Carmen BASILIO Vs Floyd MAYWEATHER Jr

[McGoorty]

Basilio wasnt going anywhere for 12 rounds and determination goes a a long way, but I don't see him being able to land on Floyd. Cotto is a better boxer than Basilio and probably has the best jab in the sport. Basilio has that heart, stamina and iron chin to stay in there for 12 though, don't see him winning though.

Actually Basilio fought and destroyed some guys who were a lot better boxers. Carmen had plenty of skills though, many not as pretty as many but THE ONLY thing that counts is EFFECTIVENESS and Carmen had an abundance of that. I made this scenario not to denigrate Floyd Mayweather ( after all I have made a video named after him ) but because in my mind Basilio is truly one of the greatest WW's. I saw someone say he had very few impressive victories against terrific fighters and named Gavilan as the only one that impresses and I heartily disagree with that. --------------------------------------------------------------- How on earth is a guy like Tony DeMarco not incredibly dangerous, DeMarco is a guy who would have utterly destroyed Cotto, his punching power was awesome but Basilio's chin was out of this world. There's no way Mayweather ever KO's Basilio, not once in a 20 fight series is that gonna happen. I rate Basilio as one of my top ten hardest and toughest fighters of all time, there is no one near him today in that respect.

[McGoorty]

Basilio wasnt going anywhere for 12 rounds and determination goes a a long way, but I don't see him being able to land on Floyd. Cotto is a better boxer than Basilio and probably has the best jab in the sport. Basilio has that heart, stamina and iron chin to stay in there for 12 though, don't see him winning though.

You said Carmen can't land even one blow on Mayweather ???, do you mean the same Carmen Basilio that landed enough punches to beat the likes of SRR and Gavilan ???.. If he can beat Robinson he must have landed a LOT of punches, and as someone who has marveled at those two fights forever I can assure you that Carmen was far better than you give him credit for. He fought in a time when the average fighter was simply a lot tougher and a lot better than today's guys. Mayweather is probably losing this fight.

[McGoorty]

Floyd's defense and boxing skills are just too good for anyone at 147 to have wiped the floor with him. But, I have no doubt Ray Robinson defeats him....

By wipe the floor I meant knocking him out savagely, with Basilio's power that must be considered a serious possibility. I do think that Floyd would get a savage beating by some of the old time WW's and LW's. That Floyd has great skills cannot be denied, but those guys had skills just as good if not better. Difference being that Floyd has met nobody with equal skills to the likes Of SRR, in fact I doubt there's more than a couple at most who would equal the slick skills of a Chuck Davey.

[#1Assassin]

mayweather by decision. he is too smart and skilled to let anyone beat him on sheer pressure and toughness. you need to be very smart and skillful to hit mayweather with clean punches not to mention avoid getting killed with counter shots.

basilio is too straight forward, too one dimensional. he gives floyd a few tough rounds early, then mayweather adapts and picks him apart for the remainder of the fight winning on cuts or by a wide decision.

[McGoorty]

mayweather by decision. he is too smart and skilled to let anyone beat him on sheer pressure and toughness. you need to be very smart and skillful to hit mayweather with clean punches not to mention avoid getting killed with counter shots.

basilio is too straight forward, too one dimensional. he gives floyd a few tough rounds early, then mayweather adapts and picks him apart for the remainder of the fight winning on cuts or by a wide decision.

We disagree on this but I totally respect your opinion. I made the thread for that purpose and also to keep the name of Basilio out there, I hate seeing great fighters lose their lustre after many decades, all fighters are at risk of being forgotten in the long term thats why the History section is probably the most important part of Boxing Scene.

