Prime Hall of Fame fighters in Floyd resume?

I think its arguable, but he's probably the most accomplished since most of the best lw's moved on pretty quickly (floyd, oscar, shane) Shane had 30 fights at Lightweight. And both Shane and Oscar were before Castillo anyway. And even then, Castillo is still more accomplished than all 3.

he lost to floyd and castillo. with 2 l's to floyd, its hard to consider him a better lw than floyd. if you wanna give him credit for floyd 1, you could argue that casa beat JLC as well. i think casa was a better lw and castillo beat corrales over some bullshi t at lw in their SECOND fight if you bring it out to 2010, jmm might have a better lw resume It's hard to consider him a better Lightweight than Mayweather? :lol1: What? He had like 4 fights there. And, if you're one of the people who think Mayweather lost to Castillo the first time then he is a first Ballot HOF'er. I can't see how it can be argued otherwise. If you add Mayweather to his already strong resume then he's a first Ballot HOF'er. I don't think Casamayor beat him nor is his resume better. As for JMM, his resumes not better either. How is it? Its not at all. Like Jro said, he probably has the best LW resume since Whitaker. That speaks for itself. He is the best, most accomplished LW of his era and whilst I wouldn't vote for him it wouldn't be a crime at all if he got in.

I have heard all this talk about other fighters in their prime but what was Floyd's prime? was it at 140 147 154? what weight and time frame was floyd at his prime? Is he still in his prime now? if he beat a fighter who wasn't in their prime but he also wasn't in his does it change things? It seems like everyone treats floyd like he does not get older. Or are you saying that floyd's prime has lasted his entire career? wouldn't that be a feat in itself.

Thats a misquote if I ever saw one. You may be right because I went by memory but if I put down the exact quote, it's not looking any prettier for Floyd, I can tell you that! Nor his statement about "Self-preservation"!

You can say that about almost any fighter. Floyd is a HOF and an ATG. I'm just happy to have seen him fight and seem him beat all the good fighters he did. He still has options left. He says he wants to fight 5 more times after Cotto. There's plenty of fights there depending on how each fighter does the next year or two. I've been saying this for several years now that he should pick it up but it's like he doesn't care .... he even says it now more often. So it's not like there is anything to defend when someone like myself says that about Floyd. You can't say that about any fighter ..... sure they may have not had a fight with everyone but people would question those who would say that Ali was a ducker because he didn't fight everyone .... especially after taking on a Liston and a Foreman. Ali would call you out and it would be for real. He would even come chasing you around ..... Floyd calls you out but then retreats from that statement. Example: "Manny you are NEXT!" .... but then we get "I never said Manny was next"

Unless we see things change, Floyd is going to look back and wished he did things differently. but using his own words, things are not going to change and may actually go downhill .... "I'm getting older and will not fight champs ...... " Thats a misquote if I ever saw one.

Unless we see things change, Floyd is going to look back and wished he did things differently. but using his own words, things are not going to change and may actually go downhill .... "I'm getting older and will not fight champs ...... " You can say that about almost any fighter. Floyd is a HOF and an ATG. I'm just happy to have seen him fight and seem him beat all the good fighters he did. He still has options left. He says he wants to fight 5 more times after Cotto. There's plenty of fights there depending on how each fighter does the next year or two.

Unless we see things change, Floyd is going to look back and wished he did things differently. but using his own words, things are not going to change and may actually go downhill .... "I'm getting older and will not fight champs ...... "

Sorry Brother Jay, I don't think Kostya Tszyu is an ATG. He's in the same boat with Jose Luis Castillo, Diego Corrales, and Genaro Hernandez to me. Probably a HOF fighter one day, but not quite an ATG. ATG to me is Top 100. HOF is a different story. Miguel Cotto will probably get into the HOF, but right now he's not an ATG.

Even if you hated Pacquiao to the max please stop discrediting other fighter achievements for the sake of hating.:pat: Pot. Kettle. Black. Hahahahahahaha

