Breaking Floyd's defence

[wmute]

ok thank you for the clarification

you're talking about a much more difficult problem to solve

i think if i had the answer for you i'd be training world class fighters and quit my dayjob ^^


i think you'd need the right ref to let them work inside and be messy about it
who wont break them if floyd is only able to partially tie up his opponent or if he's able to keep one hand free

and then you'd have to grind him out

i think anybody who is simply looking to box with floyd would be fighting the wrong fight. not saying it's impossible. i'm just saying at WW it would be the rout to head.
at WW he's not historically great in terms of size and strength or durability


i think leonard might fit your bill, being a larger man that mayweather but still markedly smaller than hearns
ie closer in size to floyd than tommy

he could match floyd's mind and shandspeed (probably beat his handspeed with his combinations)
he had the pedigree in boxing to not get outclassed in a pure boxing sense

but i still see him imposing his strength, so he might not be the style.


maybe burley would fit the bill more, of the names i brought up, because of his punching power that he brought with a style not based on imposing physicality. i think they would go tit for tat, with burley landing the more eye catching and effective punches/counters because of his advantage in natural punching power

of course burley also finished his career as a MW, and is larger than floyd as well.


good posts from you regardless
nice to see them in the history section

I think what you say about the solution to the problem and switching jobs is true. :-)

IMO Duran, Whitaker, Napoles, Williams (ike, not Holman) are the ATG closest to Mayweather's size. People whose fighting weight was around 35 in their 20s and getting closer to 47 as they approached 30s. [I exclude Pryor, as I feel he was a bit smaller, but boy what amazing fight it would have been.]

WRT the right strategy... I used to think that going street (methodically of course) on Mayweather was a very good idea, if hard to execute, but the Hatton fight changed that perspective. Hatton is not exactly a Duran of course, but the absolute nonchalance with which Mayweather switched from impersonating the cute boxer we knew to playing the role of Bernard Hopkins was an eye opener. His inside defense -even while wrestling the wrestler-, and the amount and finesse of rough tricks in his bag were uncanny and unexpected. Let me tell you, I would bet my ass that his sparring sessions must be hardcore, and not just for his sparring partners, cos that's the only way I can imagine him "teaching that **** to his body" (not sure it is clear what I mean by that). Bottom line, I think roughing him up is a better idea than sitting there, being tentative and waiting to be countered, but it will take someone very special to outfight him on the inside AND make sure he does not backpedal all night and pile up enough points.

It is a pleasure to discuss boxing with you. I limited myself to Boxing History a while ago, NSB is terrible. Also, I had not posted for more than a year!

[McGoorty]

Picking up from a post someone else made recently regarding Chris Eubank I thought it might be interesting to discuss a comment he made about circumventing Floyd's ubiquitous shoulder roll defence.

"People suggest you need to jab, jab, jab that slippery defensive style Mayweather has, but that is incorrect because he is waiting to catch the jab all night long with his right hand and counter. I would suggest the right uppercut is the punch to utilize against that particular stance that Mayweather likes to use, strategically thinking because it will force Mayweather to actually change the position of his right glove in order to block it and obviously then there is an opportunity to get in a left hook, whereas before the left hook would've been easily blocked of course because the right hand in that stance would be right in the right position to block a left hook.So I think right uppercut - left hook - right hand is the punch sequencing.

Eubank is always good value for a comment (why SKY doesn't ditch the dreadful combination of Nelson and McKenzie in favour of him I have no idea) and I was particularly interested by this statement. I've been mulling the tactic over in my mind for the past week and after watching several of Floyd's older fights I'm still undecided.

Fighters are usually averse to deploying the uppercut often because it exposes the head to a counter. And Floyd is arguably the best counterpuncher in the game right now. That said, I do see the logic in Eubank's thinking. It's a risky manoeuvre and you'd need both good speed and skills to execute it perfectly - which kind of rules out many fighters hovering around Floyd's weight range. Pac could pull it off. But whether he'd be prepared to move away from the straight right I'm not sure.

I've seen fighters use the uppercut against Floyd before. But I don't recall seeing anyone use it concertedly as a means bypassing the shoulder roll. Perhaps someone else can help on this question?

Eubank's comment about the uselessness of the jab seems more a damning indictment of the jab in modern boxing than anything else, IMO. It wasn't all that long ago that most fighters possessed not just a functioning jab but a hurtful and damaging one. Unfortunately over the last couple of decades it has, for the most part, turned into a half-hearted pawing rangefinder as fighters instead choose to load up the heavy artillery from the opening bell. Indeed, things have become so bad that you can often sit through rounds in which not a single jab is thrown!

Regardless of the usefulness of the uppercut I do think a properly executed, hurtful, accurate and - most importantly - repetitive jab is essential to troubling Floyd. At the very least it contests the tempo of the fight - something Floyd is determined control. Keep the jab in Floyd's face and he simply has to emerge from behind his fortress-like defence. If he doesn't he risks losing rounds on workrate alone - as Leonard did in the opening rounds against Tommy Hearns.

