Why is it that when people compare Floyd or manny to past fighters?

[MRBOOMER]

There is tons of footage, expect for WW Robinson. But seeing as he was KOing Middleweights, was proven to have an iron chin, KO power in both hands, speed, movement and was a great 15 round fighter, plus looking at his incredible record before he retired the first time, it is safe to give him the nod over Pac and Floyd at 147 considering its not their best weight.

Yeah I know there's footage I've seen plenty.
I'm just looking for that one thing of footage that shows these fighters fighting people incredibly simalar and as gifted as manny and Floyd that's all I'm really saying in this my main point is that it's a toss up no matter what you do even with hearns power range and speed or robinsons ko power in both hands or bassilo constant pressure you have to think have these people ever fought anyone like Floyd and manny and how would it really go not just hey he'll beat him cause he beat srr or he went up to LHW and won a title because that doesn't just mean they run all over em.

[Vadrigar.]

The older fighter typically wins like really wtf

In the case of Robinson vs mayweather or manny at 147 how much footage of Robinson there exist? For you to say he'd beat these two? Just because he one of the greatest doesn't mean he'd win...has he ever fought anybody with there style sets? And beat them? Is their footage to prove it?

This goes for every other ATg fighter there compared to
Bassilo
Whitaker
Trinidad
Pryor
Hearns
SRL
And the list goes on? I just don't get it just cause they beat other great fighters doesn't just mean they'd beat these two

If you're talking about head to head older fighters are usually favored because they've been tested against higher quality opposition which by extension means their said abilities are more proven than the modern fighter they've been compared to. It's not that the older fighter is favored just because he's older, it's that more great fighters have come out of older eras. Of course, old school eras have other factors that give advantages to fighters like Robinson (Same day weigh in, glove size, 15 rounds etc.)

You talk about "style sets" but you have to consider if someone like Floyd has fought anybody with Hearns' style set for example. It works both ways. You mention footage and I just emboldened those where there is plenty of footage for proof.

[MRBOOMER]

because people are living in the moment and they tend to OVERRATE what is current and just forget about the past and the legends who did fight the BEST OF THE BEST during their time and fighters wasn't being controlled by Promoters and Networks

it barely a hand full of fighters today who probably would have done well in just about any ERA, the rest wouldn't stand a chance

See some of that's true but look at it two ways put those fighters in this era twenty bucks says they'd do the same crap modern fighters do today ducking other fighters for bigger pay days or to protect there record

[MRBOOMER]

If you're talking about head to head older fighters are usually favored because they've been tested against higher quality opposition which by extension means their said abilities are more proven than the modern fighter they've been compared to. It's not that the older fighter is favored just because he's older, it's that more great fighters have come out of older eras. Of course, old school eras have other factors that give advantages to fighters like Robinson (Same day weigh in, glove size, 15 rounds etc.)

You talk about "style sets" but you have to consider if someone like Floyd has fought anybody with Hearns' style set for example. It works both ways. You mention footage and I just emboldened those where there is plenty of footage for proof.

Yes I know there's footage but like I've said ten times before footage that shows a fighter similar to these two they beat or at least with some of the same tangibles but off that if but that's a good point they pretty much havent fought anyone like the other fighters but because of that it makes it so much more of a mystery to decide to the winner because manny and Floyd havent fought anyone like them and they haven't really fought anyone like manny or Floyd at least that I've seen. If there is point me In the right direction for the footage tho

[sicko]

See some of that's true but look at it two ways put those fighters in this era twenty bucks says they'd do the same crap modern fighters do today ducking other fighters for bigger pay days or to protect there record

that is excuses that get used a lot, but it is not like Hagler, Hearns, Duran and Leonard was only making a few Thousands$$$, they was making Millions back then and the cost of living back then was much cheaper so they really was making a lot of money back then by those standards

would they be doing the same thing in this ERA (as far as picking a choosing fights and avoiding TOP FIGHTERS? who the hell knows, but you have to ask yourself, if fighters today had to fight the best of the best back then, would they be as highly rated or considered P4P Top Fighters or any of that in that ERA...I SAY HELL NO!

[The Noose]

Yeah I know there's footage I've seen plenty.
I'm just looking for that one thing of footage that shows these fighters fighting people incredibly simalar and as gifted as manny and Floyd that's all I'm really saying in this my main point is that it's a toss up no matter what you do even with hearns power range and speed or robinsons ko power in both hands or bassilo constant pressure you have to think have these people ever fought anyone like Floyd and manny and how would it really go not just hey he'll beat him cause he beat srr or he went up to LHW and won a title because that doesn't just mean they run all over em.

