Comments Thread For: Duran: In My Era, Mayweather Would've Been Ordinary

[The Big Dunn]

Nothing moves you when it comes to floyd, his family, tmt, his promoter etc.

defend your position with a salient argument rather than nuthugger or bumsniffing.

[The Big Dunn]

go on then ....

Thats not the thread topic.

I think power is the wrong way to beat prime floyd. I think the fighters with the best chance to beat floyd (only fighters I saw from like 79 on so I wont use SRR, armstrong or guys like that) were sweet pea, meldrick taylor, srl-guys with speed and skill who could fight different ways. Hearns length would present problems.

Hagler's size would've been too much.

As I've said I think he beats duran.

[BennyST]

I see that you actually get it. Would Floyd have some losses? Yes, but having 2-3 losses doesn't mean you aren't great or less of a fighter.

FWIW, and this is gonna piss people off, I feel Floyd would UD Leonard, Prior and Arguello for sure. I feel Hearns, due to his style would KO Floyd and Duran is a 50/50 fight IMO.

Why would that piss people off? Although I think Leonard would win a close, but clear UD and a Pryor fight would be close just due to his volume and activity, Arguello lost to the two guys he fought that probably most resembled Floyd and the way he'd fight Arguello at 130. Well, Fernandez not so much. Although very crafty and underrated, he didn't have the overall offensive counter skills and savvy defense inside that Floyd has, and relied on his jab and movement much more. Marcel was very fast, great lead right that gave Arguello fits, and his movement and ring craft were quite similar to Floyd. Both guys won clear decisions over Arguello in his prime.

Both were knocked out by Duran too funnily enough. Marcels only clear loss of his career.

Either way, he'd always be tough and crafty for anyone, win and lose.

[prinzemanspopa]

He's a HOF'er FFS who defended his title 14 times and lost to ODH and floyd. How am I elevating him to make floyd look better?

No, he isn't; he's in the WBHOF, which is as much of a joke as the IBHOF. What I said about Hernandez is correct: he beat very, very few top fighters over the course of his career. Won a vacant title and then defended it against non-ranked opponents. Raul Perez was actually a really good fighter, but even he wasn't ranked within the top ten at that point.

I'm not saying he isn't a credible threat. I'm saying I think floyd would outbox curry on a way to a win and I use as reference the starling fights.

Have you even seen the Starling fights? Have you actually seen the rematch, in which Curry fought in the pocket with Starling for fifteen rounds and beat him comprehensively? I'm asking you this because you're citing them as if they showed some major flaws in Curry's style that Mayweather could exploit.

[junior gong]

defend your position with a salient argument rather than nuthugger or bumsniffing.

I tried that a couple of years back, but im less inclined to waste my time listening to you waffle on about how great floyd is and defending the ridiculous moron's you find in my sig. These days I just like to laugh at your stock patter/routine and take the piss a little bit. I could waste my time trying to explain why Breland was a much better fighter than Floyd snr, but you will just trott more waffle out and still say that a mayweather is better. If you need that explaining to you at your age and 'supposed' experience of watching boxing, then you shouldnt be here.

[The Big Dunn]

No, he isn't; he's in the WBHOF, which is as much of a joke as the IBHOF. What I said about Hernandez is correct: he beat very, very few top fighters over the course of his career. Won a vacant title and then defended it against non-ranked opponents. Raul Perez was actually a really good fighter, but even he wasn't ranked within the top ten at that point.







Have you even seen the Starling fights? Have you actually seen the rematch, in which Curry fought in the pocket with Starling for fifteen rounds and beat him comprehensively? I'm asking you this because you're citing them as if they showed some major flaws in Curry's style that Mayweather could exploit.

either way I'm not elevating him. he beat perez better than chavez.

yes, many times.

Your trying to argue from the extreme. I'm not citing any major flaws with curry. floyd simply wouldn't curry to fight like that.

[The Big Dunn]

I tried that a couple of years back, but im less inclined to waste my time listening to you waffle on about how great floyd is and defending the ridiculous moron's you find in my sig. These days I just like to laugh at your stock patter/routine and take the piss a little bit. I could waste my time trying to explain why Breland was a much better fighter than Floyd snr, but you will just trott more waffle out and still say that a mayweather is better. If you need that explaining to you at your age and 'supposed' experience of watching boxing, then you shouldnt be here.

In other words-you would make a point and I may or may not refute it. then I make a point. thats what a debate is gong. whatever another poster has said about floyd is on them.

you can explain anything you want, but my guess is much like Starling, the discussion would be uneven because the sample of fights you've seen is probaly 1-3.

If you think Breland is better fine with me, but post why. As usual, you post something negative about the poster and floyd fans instead of the fighters being discussed. same ole gong.

[BennyST]

I watched damn near every breland fight from his time in golden gloves. Always thought he was good but not that good. I think floyd'd dad was better but left alot outside the ring. If you disagree that fine.

Frankly, you and other do that becaue you haven't seen a fighter fight or because you've seen other posters do so. those things don't move me. If you can defend your position you'd do so.

So you think Floyd Sr was better, but never showed it in the pro ranks because he left it outside? So, he was better than Breland but only outside his professional boxing career when it never mattered?

Btw, did you grow up watching boxing in NEw jersey as a young kid? Some great fighters out of there.

[junior gong]

In other words-you would make a point and I may or may not refute it. then I make a point. thats what a debate is gong. whatever another poster has said about floyd is on them.

you can explain anything you want, but my guess is much like Starling, the discussion would be uneven because the sample of fights you've seen is probaly 1-3.

If you think Breland is better fine with me, but post why. As usual, you post something negative about the poster and floyd fans instead of the fighters being discussed. same ole gong.

Same old Dunn. You seemed to have completely and deliberately missed the point. A debate isnt a debate when entered into with a completely closed mind. Its a forgone conclusion what your position on floyd(or his family or cronies) will be, so like I say, its kind of pointless.

[The Big Dunn]

So you think Floyd Sr was better, but never showed it in the pro ranks because he left it outside? So, he was better than Breland but only outside his professional boxing career when it never mattered?

Btw, did you grow up watching boxing in NEw jersey as a young kid? Some great fighters out of there.

I will make it more clear for the literal interpreters.

FLoyd sr was better than breland IMO. The floyd sr that got killed by SRL would have beaten Breland at his best. Floyd sr's out of the ring exploits took away from his career.

yes. a few guys involved with murad muhammad promotions live near me. spent a lot of time listening to stories goingto fights. I also had a friend who was a guard at Rahway, so I got a chance to see James Scott.