Wilfredo Benitez vs Floyd Mayweather 147lbs 12

I question if floyd has better offense than benitez

 

Good question. I think he can adjust better then Benitez but I also think Benitez was stronger on the inside at 154lb more then people think.

 

I got Floyd. My issue with Benitez is he's too much of a counter puncher. What I mean is I don't see enough when it comes to setting up actual offense. His offense is dependent upon his counter punching a lot of the time. He needs you to punch to get his offense off. Floyd doesn't give his opponents many counter punching opportunities. He doesn't telegraph his work. He's able to give different looks, feints, probes, speeds, etc. to make his offense harder to time. That's why Floyd landed at such a high connect percentage. Now will that drop against Benitez? For sure. Benitez has some of the best (maybe the best) upper body movement I have ever seen. But it's not going to drop enough to where he isn't winning rounds. I think it would be a situation to where Benitez is trying to find counter punching opportunities that won't be anywhere near as available while Floyd is landing just enough to win most of the rounds.

 

That's probably fair. From what I've seen, it seems as though Benitez also had the better jab and counterpunching whereas Floyd had better timing and speed.

 

But... you forget that Benitez is the bigger-stronger fighter and he has one od the best jabs in history imo. Floyd never faced a style.like Benitez but Benitez faced mich better offensive talents in Hearns, Duran, Leonard, and Cervantes.

 

Hell no! Benitez did everything better than Canelo

 

Floyd has fought bigger, stronger fighters before. He was a 5 division champion. I didn't mention it because I don't think Benitez's size outweighs the flaw I mentioned. You are higher on his jab than I am. Good jab but I wouldn't go as far as saying one of the best in boxing history. I don't think any of those fighters you named fight like Floyd. Nowhere near like him.

As far as much better offensive talent, I think some of those guys were bigger punchers and had more of an offensive mentality than Floyd. They were more aggressive. But in terms of offensive skills, I don't think Floyd lacked at all. He's a very accurate puncher, can throw every punch in boxing well to the head and body, can put punches together if he wants to, uses a multitude of set ups to get his offense off, and can fight effectively at every range. Floyd's mentality is just defense first. But in a matchup with Benitez, that could benefit him because he's not going to give Benitez the openings he wants to counter but at the same time, Floyd is an accurate enough puncher especially with how he sets up offense to land enough to win rounds. The fight wouldn't be exciting IMO. It would be a lot of feints, probes, trying to get each other to commit to some offense. But Floyd IMO would best him in that. I think he's a better all around fighter which may be controversial here.

 

He had a significantly worse career. Getting results is something he was objectively worse at doing.

 

Floyd never fought a fighter as elite as Benitez but Benitez fought many fighters who would've arguably defeated Floyd in Duran, Hearns, and Leonard. I agree that this fight wouldn't be the most arstethically pleasing but I believe that Benitez was equally as good defensively and offensively he just didn't have the benefit of fighting in a weaker era as Floyd did. Floyd seems like he was more dominant because of his competition, not because he was actually a better fighter.

 

Different eras and level of competition will do that. That's like saying that Crawford is better than the likes of Leonard, Oscar, and Pernell because he's undefeated and 3x undisputed. He wouldn't do that in another era.

 

I get your point. You are basically saying there is more evidence against elite competition on Benitez's side. I agree there is because obviously Floyd did not face those caliber of opponents. But for me, I am looking at skill set. I'm just watching the film and looking at what both do well (many things) and what both don't do well (not a lot) and seeing based on that, who would win. Benitez is a counter puncher and watching him fight, his best work is when he's able to counter. When he's not countering, I see a guy who is either trying to give looks to get his opponent to commit to punches so he can counter or he's throwing shots without much set up. There's a big difference in how his offense looks when those counter punching opportunities are not there. I don't see that with Floyd. If the counter isn't there, he still can set up offense to land punches at a high level. It makes it hard on his opponents because even if they try to commit to shots to avoid being countered, they still get hit consistently. Then he's defensively responsible so it's harder to counter him back.

I didn't even mention the speed factor. Floyd IMO is clearly faster than Benitez. When Benitez fought Hearns and Leonard who had speed, we saw how it froze his offense. Hearns I can understand because he had to deal with a reach and height factor. With Leonard, they were both in the pocket and Benitez wasn't trying to commit to punches because of the speed Leonard had coming back. All he could do is either get hit or stay defensive. He couldn't time Leonard much at all.

 

He might do it in any of those eras. He didn’t even bother with 160.

 

Benitez just doesn't have the style to flummox Floyd imo. Guys who throw punches in bunches and who could deny Floyd space and the time to think were usually the ones he struggled with far more than the guys who tried to outbox him. Benitez would give Floyd too much time to think and Floyd would just start figuring him out and finding openings. If you're gonna play chess with Floyd, then you have to be someone on the level of Leonard, Robinson, or Sweet Pea, to name a few. Benitez simply didn't reach the same level of pugilism that Floyd was on and lacked the necessary physicality to bridge that gap.

 

There have been more than 300 no-hitters in MLB history.

This fight would be boxing’s first. Neither guy able to lay a glove on the other for 12 rounds.

Three cards of 120-120.

It would be glorious.

(Funnily enough, at the gym Friday one guy who’s works out there and is a part-time/sometime coach asked me who I thought was the best defensive fighter of all time — I said Wilfred Benitez, whom he hadn’t heard of, as he’s much younger than me, and asked him who he thought and he said Floyd was best he’s seen.)

 

He was basically saying that Floyd has never fought anybody that size, and with that level of ability.