-
-
I believe his exact words was that Floyd more skilled and only Sugar Ray Robinson could say he was better. He also said for what floyd has accomplished in so little time and remain undefeated is unmatched in the history of boxing. There is Floyd and no one else. So he never actually said that Floyd was better but he did say more skilled.Comment
-
what i wonder is how people can say with confidence that past era were more skilled and competitive than today. From what I have seen in past fights on ESPN classic and what not, they don't look that much better if at all better than what i see today. SRR was great and had a certtain Ferocity, but I don't see the athleticism that Floyd has. Ali had very fast hands for a HW but he got caught with too many shots and was nowhere the technical specimen Floyd was. The only fighter that have seen that no one seems too mention is Pernell Whitaker that IMO can compare to Floyd. The things he coiuld have been if wasn't such fiend and made some better choices and had the focus of Floyd. SRL was great and fought some tough comp, but I don't think he beat Hagler and IF is his fight with Hearns was fought in today's time, he would have lost to Hearns the 1st time and Hearns might have won the 2nd time.
I just don't think that this a weak era and that he has fought weak opposition compared to those other guys. I just think he is so much better that he makes these other guys look like they 2nd rated comp. Like roger I feel like he could compete in any era and be the greatest or very close to it. Boxing is boxing, there isn't a new invented punch or nothing like that. Skills are still skills and floyd has all the skills in the world.Comment
-
Which fights or fighters, and how far back are you talking about. I think what you may be confusing is that most fighters of any era aren'tas technical as Floyd. That doesn't mean they're not as good. Many fighters of the past would've done away with Castillo much better than Floyd did.
Ali was a Heavyweight, so it's obvious he's not gonna be as quick or as impressive in comparison. SRR was better than Floyd in most areas. Floyd was quicker and had better defense and movement. SRR had a much better offensive arsenal.SRR was great and had a certtain Ferocity, but I don't see the athleticism that Floyd has. Ali had very fast hands for a HW but he got caught with too many shots and was nowhere the technical specimen Floyd was.
The things he could've been? He was arguably a top 10 boxer of all time. He didn't get ruined by coke until he was already past his prime. He accomplished much more than PBF has and did it against better comp, in more impressive fashion. He dominated a much better fighter in Chavez in a much better fashion than Floyd did to his protege Castillo.The only fighter that have seen that no one seems too mention is Pernell Whitaker that IMO can compare to Floyd. The things he coiuld have been if wasn't such fiend and made some better choices and had the focus of Floyd.
Someone could easily say that Floyd lost to Castillo. And if you appreciate boxing, which you seem to, then I don't see how you gave the fight to Hagler. Also, no way in hell Floyd competes with either of those guys. Hearns destroys him at 147.SRL was great and fought some tough comp, but I don't think he beat Hagler and IF is his fight with Hearns was fought in today's time, he would have lost to Hearns the 1st time and Hearns might have won the 2nd time.
Ridiculous. The guys he beat were not as good prior to facing him. If he faced someone who was considered on the level of some of Leonard's or Whitakers opponents, and dominated them like he does, he would be thought of much higher. I doubt he beats Williams today, and I have my doubts about Cotto.I just think he is so much better that he makes these other guys look like they 2nd rated comp.
He does well in any era, but the best? Nah, he gets beaten by the Leonards, Durans, Whitakers, Hearns's, etcs of other eras.Like roger I feel like he could compete in any era and be the greatest or very close to it. Boxing is boxing, there isn't a new invented punch or nothing like that. Skills are still skills and floyd has all the skills in the world.Comment
-
Acting like I don't know what you mean? No, I don't know what you mean.
What they can do in the ring? If they can beat him in the ring, how is he better? Especially considering most of the guys I named had better resumes as well?
Explain. I think they all can beat him, so how is he more talented or better?
What do you mean? Most athletic?Comment
Tweet
Comment