floyd vs real killers

[calemanregreso]

love how floyd defenders never mention blood draining from constant drug testing, while floyd being on PEDs HIMSELF

[The D3vil]

Nobody in any era is "mopping the floor" with Floyd.

He's not "TBE", but he is as smart of a fighter as there's ever been and defensively is in a very small elite class.

I'd pick guys like Robinson, Leonard, Duran, and Hearns over him, but it wouldn't be easy. He's too good for that.

No Mas Duran would have retired if he fought Floyd. Look at how frustrated he was in the second Leonard fight.

Whitaker and Pryor would have been better fights for him.

Duran quit because Leonard (admittedly) got the fight scheduled for when Duran wasn't ready because he had gained 40lbs after the 1st fight and he had to torture himself to get back down to 147.

By the time of the fight, he was completely drained physically.

[hugh grant]

Lol this.

Plenty of mfers were supposed to beat Floyd before the fight only to be called cherry picks after they lost according to some geniuses here & other forums.

Well i m sure some people thought Floyd would lose to some of the people he fought and beat, underestimating floyd. So Floyd was better than some believed.
But that's not saying too much. I'm sure some thought jmm might beat floyd, as they didn't think Floyd was that good and overated. But it's still a cherry pick though as there were tougher challenges. It doesn't change that fact just because some might think bloated jmm would beat floyd and it don't mean it's a great win. It just means Floyd did better than you thought.
The bookies certainly didn't have Floyd underdog though.

[RadChang]

Don’t see any way Floyd could beat Hearns

[aboutfkntime]

Well i m sure some people thought Floyd would lose to some of the people he fought and beat, underestimating floyd. So Floyd was better than some believed.
But that's not saying too much. I'm sure some thought jmm might beat floyd, as they didn't think Floyd was that good and overated. But it's still a cherry pick though as there were tougher challenges. It doesn't change that fact just because some might think bloated jmm would beat floyd and it don't mean it's a great win. It just means Floyd did better than you thought.
The bookies certainly didn't have Floyd underdog though.

yea, Marquez was crap

oh... except for when he leveled Pacquiao, that was great

but yea... apart from that, he was crap

[aboutfkntime]

Don’t see any way Floyd could beat Hearns

heading into the last half of that fight... I couldn't see any way Leonard could beat him either

clowns were saying they couldn't see how Floyd could beat Pacquiao

[hugh grant]

yea, Marquez was crap

oh... except for when he leveled Pacquiao, that was great

but yea... apart from that, he was crap

I'm sure some thought Hatton would beat floyd also. Again, because they didn't think Floyd was that good, not that Hatton was special.
But once Floyd beat hatton, although people think ref helped floyd, Floyd was actually better than some thought he was.
Does it make Floyd great? No, just better than some thought and better than hatton on the night.

Floyd needed to beat more fighters the bookies didn't think he'd beat. Floyd didn't try hard enough in that department played safe

[aboutfkntime]

I'm sure some thought Hatton would beat floyd also. Again, because they didn't think Floyd was that good, not that Hatton was special.
But once Floyd beat hatton, although people think ref helped floyd, Floyd was actually better than some thought he was.
Does it make Floyd great? No, just better than some thought and better than hatton on the night.

Floyd needed to beat more fighters the bookies didn't think he'd beat. Floyd didn't try hard enough in that department played safe

there was nobody, including Pacquiao

it's a pity that better opponents were not available

[hugh grant]

there was nobody, including Pacquiao

it's a pity that better opponents were not available

You'd be surprised if you looked hard enough. If there were.no opponents for floyd as the names were too small in size so would be underdog against floyd, and Floyd wouldn't get much credit, or opponents had too much wear and tear, you need to look for another challenge elsewhere.

Ggg or Sergio or nel o at 160 or even 154. Or fight young lions spence, thurman at 41 like Pac did.
. Certainly better than berto, maidana and better than ortiz. Certainly should fight toughest available and Floyd can't even claimed to have did that. Didn't even fight toughest of a weak bunch, so what does that tell you about floyd?

Floyd admitted he didn't want to fight the best after the best, "there's always somebody else to challenge someone else comes along" to fight Floyd said.

[ruedboy]

Nobody in any era is "mopping the floor" with Floyd.

He's not "TBE", but he is as smart of a fighter as there's ever been and defensively is in a very small elite class.

I'd pick guys like Robinson, Leonard, Duran, and Hearns over him, but it wouldn't be easy. He's too good for that.



Duran quit because Leonard (admittedly) got the fight scheduled for when Duran wasn't ready because he had gained 40lbs after the 1st fight and he had to torture himself to get back down to 147.

By the time of the fight, he was completely drained physically.

True, prime Oscar, Shane and Tito vs Floyd would be epic fights too.