[billeau2]

We just saw Cotto do a reasonably good job against Floyd and Basillo would be psuring Floyd simularly as Cotto did once in a while. The differences are that Cotto can't punch and he can't sustain an attack! Other than Pacman theres very few fighters that train to maintain a sustained attack on their opponents and Basillo would do just that for Mayweather. A huge difference is that the era of WW then was the best ever and to compete against that top ten was a huge task. They defeated one another at will and Mayweather would be a second division guy unless he showed a much higher competitive nature. Counter punching could only be a method used at an appropriate time. Trying to fight that style against those WW would get him in alot of trouble. Those men could punch harder than the fellows today because their power punching techniques were superior.
I do think it could be a great fight because Carmen was not a big WW as to height and that might help Floyd abit but I doubt that Floyd could success inside because fighters today are more boxers than fighters and their time in the amatuer ranks works against them in fantasy fights against the likes of the men from the 20s up thru 60s.
If it was fought back then I see Basillo winning on TKO, if it were fought now a days I see Basillo possibly getting haulted on cuts and abrasions but that meand Floyd has to fight and box!! Boxing then was a brutal battle because the men participating became that way. They fought often and hard or they wouldn't get on cards. It was a different business then and frankly the fellows today wouldn't have the same successes they have now if they fought then. Can you imagine Mayweather fighting 18 times a year for 3 or 4 years in a row? I can't! Plus a counter guy wouldn't get on cards then anyway, they were boring then just as they are now! Ray

Love to read your posts. The distinction you make between "boxer" and "fighter" is one I have realized when analyzing the same differences you speak of. You also made me ask myself how much olympic institutions for the sport influenced modern fighters. It would be an irony of sorts because the olympic guys obviously have good correlation to success (looking at the big picture) but the training is more as an "athlete" than as a "fighter" (to use your distinction). And just in the ways you describe when analyzing this match up...this difference could work against the moderns....

A lot of technique in the game fighter's use is very hard to see. Hence one has to be trained in the game, apprenticed, and brought up slowly to get the varied techniques necessary. I believe that any fighter from the golden age would simply take a modern guy inside sensing a lack of ability from that range. Floyd actually can fight inside! so that does speak to his competative ability, but guys who could throw punches all fight long for 3 minutes of every round...guys like Marciano, would get inside on most modern guys...one can imagine Klitschko trying to hit Marciano (for example) while Marciano was on top of him pummling him.

[McGoorty]

Love to read your posts. The distinction you make between "boxer" and "fighter" is one I have realized when analyzing the same differences you speak of. You also made me ask myself how much olympic institutions for the sport influenced modern fighters. It would be an irony of sorts because the olympic guys obviously have good correlation to success (looking at the big picture) but the training is more as an "athlete" than as a "fighter" (to use your distinction). And just in the ways you describe when analyzing this match up...this difference could work against the moderns....

A lot of technique in the game fighter's use is very hard to see. Hence one has to be trained in the game, apprenticed, and brought up slowly to get the varied techniques necessary. I believe that any fighter from the golden age would simply take a modern guy inside sensing a lack of ability from that range. Floyd actually can fight inside! so that does speak to his competative ability, but guys who could throw punches all fight long for 3 minutes of every round...guys like Marciano, would get inside on most modern guys...one can imagine Klitschko trying to hit Marciano (for example) while Marciano was on top of him pummling him.

There are guys like Floyd who can fight inside plenty really but their lvl of skill there is lower, the great body punchers and inside fighters heyday was long ago and a lot of the subtlety is lost, there were guys who were simply destroyers inside, Marciano was like a throwback to a Frank Klaus.. Frank wrote the definitive textbook on being a great inside fighter,, and yes, I have the link. Just look at old film of Nelson, Wolgast and especially Les Darcy, hard to tell if he is just subtle when you see just how incredibly strong that kid was, he literally lifts his opponents off the floor with close in body shots, no opponent could fight inside with him. I hate to sound like any kind of hugger but hey inside fighting looks somewhat like unfriendly hugging. That was 1915 and 1916 and there were many many great ones on the way (Darcy was not a pure infighter like Klaus, I can't judge Klaus without film but he may have been the best insider of all MW's but Darcy was also a master on the outside and everywhere in between, a complete fighter). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------- Of Course the 1900 - 1917 era had hundreds of rugged dangerous inside men, indeed it seems to be the most common style added with the famous Klaus crouch that many emulated. From seeing that tiny bit of surviving film of George KO Brown its obvious that he was ALL infighter, he still lost that fight by some margin but that one minute or less that survives of the Darcy Vs KO Brown fight shows glimpses of one of the ferocity of the infighting those two dished out for 20 rounds, it was without doubt one of the great fights of the decade, a decade with many great fights. what an era it would have been to see in living colour. ------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------ The 20's and 30's and 40's produced a couple of hundred great fighters whose names resonate loudly today.. Walker, Greb, Armstrong, Dempsey, Zale, Petrolle... an almost endless list of men who mixed boxing skill with fighter skills and the ferocity to make a bear **** itself. These guys didnt all dance a lot, they simply ran at you leading with a half hearted jab and a crunching left hook and then inside and on we go with the attempts and sledgehammer body blows with them hoping to puncj a hole right through the ribs and hoping to tear the heart out ( not literally but at least to break ribs and hope the guy hasn't the heart to wanna go the distance, I really really really hate fighters who aim for a points win from the start.. its not fighting and its not even boxing, its just BS.