Of course, there is always the possibility that Floyd will come out to fight and beat you anyway. But at least he's fighting on your terms. Not his.

Unfortunately, I can't think of too many fighters who possess a good enough jab to make this work. Manny has the speed, accuracy and workrate. But I doubt whether he'd use it often enough. On the other hand his stable-mate, Khan, has developed a very useful jab under Freddie Roach. It is accurate, fast and pretty heavy. But could Khan (who is still pretty young and inexperienced) remain calm and stay on the plan for twelve rounds? I have my doubts.

Aside from these two I can think of too many others. Anyone else?

Opening the discussion up - if you trained a hot prospect about to fight Floyd Mayweather what tactics would you favour (aside from entering the ring with a sawn-off *******)?

Moving on - I also found this comment interesting

"But the thing with Mayweather is he is very sharp, I know for a fact he is petrified of losing because the more fear you have of losing the better your reflexes work, I know that. His reflexes are very sharp. You must be a very sharp shooter and strategic thinker to defeat him, or you must not pose any fear or threat to him in his opinion for his reflexes not to work like they should work."

I think Eubank really does capture at least one possible champion mindset with this statement. I know from playing sport that a healthy dose of fear does wonders for your reflexes. And nothing blunts their edge more than complacency.

To tell you the truth, I can't answer that,... hasn't been done yet...... I'll ask Larry Merchant and get back to you.

[McGoorty]

I once heard someone say once that the way to beat a boxer with great speed, solid defence and is a wicked counter-puncher, ( as someone pointed out, Floyd has his right glove up next to his right ear, a defensive based fighter, and a dangerous counter-puncher )............ the guy said was to make him try to counter-punch a punch that ain't a punch, you have to force him into opening up by mistake, and by feinting a punch, but it's just a trap. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think it was Abe Attell,......... obviously to that would take speed and timing...... many old-timers based their style on deceit, always trying to deceive and out-think their opponent........ Come to think of it, Mayweather has skills in those departments.

[wmute]

Oh yeah I forgot, being a lefty must be good for something here, because he always comes forward against lefties.

[rorymac]

No active boxer has the skills to beat Floyd Mayweather. To beat Mayweather you need a skill level that is equal or almost equal to his, and you need the physical advantages too. Hearns could probably have done it. Hatton's strength and rough-house tactics provided some problems early on but he wasn't skilled enough to capitalise. A good boxer with a good jab/long reach could outwork Floyd and force him to fight out of his comfort zone. De La Hoya proved this but didn't do enough to win the fight.

The problem is that Floyd's challengers take an approach that is somewhere in the middle. They fight aggressively, but in the wrong way. They try and land big punches and combos, but Floyd can slip/block/counter all day. The middle ground does not work; you need to either get right on the inside and rough him around to expose openings (I think Eubank's point about the uppercut would help with this tactic), or you need to fight him from range, which means you need a good reach/good timing/handspeed/footwork.

[DeepSleep]

A tall rangy southpaw with a high work-rate would be optimal. Although Floyd has shown he can adapt to beat southpaws he clearly isn't as effective since he can't utilize his shoulder roll fully since it swings him the wrong direction. When he fights southpaws he tends to prefer using his reflexes and unreal timing skills to counter opponents as he comes forward as opposed to sitting back and making them miss.

The problem with whatever we type up on here is:

1). The fighter we are describing doesn't exist at 147 currently.

2). It's Floyd Mayweather... He solves boxers like Peyton Manning solves NFL defenses. Unless he is at a physical disadvantage it's tough to see him not being able to adapt and make people miss.

The best fit for the guy to crack Mayweather's defense at 147 is father time.

That said I don't think you need to really "crack" his defense to win. I think a guy like Pacquaio could simply out work him over 12 rounds given Floyd's low punch rate.

[JAB5239]

A tall rangy southpaw with a high work-rate would be optimal. Although Floyd has shown he can adapt to beat southpaws he clearly isn't as effective since he can't utilize his shoulder roll fully since it swings him the wrong direction. When he fights southpaws he tends to prefer using his reflexes and unreal timing skills to counter opponents as he comes forward as opposed to sitting back and making them miss.

The problem with whatever we type up on here is:

1). The fighter we are describing doesn't exist at 147 currently.

2). It's Floyd Mayweather... He solves boxers like Peyton Manning solves NFL defenses. Unless he is at a physical disadvantage it's tough to see him not being able to adapt and make people miss.

The best fit for the guy to crack Mayweather's defense at 147 is father time.

That said I don't think you need to really "crack" his defense to win. I think a guy like Pacquaio could simply out work him over 12 rounds given Floyd's low punch rate.

I think Pac would give him his sternest test since the first Castillo fight, but If JMM was able to counter Pac than I have no doubt Floyd would do the same and do it more effectively. If this fight ever happens I'll be pulling for Manny but betting on Mayweather.