But surely it works both ways?

Who has either Floyd or Pac faced that has the combination of height, reach, power and speed of Hearns?
Or the skills of Whitaker?
Or the ability, power, durability and skills of SRR?

Old ATG fighters get the nod usually because their careers have ened and we know how good they were. Floyd and Pac lose their next fights and their legacy will be changed. Look at Roy Jones for example.

[Vadrigar.]

Yes I know there's footage but like I've said ten times before footage that shows a fighter similar to these two they beat or at least with some of the same tangibles but off that if but that's a good point they pretty much havent fought anyone like the other fighters but because of that it makes it so much more of a mystery to decide to the winner because manny and Floyd havent fought anyone like them and they haven't really fought anyone like manny or Floyd at least that I've seen. If there is point me In the right direction for the footage tho

It's not about having someone who fights exactly the same style on your resume, though it is ideal. But if someone is similar enough overall you can be pretty confident he will fair well or win head to head. Of the top of my head you can look at both Foreman's and Tyson's resumes and see a KO win over Joe Frazier who had a similar style to Tyson.

The bold is generally not a problem for most ATG's but or a few like Mayweather-Whitaker it is. Then you have to look at each fighters abilities in relation to the quality of opponents they fought, rather than style sets. Comparing intangibles will also help decide a pete/mayweather winner.

I will give you a website.

[bojangles1987]

The older fighter typically wins like really wtf

In the case of Robinson vs mayweather or manny at 147 how much footage of Robinson there exist? For you to say he'd beat these two? Just because he one of the greatest doesn't mean he'd win...has he ever fought anybody with there style sets? And beat them? Is their footage to prove it?

This goes for every other ATg fighter there compared to
Bassilo
Whitaker
Trinidad
Pryor
Hearns
SRL
And the list goes on? I just don't get it just cause they beat other great fighters doesn't just mean they'd beat these two

What footage is there of Pacquiao or Mayweather beating anyone as great as Leoanrd, Whitaker, or Hearns?

There's plenty of footage of every name in bold, beating fighters just as great as Pacquiao or Mayweather. Trinidad, Hearns, and Leonard get picked to beat Mayweather and Pacquiao because they are huge welterweights, and Hearns and Leonard are simply better fighters.

I mean, are you really acting like Whitaker, Trinidad, Hearns, and Leonard are from some bygone black and white era with barely any footage? go on YouTube and you'd see exactly why they are chosen over Mayweather and Pacquiao.

[bojangles1987]

Yeah I know there's footage I've seen plenty.
I'm just looking for that one thing of footage that shows these fighters fighting people incredibly simalar and as gifted as manny and Floyd that's all I'm really saying in this my main point is that it's a toss up no matter what you do even with hearns power range and speed or robinsons ko power in both hands or bassilo constant pressure you have to think have these people ever fought anyone like Floyd and manny and how would it really go not just hey he'll beat him cause he beat srr or he went up to LHW and won a title because that doesn't just mean they run all over em.

They fought fighters greater than Pacquiao and Mayweather, and beat them. It's pretty simple.

[#1Assassin]

think about it. boxing has been around for over a hundred years, what are the chances that the two top guys today are better than all that came before them? there have been generations of champions before these two. on top of that fighters in general arent as good today as they once were, dont have the mental toughness or the skill, there arent as many good teachers around and a big number of top fighters have major holes in their game. back in the day fighters honed their craft more, the world was tougher as was the competition.

mayweather and pacquiao are atgs for sure, but there are plenty of fighters of the past better than them. ofcourse they are better than many former welterweight champions too. the latest fighter on that list was pernell whitaker, think about all the great WWs who came after him in just a few years. mosley, DLH, forrest, trinidad etc. go back just a bit and you have camacho, curry, starling, breland, mccrory etc.. thats just two eras. imagine the greatest of all time, several dozens of great WWs.

ppl on this site are ignorant, they only know recent history well and very little about the fighters of the past. they only know about the very best fighters in history from other eras. so when they go to compare todays fighters with fighters from the past they talk about guys like robinson, duran, hearns, leonard, whitaker, griffin etc and when knowledgeable fans tell them todays fighters arent as good as any of them they think they are being unreasonable. what they fail to realize is no WW in history is as good as these guys.

compare them to cuevas, benitez, gavilan, napoles etc and you can have a real discussion. all these fighters are great too, these arent random fighters they were all great, great champions. as are pacquiao and mayweather. but there has been many great, great champions through the years. you just have to face the fact that pacquiao and maywetaher arent the greatest of them all and stop comparing them to the fighters who are.