Is Floyd The Best Fighter In The Last 30 Years?

[Ravishing]

I see what you mean I dont think it will be even 3 years before we start looking a guy and comparing him to Floyd. Guillermo Rigondeaux comes to mind. His skill set is just sickening.

I think the frame of reference comes from the eye ball test. Styles makes fights. I look t Mayo and Forresst and its clear who the better boxer is. So I dont think its based on who would beat who I think its based off just looking at guys and there skill sets and making a judgement on them.

But you can't totally judge based on what you see separately from each fighter because that's why they actually fight. George Foreman was a nightmare match up for Ali, but that didn't really end how people expected it to end. The beauty of Boxing is the match up itself. If it were as simple as seeing what one guy did to another and vice versa and picking a winner based off that, there'd be no point to watch Boxing.

Just like the Pacquiao vs Mayweather fight. If Floyd is supposed to wipe the floor with Pacquiao, why bother watching it if you know exactly what's going to happen? We all have our "predictions", but once the bell rings, that all gets tossed out the window.

[PH|L]

Exactly you fight the style that suits you.

But, that is my point just cuz one style is prettier than the other. And, that guy perfected that pretty style does not mean he is more skilled then the guy that perfected a style that is much rougher.

Determining skills is subjective, you have to put a lot into account.

When people determine skills and IQ they go by styles. And, I think if you go by that. It will give a false premise of who the greater skilled fighter is.

Pëople who only talk about "skills" when determining who is better than who are just looking at one piece of the pie. Mental fortitude, reach, height, power, stamina, toughness, speed, strength, and many many more aspects come into play when factoring how good a boxer is. Even things like "brittle hands" or "Skin that cuts easily" count for something.

You gotta look at the whole package, not just the skillls.

[B.U.R.N.E.R]

But you can't totally judge based on what you see separately from each fighter because that's why they actually fight. George Foreman was a nightmare match up for Ali, but that didn't really end how people expected it to end. The beauty of Boxing is the match up itself. If it were as simple as seeing what one guy did to another and vice versa and picking a winner based off that, there'd be no point to watch Boxing.

Just like the Pacquiao vs Mayweather fight. If Floyd is supposed to wipe the floor with Pacquiao, why bother watching it if you know exactly what's going to happen? We all have our "predictions", but once the bell rings, that all gets tossed out the window.

Ofcourse I want to see the fight. Its the best two fighters in the world going at it. Do I think Floyd will win easy..yes. Do I still want to watch one of my favorite fighters do it..yes.

[Boxin']

Styles makes fights fool.

Mayorga is better than Vernon no??

Cotto is better than Marg no??

So if Mayweather beats Pac it could be because of styles right?

You admit that Pac still could be greater than Floyd even if Floyd beats him?

[B.U.R.N.E.R]

Pëople who only talk about "skills" when determining who is better than who are just looking at one piece of the pie. Mental fortitude, reach, height, power, stamina, toughness, speed, strength, and many many more aspects come into play when factoring how good a boxer is. Even things like "brittle hands" or "Skin that cuts easily" count for something.

You gotta look at the whole package, not just the skillls.

But he didnt ask me about "the whole package". He asked about skills.

I mean has a guy a mastered or came close to mastering the art of boxing. I would call that fighter a highly skilled fighter.

Mayweather
Calderon
Ward
Dirrell
Winky
Hopkins etc..

[jrosales13]

Pëople who only talk about "skills" when determining who is better than who are just looking at one piece of the pie. Mental fortitude, reach, height, power, stamina, toughness, speed, strength, and many many more aspects come into play when factoring how good a boxer is. Even things like "brittle hands" or "Skin that cuts easily" count for something.

You gotta look at the whole package, not just the skillls.

Well now that you mention that you might have a point.

I mean when people talk about the greatest skilled fighters. Nobody really mentions Jose Napoles. They called him "Mantequilla" cuz he was smooth as butter. You won't find many guys more skilled than Napoles but nobody really mentions him cuz of his he cut and bleed easily due to his paper tissue skin.

He ranks as an ATG fighter but for just pure skills wise nobody puts him up there. When it would damn difficult to find fighters more "skilled" then him.

[jrosales13]

But he didnt ask me about "the whole package". He asked about skills.

I mean has a guy a mastered or came close to mastering the art of boxing. I would call that fighter a highly skilled fighter.

Mayweather
Calderon
Ward
Dirrell
Winky
Hopkins etc..

Do you think Dirrell is more skilled than Pacquiao?

[B.U.R.N.E.R]

Do you think Dirrell is more skilled than Pacquiao?

By like a **** hair. Dirrell has a lot more work to do it mightve even been premature for me to put him on that list now that I think about it.

[B.U.R.N.E.R]

I do think Pac is skilled though. I would call him a skilled volume puncher. Speed, footwork, combos the ability to turn people at the drop of a dime. Pac has the goods.

[letsgobrady]

it's funny how pacquiao is fighter of the decade and all this other **** yet floyd is the one that is talked about as possibly the best ever