Wilfredo Benitez vs Floyd Mayweather 147lbs 12

Of course speed can be deadly.

But I believe he’d have been less cautious against Floyd at WW.

It would have been an intriguing game of chess.

Maybe even uneventful.

 

Benitez’s legacy stands out because he faced elite offensive fighters at their peak—fighters who, in my view, surpassed Floyd Mayweather in offensive prowess. I consider Hearns, Leonard, and Duran to be superior offensive boxers compared to Floyd. Mayweather, on the other hand, never fought top-tier offensive opponents in their prime; when he faced Manny Pacquiao, Miguel Cotto, Juan Manuel Marquez, and Canelo Alvarez, they were past their best. I also don’t classify Marcos Maidana as an elite offensive fighter during his bouts with Floyd. The version of Duran that Benitez masterfully outboxed was significantly better than Maidana, even if Duran wasn’t at his absolute peak. My point is that Floyd’s spectacular performances were influenced by the level and condition of his opposition. Benitez, facing the likes of Duran, Hearns, and Leonard, adopted a more cautious approach because these fighters posed genuine offensive threats—unlike the opponents Floyd encountered. If Benitez had been matched against every fighter Floyd faced from 140 to 154 pounds, he would have dramatically dominated them.

 

Are you in denial about Bruce Curry beating the breaks off Benitez? Why haven't you responded to that point and video?

Benitez just wasn't on Mayweather's level, Mayweather's better in every category and stylistically he completely would play into Mayweather's hands. Tell what Benitez does better.

Benitez fought at a lower weight than all of Mayweather's WW opponents, bar Marquez.

As for Mayweather stuggling with DLH, watch it again and look closely if the punches landed, most of Delahoya's didn't land. Delahoya also had massive weight advantages over Mayweather too. Benitez wouldn't have that

 

Yeah, I got your point the first time. That still doesn't prove to me the flaws I see in Benitez don't exist. It still doesn't prove to me that Floyd wouldn't have success. Obviously we are making assumptions based on a fight that will never happen but the assumptions you are making can be disproven through history. You are picking Benitez because he has proven more to you. Let's use Roberto Duran as an example. Who did Duran face that was good as Leonard prior to beating Leonard? No one. That's one of the reasons why Duran wasn't favored. Who did Ali beat that was as good as Liston prior to beating him? No one. Who did Benitez beat that was as good as Cervantes? No one. That's why I don't put too much stock into stuff like that and focus on the film. Both are great fighters. Both are all time greats. To put that much stock into better level of opposition takes away from the technical aspect of the matchup. When you actually look at it, it's very compelling. To me, bringing up Leonard, Hearns and Duran aren't relevant because none of them fight like Floyd. Their approach to fighting is not like Floyd's. You look at them as being superior offensive boxers while I look at them as being different offensive boxers. Why? Because Floyd has high level offensive skill that I already mentioned. His temperament is defense but that doesn't mean he lacked in skill. That fight would be a chess match and I think Floyd would win it.

 

That's a common theme with most of Floyd's opponents. Floyd had a way of neutralizing output. Very rarely did fighters commit a lot of offense against Floyd. Obviously someone will say Benitez is better than those guys therefore that wouldn't be the case and that is what makes it intriguing. I think it would be a chess match for sure. Both are boxers. Both like to take their time.

 

In denial?

It’s one fight out of a whole career.


I could say that Floyd got a gift from Castillo.

That he barely beat a B-C level Maidana.

I could say that he never fought a prime ATG in his life.

Nobody the calibre of the Fab Four.


Wasn’t on his level?

GTFO!


I’ve watched the Oscar fight numerous times. It was a very close fight, bar the last few rounds. And that was a version of Oscar who hadn’t fought in a year. A version who’d only fought once in 3 years. A version who retired the following year.

 

He could have easily unified 135 and 140 in the early 80s. 154 was easy work in 1983. That’s three divisions.

135 had weakness during plenty of years in the 90s. 140 wasn’t good after Chavez and Whitaker left/faded out. He could’ve leapfrogged 147 and united at 154 in the second half of the 90s. That’s three.

I didn’t even need to consider 160 and 168.

 

So basically:

He’d have done well, if he’d have picked and chosen, at the perfect time, when the divisions were at their weakest.

Brilliant.

 

Or he could've beaten the absolute crap out of Wilfred Benitez.

 

Seen as though he’s never seen a prime great, or anybody with Benitez’ style, there’s not a shred of evidence to even suggest such a thing.

 

Klimov.

 

Bruce Curry did indeed get robbed In the first fight but what you leave out is Mayweather never came close to hitting as hard as Curry did.
And also,you forget in the rematch Curry lost.
Mayweather never faced the competition that a Benitez did and that isn't up for debate.
Oscar was effective against Mayweather because of his jab which was giving Mayweather problems and this was an Oscar that was basically retired.
At jr.lightweight and lightweight Mayweather was a beast but at higher weights he wasn't the same.
Benitez seemed to hit his stride at jr.middleweight.

 

It says something when the people who think Floyd would win actually talk about the styles and how they match up whereas the people who think Benitez would win just point to his resume and presuppose this means Benitez would win. Funny how that works...........

 

Here we go again.

So you support a post with a breakdown, which states that Benitez wouldn’t have won a round?

A breakdown of pure garbage impressed you, just because a breakdown was given?

We don’t need a breakdown here.

They were both excellent fighters.

Both tremendously skilled defensive counterpunchers, who were elite technicians with limited power.

Floyd had the better overall career, but Benitez fought better opponents.

It would have been a closely fought chess match.

There is zero evidence available, to support the theory of an easy win for either fighter.

 

If anything, fight could play out similar to the Leonard and Benitez fight, except that Floyd would be more defensively responsible but with lesser output and may find it harder to beat Benitez to the punch as despite having elite timing, Floyd at WW simply doesn't carry the same handspeed as Ray or the mindset to necessarily shoot shot for shot and back your handspeed like Ray did.

Floyd and Benitez would both be setting traps for each other and likely getting frustrated when the other doesn't bite in the way they expect. One thing though, Floyd was a brilliant adjuster and whilst Benitez faced higher level of elite, I think this would be a fight where Floyd is in with the most skilled fighter he faced, whereas it's not the same for Benitez. I like Floyd 9 - 6 or 8 - 7, fight surprisingly close, Floyd with cleaner offensive work, Benitez making him miss more than we are used to.