Well by that reasoning then Hatton gets in because of his win over Tszyu. My question to you Walt is who did Pacquiao beat that would warrant him being in the HOF I mean, if we are going to be critical, let's be critical across the board. Barrera's only notable win is over Morales. If he is a future HOF'er, then Corrales is definitely a HOF'er for his fights with Castillo. Morales' greatest win comes over Pacquiao. Take that away and he's no better than Corrales who's greatest win comes over Castillo. Does that qualify him for the HOF? DLH doesn't count because he was drained. I'm sure we agree on that. Hatton ... I don't know. Hatton was already contemplating retirement after Floyd. He knew he had little left to give. That's why he hired the Mayweathers to "fix" him. That was a clear cut sign. A win over Ricky at that point didn't hold any real legacy value IMO. Cotto's only win in his career that holds any legacy value comes over Mosley. That decision, like you said earlier, was arguable. I won't attempt to devalue the win. I will only say that without it Cotto wouldn't even be a top commodity. Clottey has never beaten a world champion in his career. He's a step above a gatekeeper, but he doesn't quite have the stuff to be a champion. Margarito has only one noteworthy win in his entire career and that comes over Cotto. Six months later he was humiliated because his skills don't pay bills. His cement does. Mosley is a HOF'er without a doubt. However Shane's status when Pacquiao faced him was he was dominated by one guy, and had an awkward fight against another that resulted in a draw. The timing was too convenient for a guy who's trainer openly stated that he would not let Manny fight Shane because Shane was too good. JMM ... what can I say? The guy has shown himself to be the better boxer in three different occasions against Pacquiao. He just doesn't get the nod. The fans know it. The press writes about it. The pundits speak about it whatever medium they have access to. To be able to receive ANY HOF glory from his three bouts with JMM, Pacquiao would have had to have been perceived as winning any of those three matches .. and not just getting the nod from the judges. In the first match, he floored JMM 3 times. That's the last good thing you could say about Pacquiao in that match. JMM came back and took over by teaching a boxing lesson. The judges felt that the three knockdowns were too much to come back from obviously. Manny had other moments, but not enough to win many rounds outside of that insane first round. In the second, they went toe to toe with JMM in most opinions getting the better of Manny more so than in the first. He definitely outboxed Manny, but again the knockdown kept Manny relevant enough to get the nod from the judges. In the third ... forget about it. Manny got taught a complete boxing lesson. JMM didn't run. He didn't hide. He fought 12 rounds. Manny was just upset because JMM didn't fight like a Mexican and hit and moved in favor of standing and trading. JMM showed that he could take all of Manny's weapons away and not have to stay on his bicycle like Mosley did simply by moving to the side after counterpunching. Manny may have fought JMM three times, but he certainly NEVER beat him once. Just because a judge gives you the nod doesn't mean that fans are dumb, deaf and blind. Pacquiao didn't get in the face with a water bottle because he won. The world has chimed in and Pacquiao has been found wanting my man. So if you're going to say that Manny is a HOF because of his wins over Barrera and Morales, then you've got to recalibrate your list of who is getting in the HOF. Manny certainly better not get in because of ANYTHING he did at WW or jrMW. We may not always agree on everything Walt, but you know like I know that weight manipulation along with targeting 6 different fighters who were coming off career losses and minor tune ups makes Manny's campaign at WW and jrMW entertaining but not HOF or ATG worthy. Manny looked like a gladiator in those fights, but the tactics used@ WW & jrMW rendered any legacy-defining value obsolete in those 2 divisions. This is not trashing Manny Pacquiao as a fighter. This applying the same distinction that you have across the board. I look forward to your reply. listen, hatton vs manny's resume even with the win over zoo, which was a good win AT BEST b/c of reasons I mentioned before is not even a subject of discussion. hattons resume is garbage and i dont expect to have to dissect the zoo win as far as the first bold, we can't get anywhere as long as you actually believe that barrera and morales' only notable wins are barrera over morales and morales over pac. anyway, I think pac and floyd sealed their HOF credentials before they got to 140-147. and i think jmm-pac 1 was a draw and pac won the second fight and that one's not arguable IMO. Manny was clearly outboxed in the first fight after the second round. not so in the second fight at all. they fought on even terms and manny dropped him. so that's another hof type win vs a prime fighter at his best weight. the third, was blown out of proportion, jmm didn't do enough and I gave it to manny, but i can see a 1-2 point win for either guy. manny has basically been bullshi ttin since he fought over 140 and floyd has been bullshi tting since 140. as far as the second bold, i agree except i give pac some credit for the cotto win. morales, barrera and jmm=enough to be an atg. morales is a badass mofo period. i think all those wins trump all floyd's wins except maybe castillo x 2. floyd and manny stroll striaght in to the hof......as far as atg status goes, I have them VERY close at this point because of how lame their last couple of years have been. they no longer challenge themselves and I dont respect that as far as atg status goes. manny in particular has lost a LOT of the shine I thought he earned