[billeau2]

There are guys like Floyd who can fight inside plenty really but their lvl of skill there is lower, the great body punchers and inside fighters heyday was long ago and a lot of the subtlety is lost, there were guys who were simply destroyers inside, Marciano was like a throwback to a Frank Klaus.. Frank wrote the definitive textbook on being a great inside fighter,, and yes, I have the link. Just look at old film of Nelson, Wolgast and especially Les Darcy, hard to tell if he is just subtle when you see just how incredibly strong that kid was, he literally lifts his opponents off the floor with close in body shots, no opponent could fight inside with him. I hate to sound like any kind of hugger but hey inside fighting looks somewhat like unfriendly hugging. That was 1915 and 1916 and there were many many great ones on the way (Darcy was not a pure infighter like Klaus, I can't judge Klaus without film but he may have been the best insider of all MW's but Darcy was also a master on the outside and everywhere in between, a complete fighter). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------- Of Course the 1900 - 1917 era had hundreds of rugged dangerous inside men, indeed it seems to be the most common style added with the famous Klaus crouch that many emulated. From seeing that tiny bit of surviving film of George KO Brown its obvious that he was ALL infighter, he still lost that fight by some margin but that one minute or less that survives of the Darcy Vs KO Brown fight shows glimpses of one of the ferocity of the infighting those two dished out for 20 rounds, it was without doubt one of the great fights of the decade, a decade with many great fights. what an era it would have been to see in living colour. ------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------ The 20's and 30's and 40's produced a couple of hundred great fighters whose names resonate loudly today.. Walker, Greb, Armstrong, Dempsey, Zale, Petrolle... an almost endless list of men who mixed boxing skill with fighter skills and the ferocity to make a bear **** itself. These guys didnt all dance a lot, they simply ran at you leading with a half hearted jab and a crunching left hook and then inside and on we go with the attempts and sledgehammer body blows with them hoping to puncj a hole right through the ribs and hoping to tear the heart out ( not literally but at least to break ribs and hope the guy hasn't the heart to wanna go the distance, I really really really hate fighters who aim for a points win from the start.. its not fighting and its not even boxing, its just BS.

Indeed, the subtlety of the inside game is as you say a consumate skill... a whole ball of wax...from setting up from the clinch to controlling the elbows, to always having a hand free and moving the head properly. Frankly it is a lot like classic Ju Jutsu. Like any fighting scenerio one needs to control the opponent. If you know what to look for you can see it with the guys who knew how to operate at that distance.

What amuses me is that people are so ready to declare that the size of a modern heavyweight...which does not correlate to any measure of success (it happens to be the case that Lewis was a big heavyweight and champ, the Klitschkos rule a pathetically weak division) makes all the difference in the world, while simply ignoring the fact that a skilled, smaller heavyweight from the old days could operate with consumate skill on the inside....Can anyone really declare with a straight face that the Klitschkos move fluidly, well enough, to avoid a guy like Marciano on the inside? heck even Holyfield at cruiser weight limit would get inside and work these guys. Ali had the ability to keep a guy outside but that was due to great feet, not size!

The argument that the old timers were too small is patently absurd from a combat perspective.

