Hypothetical: Floyd dominates DLH enroute to a wide UD...

[BmoreBrawler]

he would have to beat Hatton to be top twenty. A semi-washed up Oscar who is known more for his heart than skill is not the guy that will propell PBF to the HOF.

[K-DOGG]

KDogg where do you rate Roy all time?

He goes in and out of my Top 10, to be truthful. His talent was phenomenal; but his competition could have been better. He left a lot to speculation and a lot to question. We never got to see him against Eubank, Benn, Nunn, or Michelewski (sp). Personally, with the exception of maybe Nunn, I think he could have beaten all of them; but I didn't see it 'cause it didn't happen. So, I have to go on what I did see, which was phenomenal. His schooling of James Toney was one of the more impressive displays I've ever seen. The Hopkins win was nothing special at the time, until you consider how great Bernard went on to be. Also his 4th round Kayo of Hill was mind-boggling, even if Hill was past his best.

Jones overall domination really weighs in and forces one to take notice, even with the unanswered questions. So, I rank him as an all time great based more on potential and accomplishment than anything.....even though his "accomplishment" side could have been better. Not all of the fights that didn't happen were his fault.

Here's a Ten p4p List off the cuff. (I don't have a set one because it's always in flux.)

1. Robinson
2. Armstrong
3. Pep
4. Fitzsimmons
5. Langford
6. Duran
7. Charles
8. Jones Jr.
9. Leonard (Benny)
10. Whittaker

[aps214]

he would have to beat Hatton to be top twenty. A semi-washed up Oscar who is known more for his heart than skill is not the guy that will propell PBF to the HOF.

If PBF retired today he'd end up in the hall of fame.. NOBODY needs Hatton for anything.

[aps214]

He goes in and out of my Top 10, to be truthful. His talent was phenomenal; but his competition could have been better. He left a lot to speculation and a lot to question. We never got to see him against Eubank, Benn, Nunn, or Michelewski (sp). Personally, with the exception of maybe Nunn, I think he could have beaten all of them; but I didn't see it 'cause it didn't happen. So, I have to go on what I did see, which was phenomenal. His schooling of James Toney was one of the more impressive displays I've ever seen. The Hopkins win was nothing special at the time, until you consider how great Bernard went on to be. Also his 4th round Kayo of Hill was mind-boggling, even if Hill was past his best.

Jones overall domination really weighs in and forces one to take notice, even with the unanswered questions. So, I rank him as an all time great based more on potential and accomplishment than anything.....even though his "accomplishment" side could have been better. Not all of the fights that didn't happen were his fault.

Here's a Ten p4p List off the cuff. (I don't have a set one because it's always in flux.)

1. Robinson
2. Armstrong
3. Pep
4. Fitzsimmons
5. Langford
6. Duran
7. Charles
8. Jones Jr.
9. Leonard (Benny)
10. Whittaker

Now how about this.. Suppose Roy retires IMMEDIATELY after beating Ruiz. The positive sentiment for him was so overwhelming at that pont that most people were saying Top 2 or 3 all time P4P. Its amazing how a few fights could kill a legacy

[K-DOGG]

You must mean Joe Gans. The one from the early 1900's. Exactly how many fights of his have you watched? Same with Armstrong. So you're right, you shouldn't get into them. Leonard would most likely beat Floyd, but Floyd would put up a fight. Not bad considering Leonard never fought below 147. I guess Pryor and Duran comes down to opinion because I don't think either would beat Floyd. And Walker who? Not Mickey Walker I hope. so based on the 140 and below part of what I asked you only named Duran, Pryor and ancient fighters that nobody has really ever seen much or anything of. And only named a couple above 140 that would beat him, which is exactly what I said.

1. I've seen enough footage of Gans and Armstrong to know how good they are and to form an intelligent opinon.

2. Benny Leonard, ...NOT RAY. Don't argue if you don't know who you're talking about.

3. I did counter-act what you suggested, so drop the word play. You wanted names of fighters who I honestly think Floyd would have trouble beating and I gave them to you. It's not my fault if you've never takent the time to study the history of the sport and are completely overwhelmed by the hype promoters throw out there for sheep to eat.

[K-DOGG]

Now how about this.. Suppose Roy retires IMMEDIATELY after beating Ruiz. The positive sentiment for him was so overwhelming at that pont that most people were saying Top 2 or 3 all time P4P. Its amazing how a few fights could kill a legacy

I would have had him Top 5 if not for the second Tarver fight. Sucks; but even though Roy was past his best, that fight did show the vulnerability of his chin....which is average, not glass.

[Em1]

You can remove the hypothetical. Oscar's old ass is going to get kicked.

[K-DOGG]

I have seen no evidence that Floyd would get "KTFO'D" by fighters like Hearns or Robinson.
In reality, Floyd probably has a better chin then both of them.
His defense is also better, and he has excellent speed.
Just in the way your saying these guys would KO Floyd, one can say Floyd would decision them with ease.
Attempting to convey your opinion as fact in regards to fantasy fights is foolish.

Styles and power mainly. Hearns was knocking out light-heavies and Robinson was cold-****ing grranite chinned middlweights. Also both were bigger that Floyd who started off at 130, had a longer reach, better power, and were as fast. Style-wise, both would have been nightmares for Floyd. Just because he hasn't lost against the opposistion he's fought, it doestn' make him invincible by any means.

Hell, from a style perspective, I'd favour a prime Marlon Starling, who was a very cagey Welterweight Champ......and bested Floyd Sr. twice, who essentially had the same stlye, to beat Jr. by decision.

[Tysonisgod]

Floyd would be in my top 50 if he beats Oscar. If he goes on to beat Hatton or Cotto, he'll make my top 25. But top 10? That's an insult to alot of great fighters.

So you would say that beatin hatton or cotto who are much lesser talents than the great oscar de la hoya is a bigger thing?

[wmute]

Junior Lightweight, Lightweight, and Welterweight....that's three. Hatton was champ at 140; Floyd never faced him.

Other multi-division champs include Barney Ross, Henry Armstrong, Bob Fitzsimmons, Carmen Basilio, Emile Griffin, Nino Benvenuti, Roberto Duran, etc, etc. AND they did it in an age where there was only ONE champ per division; none of this multi-titlist horse**** we see today. AND that "0" is only worth the fighters it was earned against.

He ain't done enough yet to leap frog to the front of the line.

I am afraid I will have to correct your logic here:

if you say floyd has been a champ in only 3 divisions, because those are the ones where he beat the man (and I agree with that), then you cannot complain about no alphabet bull****, because in those 3 divisions he beat the man, and so he would have been the champ even with only one belt.

or you can say he is a 4 division champ and then you can blame alphabet bull**** all you want.

but he is a 3 division champion like any 3 division champ from the past (well except someone like armstrong who was champ in a wider weight span of course)