would Floyd have lasted?

Floyd is well inside the top 50 p4p all time, probably somewhere around 30. If he had to fight at least 4 times a year would his hands have held up and allowed him to be an all time great?

 

I doubt it too. Lets say he could though. Would he eventually lose fighting more often, or would he continue on undefeated?

 

Not saying its not true, but I don't recall hearing that. If true it would be interesting to know if it was his whole career or later in it.

 

Any era where fighters routinely fought more. Floyd is incredibly skilled, I just don't think he would have held up had he been more active.

 

They didn't though and most greats fought far more times without their bodies betraying them. Like I said, Floyd is great and would be in any era. But if he had to fight in say the thirties with the McLarnins, Ross', Canzoneri's, Armstrong's and tough contenders all around he surely would have had issues with his hands and most likely had some losses because of these troubles. I don't particularly like Floyd but that's no slight against him.

 

I see you voted his hand WOULD hold up. Can you explain this considering the problems he already incurred when he was fighting more often? Lets not forget he isn't going to have the same medical technology either.

 

I don't remember anything about bad hands nut now that you mention Sugar some of that sounds familiar so it may not be out pf the realm of possibility. Thanks for the clarification and good points to think about Floyd. The thing that makes me think though is than why didn't he change his style more often? The obvious answer will be money and that has always been a sore point about him with me. I respect his abilities, but I favor fighters who court greatness by beating everyone. I'm just not sure his hands would have held. At the ed of the day though I may very well be wrong.