Whitaker or Mayweather - who was greater?

I mean it would be like May going up 2 classes to take on RJJ at 160 .. He's #1 p4p ranking would mean jack sh*t , same as JMM's didnt

 

Yup, that’s a great example. I tried to think of an example like that but drew a blank.

 

Even though they were not p4p #1 and #2, the analogy is still on point. But, I wouldn't expect someone as narrow minded as you to be able to follow anything less simple than counting to 1 or 2.

 

Napoles Monzon … where the same thing basically happened in weight. Monzon just way to big for him as well

 

The same thing? You can't be serious.

 

Elaborate

 

It's an awful example.

 

Not sure how much you know about their careers, but Mayweather and Marquez came of age and made their marks 4 pounds apart from each other, at 130 and 126 respectively. Mayweather ended up moving up in weight much quicker, because he was hungry for bigger paydays against bigger fighters, and he was still considered to be a small welterweight when he took the Marquez fight.

Monzon on the other hand, had always been a much bigger man than Napoles, and probably had to work hard cutting weight to even make 160 at that point. Napoles was so small that he only weighed in at 153 against Monzon, and after the fight he never fought above welterweight again.

Seem pretty different to me.

 

You see it how you see it fair enough. I believe, JMM weighing around 121 when he turned pro. And JMM went up almost 2 pounds more than Napoles did … anyway , both went up 2 weight classes, 1 napoles(2 today) , JMM carry around a ton of extra weight for the first time, both giving up a ton a weight in the fight(keep in mind its the percentage of your own body weight you are adding and giving up in the actual fight, not the pounds, so 7 pounds at 135 is way more drastic than 7 pounds at 175, if you follow me, Both May and Monzon WAY to big , seems like a decent analogy to me … who knows maybe not

 

Comparing that drug cheating gift receiving ginger nut to Chavez??

Go on the general forum your much better suited there.

 

It was impressive what May was able to do with Marquez in a sense, but considering the weight and everything else, I don't get how people get overly excited about it. Same with Canelo. You'd think May beat the version of Canelo we see today. He didn't, and Canelo wasn't really all that close to the fighter he is today. We all saw Canelo be a dear in the headlights that night, yet some want ot act like it was Canelo vs. GGG 2 in there against May to boost up May. Just not how it was.

Still waiting on people who say May is better to discuss the likelihood of May ever signing on the dotted line to fight a prime Hoya and Felix while past his own best? Whitaker did, because that's what he was made out of, can we say the same about May? Once you get to certain levels it's hard to separate great fighters, it seems abundantly clearly to me that Whitaker had more nasty and more confidence in his abilities than May, and why was that? It matters who people sign on the dotted line to fight and when, and whitaker decisively trumps May in this regard.

Next, I'm still waiting on, if May is better and better h2h.... Why was Whitaker, past his best, able to run close or beat a prime Hoya, while May struggled with a weight drained past his prime Hoya? Explain to me why this isn't significant and give an edge to Pea?

 

Can you think of any other examples where a boxer as skilled and revered as Marquez gets beat around like an inadequate sparring partner from bell to bell? And by a man coming off of two years of inactivity no less?? It was a very special performance.

For better or for worse, Mayweather had already earned hundreds of millions of dollars and was concerned about preserving his legacy and image, which was rooted in his undefeated status at that point in his career. So I doubt it too. Not sure why this speculation really matters though.

Styles make fights?

And what makes you say that Oscar was weight drained?

 

Stats? There is only one stat that matters... Wins. Actually it goes deeper than that because you have to look at who a guy beat and when he beat him. You need to consider if his opponent prime, near prime, past prime, injured, etcetera. You need to consider how he won, did he deserve it. Look at the losses too... did he deserve them? Was he past prime, pre-prime, or injured?

Whitaker won his first 44 fights in my opinion. He was robbed vs. Ramirez and easily beat him in their rematch. He was robbed vs. Chavez. I think he did enough for the win over DeLaHoya and Whitaker was past-prime in that fight.

He beat (all world title holders)-

Roger Mayweather
Jose L. Ramirez x2 (HOF, not IBHOF)
Greg Haugen (HOF, not IBHOF)
Freddie Pendleton
Azumah Nelson (Hall of Famer)
Juan Nazario
Jorge Paez
Rafael Pineda
Buddy McGirt x2 (Hall of Famer)
Julio Cesar Chavez Sr. (Hall of Famer)
Julio Cesar Vasquez
Jake Rodriguez
Diosbelys Hurtado
Oscar DeLaHoya (Hall of Famer)

He also beat (some of these guys held lightly regarded world titles)-

Benjie Marquez
Anthony Jones
Poli Diaz
Harold Brazier
Santos Cardona
Gary Jacobs
Wilfredo Rivera x2
Andrey Pestryaev

Thru his first 44 pro fights he lost very few rounds even though he had been robbed a few times.

Whitaker knew how to win, he expected to win, and this wouldn't change just because it's Floyd Mayweather. Neither man is getting hurt and most of the punches are going to miss but I think Whitaker does just a little bit more than Floyd and earns the decision... if the judges are being fair.

 

I like that a past-prime Whitaker beat (in the eyes of a lot of boxing fans) DeLaHoya but a past-prime DeLaHoya did enough for a draw vs. Mayweather... according to a lot of boxing fans.

 

Just curious did you the score the fights? There is a fight of the week thread with these fights in them, would like to hear your input as well after watching them fresh and scoring them