Well by that reasoning then Hatton gets in because of his win over Tszyu. My question to you Walt is who did Pacquiao beat that would warrant him being in the HOF? I mean, if we are going to be critical, let's be critical across the board. Barrera's only notable win is over Morales. If he is a future HOF'er, then Corrales is definitely a HOF'er for his fights with Castillo. Morales' greatest win comes over Pacquiao. Take that away and he's no better than Corrales who's greatest win comes over Castillo. Does that qualify him for the HOF? DLH doesn't count because he was drained. I'm sure we agree on that. Hatton ... I don't know. Hatton was already contemplating retirement after Floyd. He knew he had little left to give. That's why he hired the Mayweathers to "fix" him. That was a clear cut sign. A win over Ricky at that point didn't hold any real legacy value IMO. Cotto's only win in his career that holds any legacy value comes over Mosley. That decision, like you said earlier, was arguable. I won't attempt to devalue the win. I will only say that without it Cotto wouldn't even be a top commodity. Clottey has never beaten a world champion in his career. He's a step above a gatekeeper, but he doesn't quite have the stuff to be a champion. Margarito has only one noteworthy win in his entire career and that comes over Cotto. Six months later he was humiliated because his skills don't pay bills. His cement does. Mosley is a HOF'er without a doubt. However Shane's status when Pacquiao faced him was he was dominated by one guy, and had an awkward fight against another that resulted in a draw. The timing was too convenient for a guy who's trainer openly stated that he would not let Manny fight Shane because Shane was too good. JMM ... what can I say? The guy has shown himself to be the better boxer in three different occasions against Pacquiao. He just doesn't get the nod. The fans know it. The press writes about it. The pundits speak about it whatever medium they have access to. To be able to receive ANY HOF glory from his three bouts with JMM, Pacquiao would have had to have been perceived as winning any of those three matches .. and not just getting the nod from the judges. In the first match, he floored JMM 3 times. That's the last good thing you could say about Pacquiao in that match. JMM came back and took over by teaching a boxing lesson. The judges felt that the three knockdowns were too much to come back from obviously. Manny had other moments, but not enough to win many rounds outside of that insane first round. In the second, they went toe to toe with JMM in most opinions getting the better of Manny more so than in the first. He definitely outboxed Manny, but again the knockdown kept Manny relevant enough to get the nod from the judges. In the third ... forget about it. Manny got taught a complete boxing lesson. JMM didn't run. He didn't hide. He fought 12 rounds. Manny was just upset because JMM didn't fight like a Mexican and hit and moved in favor of standing and trading. JMM showed that he could take all of Manny's weapons away and not have to stay on his bicycle like Mosley did simply by moving to the side after counterpunching. Manny may have fought JMM three times, but he certainly NEVER beat him once. Just because a judge gives you the nod doesn't mean that fans are dumb, deaf and blind. Pacquiao didn't get in the face with a water bottle because he won. The world has chimed in and Pacquiao has been found wanting my man. So if you're going to say that Manny is a HOF because of his wins over Barrera and Morales, then you've got to recalibrate your list of who is getting in the HOF. Manny certainly better not get in because of ANYTHING he did at WW or jrMW. We may not always agree on everything Walt, but you know like I know that weight manipulation along with targeting 6 different fighters who were coming off career losses and minor tune ups makes Manny's campaign at WW and jrMW entertaining but not HOF or ATG worthy. Manny looked like a gladiator in those fights, but the tactics used@ WW & jrMW rendered any legacy-defining value obsolete in those 2 divisions. This is not trashing Manny Pacquiao as a fighter. This applying the same distinction that you have across the board. I look forward to your reply. Even if you hated Pacquiao to the max please stop discrediting other fighter achievements for the sake of hating.:pat:

when floyd got a Q, this happens lol.....

I agree with this, Castillo might be the greatest LW since...maybe Whitaker. Ah ok, but still you act like Corrales sucks. He beat Freitas, Manfredy, Gainer, Garcia, Casamayor on top of the epic Castillo fight. But castillo beat him on some bullshi t.

I agree with this, Castillo might be the greatest LW since...maybe Whitaker. I think its arguable, but he's probably the most accomplished since most of the best lw's moved on pretty quickly (floyd, oscar, shane)

Wait, what? Corrales, its fnf time which means im blowed out

If there's a lot of guys then name them. How many people from 00-09 have a better Lightweight resume than Castillo? I'd like to hear them. And considering you said you don't agree then who do you have in mind? Casamayor, Corrales, Johnston, Lazcano, a razor thin fight with Floyd Mayweather that he very arguably won, and more. Again, who has a better Lightweight resume from 00-09? If there's any, there's certainly not many. I can't think of any. His Lightweight run was exceptional. He's pretty much universally recognised as the best Lightweight of his era and deservably so, to be honest. he lost to floyd and castillo. with 2 l's to floyd, its hard to consider him a better lw than floyd. if you wanna give him credit for floyd 1, you could argue that casa beat JLC as well. i think casa was a better lw and castillo beat corrales over some bullshi t at lw in their SECOND fight if you bring it out to 2010, jmm might have a better lw resume

Wow got owned the first page of his thread before I even got a chance to. NICE.

This is true too. This is why Laszlo Papp got in IMO. It was because of his outstanding amateur background. Won 3 Olympic Gold Medals in a row. Is in the discussion for the greatest amateur of all time. And, look at his pro resume. Not HOF worthy. I don't see how he could get in as a professional. Because, he didn't really accomplish much. And, it wasn't his fault either IMO. Just hand injury and politics that probably stopped him from gaining reaching his full potential as a pro. His pro resume is weak. But, his amateur resume can't be denied. And, he is inducted into the IBHOF. of couse. the other people with 3 golds have no pro experience

I'm just saying, it's hypocritical as f**k to get picky all of a sudden just because too many other people got in first. You can't get picky all of a sudden out of nowhere, then it's a double standard...."fool". No disrespect or anything, but you're the guy on here talking s**t, not me. I was just saying that they can't get all picky and the resume's of Corrales and Castillo are at least equal to Tszyu's. And that Genaro and Hatton have better wins than McGuigan and Mitchell. That's all I was saying homie. zoo's amateur resume smashes...that's probably what got him in. possibly those people are a bit better than the worst guy inthe hof, doesn't mean they should get in. there's ALWAYS an outlier or two. based on boxing accomplishment alone, none of those 3 deserve it. they're good fighters and hatton is a decent to good fighter, not great.