[McGoorty]

Indeed, the subtlety of the inside game is as you say a consumate skill... a whole ball of wax...from setting up from the clinch to controlling the elbows, to always having a hand free and moving the head properly. Frankly it is a lot like classic Ju Jutsu. Like any fighting scenerio one needs to control the opponent. If you know what to look for you can see it with the guys who knew how to operate at that distance.

What amuses me is that people are so ready to declare that the size of a modern heavyweight...which does not correlate to any measure of success (it happens to be the case that Lewis was a big heavyweight and champ, the Klitschkos rule a pathetically weak division) makes all the difference in the world, while simply ignoring the fact that a skilled, smaller heavyweight from the old days could operate with consumate skill on the inside....Can anyone really declare with a straight face that the Klitschkos move fluidly, well enough, to avoid a guy like Marciano on the inside? heck even Holyfield at cruiser weight limit would get inside and work these guys. Ali had the ability to keep a guy outside but that was due to great feet, not size!

The argument that the old timers were too small is patently absurd from a combat perspective.

Yes great feet and hand speed, one factor too many also ignore is reach, Darcy was about same size a Klaus from memory, short, Klaus HAD to be able to do it inside and he was extremely scientific about it, I am gonna get that old thread out for you I can see you will love that book. Darcy although short had two things that made him able to fight inside and able to do as well on the outside, one of them was twinkling feet, he was like a kangaroo and his feet were very fast. His other natural gift was a ridiculous orangutang reach, it was over 6 ft 2 inches, he was 5 ft 7 inches high and he had quick hands, it didnt matter where he fought he was non stop busy throwing incredible amounts of punches, he could box, he had very heavy hands but did not throw all punches heavy. Don't know if you know much about him but well you know more now I hope.. I will bump that Klaus thread for you.

[Anthony342]

There are guys like Floyd who can fight inside plenty really but their lvl of skill there is lower, the great body punchers and inside fighters heyday was long ago and a lot of the subtlety is lost, there were guys who were simply destroyers inside, Marciano was like a throwback to a Frank Klaus.. Frank wrote the definitive textbook on being a great inside fighter,, and yes, I have the link. Just look at old film of Nelson, Wolgast and especially Les Darcy, hard to tell if he is just subtle when you see just how incredibly strong that kid was, he literally lifts his opponents off the floor with close in body shots, no opponent could fight inside with him. I hate to sound like any kind of hugger but hey inside fighting looks somewhat like unfriendly hugging. That was 1915 and 1916 and there were many many great ones on the way (Darcy was not a pure infighter like Klaus, I can't judge Klaus without film but he may have been the best insider of all MW's but Darcy was also a master on the outside and everywhere in between, a complete fighter). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------- Of Course the 1900 - 1917 era had hundreds of rugged dangerous inside men, indeed it seems to be the most common style added with the famous Klaus crouch that many emulated. From seeing that tiny bit of surviving film of George KO Brown its obvious that he was ALL infighter, he still lost that fight by some margin but that one minute or less that survives of the Darcy Vs KO Brown fight shows glimpses of one of the ferocity of the infighting those two dished out for 20 rounds, it was without doubt one of the great fights of the decade, a decade with many great fights. what an era it would have been to see in living colour. ------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------ The 20's and 30's and 40's produced a couple of hundred great fighters whose names resonate loudly today.. Walker, Greb, Armstrong, Dempsey, Zale, Petrolle... an almost endless list of men who mixed boxing skill with fighter skills and the ferocity to make a bear **** itself. These guys didnt all dance a lot, they simply ran at you leading with a half hearted jab and a crunching left hook and then inside and on we go with the attempts and sledgehammer body blows with them hoping to puncj a hole right through the ribs and hoping to tear the heart out ( not literally but at least to break ribs and hope the guy hasn't the heart to wanna go the distance, I really really really hate fighters who aim for a points win from the start.. its not fighting and its not even boxing, its just BS.

Hell yeah, I agree with that last part. My favorites are mostly fighters that go for the KO or TKO or, as they say these days in boxing and MMA, fighters who "finish fights." That's why I usually enjoy watching a Miguel Cotto fight these days, because he usually goes for the finish and not just a points win. Nonito Donaire seems to do that too and there's probably a couple of other boxers who do the same that I haven't seen yet.