirements and reliqushing belts is done without risk of throwing a career away.

That's not to take anything away from Mayweather, since he is the pre-eminent model, the latest blueprint of such a phenomenon.

 

First of all, l think Mayweather deserves huge props for always being in shape to fight. He was exceptional in many ways. As to Duran beating all of Mayweather comp, very few thought he could do it over an 18 year period of time, rather most, including myself were using Duran's fighting schedule, not Mayweather's.

 

But those guys weren't all bling-blingy and they didn't hang around with rappers and call themselves The Best Ever! Don't compare them to this monster.

 

Mayweather had outstanding speed, quickness, defense and a counter right hand that made his opponents gun shy from pressing him.

You have to give him credit. He took away the other fighters best weapons while at the same preserving his reserves.

Mayweather defense was so good, punch stats show you his opponents when he faced them all had all time low connect percentages.

His chin was at least very good, so on the rare occasions when he was hit, he took it well.

The best way to beat him is to press the action and fight 3:00 minutes every round, forcing him to exchange...but he's going to land the cleaner shots.

It would take Paul Williams type or Roberto Duran type at the top of their games to beat him.

PS: I predict Mayweather will lose soon. The IRS or police will get him. A real scumbag type outside the ring, but undeniably great in it.

 

Paul Williams struggled enough with Quintana. He get nailed with right hands all night.

 

I think he'll be better appreciated in years to come.. I can remember when Pernell Whitaker was active and how dull some people thought his fights were. I never felt that way myself by there were plenty who did, and he's since been regarded as just about the best lightweight of all time or certainly among the very best of them. Floyd Mayweather could be a loud mouth, flashy, arrogant, etc.. And his domestic abuse allegations don't inspire love for him either in the eyes of most.. But for all his shortcomings he was consistent, talented, and had more personality and charisma than most athletes.. There's a reason why he made record breaking earnings despite never having fought at heavyweight. He's been largely criticized for not actively persuing better opponents, but that shouldn't be chalked up to record padding either.. He's beaten something to the tune of 30 ranked men, many of whom held some sort of title at one point or another, and quite often were met at a higher weight. there's also a few hall of famers in there.. And his being ranked so highly P4P for some 15 years should also be considered. Floyd's longevity, undefeated record, numerous titles in several divisions, excellent amateur career, awesome defensive skills and charismatic persona make him an ATG in my book.. I have no problem placing him in my top 10 p4p all time.

 

Pernell Whitaker took on major rivals as soon as he could get them in the ring. He didn't pick and choose, delay and stage retirements. He dominated a weight class, unified, and moved up. He was respected for that.

To be fair to Mayweather, he was fortunate and shrewd enough to market and maintain himself as a superstar fighter to the masses - perhaps fortunate to come along in a time of declining American talent , and he insisted on being the biggest draw in boxing, whereas Whitaker was never that, and had to chase the recognition.
In Mayweather's shoes, he did what any fighter should do.