You have to bet your life on one fighter to beat Floyd Mayweather

[Marchegiano]

proud Floydite myself.

Maybe I am wrong, and it isn't that I'm ignorant to or unimpressed by historical figures so much as there's this one thing about Floyd that stops me from really believing he'd lose.

I reckon Floyd's mastered the biggest array of forms. You watch him fight and you can see a little bit of all the really influential fighters. I love Archie Moore, and while Floyd fights differently it's not hard to see a bit of Moore in him. Who doesn't like a bit of Ali? That's exactly what Floyd's in-ring tomfoolery has me thinking about, Muhammad's tomfoolery. Loads of people give Floyd a lot of criticism for how he sells fights but all I can think about when folks are going on about Money is Daniel The Jew Mendoza and I can't help be feel grateful I was there to witness a man similar to Mendoza or Theagenes of Thasos. As if that wasn't enough, when Floyd gets mean, I mean real mean, he's got a bit of Marciano in him too. Floyd knows about the hallmarks of a puncher in equal depth to the hallmarks of a boxer and shows it in spots. He deals in posture and baiting while dealing in angles and feinting. Not every great boxer can KO a man like Floyd did Hatton, and more recently, not every boxer can completely disregard the fighting style that made them a legend and play with MMA stars by walking them down.

Now, yeah, sure, plenty of men could whoop Conor or the new kid from Japan easy, and plenty of them could walk them down too, but, do they also remind you of Moore? Well, if they have those two qualities how similar to Mendoza are they? You get my point right? It isn't that Floyd just did one of these things or posses one of these qualities it's that he's done and does all of these things and quite a few more.

So while the greats are great and most times I reckon greater at the things they did that made them great than Floyd is I struggle to believe the singular greatness would actually overcome the captain planet style package Floyd brings to the table. With their powers combined he is Money.

[them_apples]

I'm not underestimating Hearns. I loved watching Tommy and it's not that I don't think Tommy couldn't beat Floyd. That frickin' long jab of his and the sledgehammer right makes for a potent combination. At his best he was a very tough puzzle to solve. But Ray solved it and Hagler/Barkley just went through him (at a different weight class of course). In a Floyd/Hearns matchup my money is on Hearns.

But if I'm picking one guy to beat Floyd in one fight then I want a guy who will outwork him, rough him up and keep coming forward. That's Duran. I don't think Floyd can hit Duran hard enough to hurt him and Hands of Stone would have been fast enough, strong enough and determined enough to get inside and work Floyd over. Floyd had a difficult time with Maidana and I want that kind of guy who is faster, dirtier and quicker.

But heck, we don't even need to look that hard. Oscar de la Hoya in his prime would whoop Floyd. He pretty much did at age 34.

Yeah true. I prime Duran I can't see losing by any margin to Floyd. thats probably his worst matchup. Mostly because he couldn't hurt Duran and he doesn't throw a lot of punches, so that gives Duran too much time to land something, which he would.

Where as Hearns I would pick to beat Floyd, simply because at 147 he is a different animal than Floyd at 147, but there is a pocket there for Floyd to make him look bad of frustrate him (but still end up losing imo, i don't see floyd doing much to Hearns tbh).

[OctoberRed]

Yeah true. I prime Duran I can't see losing by any margin to Floyd. thats probably his worst matchup. Mostly because he couldn't hurt Duran and he doesn't throw a lot of punches, so that gives Duran too much time to land something, which he would.

Where as Hearns I would pick to beat Floyd, simply because at 147 he is a different animal than Floyd at 147, but there is a pocket there for Floyd to make him look bad of frustrate him (but still end up losing imo, i don't see floyd doing much to Hearns tbh).

Was Duran still in his prime in Leonard rematch?

[Granath]

Was Duran still in his prime in Leonard rematch?

Good question. Age? Yes. Mentally? No.

Duran ballooned up after the first Leonard fight due to partying. Simply put, he got fat. He had to drop a tremendous amount of weight quickly and so was weak for the Leonard rematch. He got stomach cramps, most likely to improper hydration and quit. What most people don't remember is that Duran wasn't that far behind in that fight. He was down by 2 rounds on 2 scorecards and 1 on another. So out of shape, cramping up and with his mind not right he was still competitive for SRL.

Personally, I believe he figured that he'd get back in shape for the inevitable deciding match in the trilogy. But that never happened - at least while those guys were still in their primes.

[chrisJS]

Robinson and Hearns are guarantees and probably via KO.

One that I’ve not seen mentioned who’d just be a total mess for Floyd would be Luis Rodriguez. Great legs, footwork, movement, busy as hell always throwing, going to the body and a good defense with a great chin plus he has size on Floyd. I don’t see Floyd winning many rounds at all with Feo.

Napoles, Griffith, Armstrong are all a nightmare for him too.

[phallus]

1 Robinson
2 Gavalin
3 Walker
5 Hearns
6 Leonard
7 Langford
8 Gans
9 Benny Leonard
10 Duran
11 Benitez

Gans at LW for sure. Armstrong also comes to mind as a very interesting matchup.

People who think that no one would beat Floyd have to understand that every great fighter in history would be undefeated if They didn't take the fights They lost...

If Hearns moved up to 154 without fighting Leonard, didn't fight Hagler or Barkley at 160, got a decision against Ray in a rematch that many thought He deserved - and retired before fighting Uriah Grant - He could retire 60-0, while holding titles at 147, 154 and 175... and on paper his career would look better.
If He played that right - People would be saying that He was unbeatable, that Leonard, Hagler ducked him... After all He destroyed Duran and outboxed Virgil Hill at 175... so how could anyone beat him at 147, 154 or 160? IMPOSSIBLE!

Tito Trinidad could've retired undefeated - and with better resume than Floyd - if He didn't fight Hopkins... There's many other fighters like that. All about career management.

Floyd was great fighter, but what separates him from other great fighters is that He was carefully managed, fought in an era where it was easier to avoid fights...
He didn't fight Freitas or Casamayor at 130 or 135...
Didn't fight Stevie Johnston, or Spadafora at 135..
Didn't fight anyone who was any good at 140.
Didn't fight Margarito, Cotto, Williams, prime Pacquiao, Clottey at 147 - or any of the highly regarded young guns from next genaration.
At 154 He fought old ODLH, past-prime Cotto(Not a real 154 pounder), Canelo (Still young and at a catch-weight)...

..right now, it's easy to say "Oh, Floyd would beat them ANYWAY", because He had better career at the end, but there's a reason You fight a fight.

Think of any upset You ever seen, with undefeated champion losing. Roy Jones didn't have to fight Tarver to be considered better than him. If He retired undefeated, naive fans would believe He was unbeatable.
Shane Mosley didn't have to fight Vernon Forrest or Winky.


If Your best win over prime fighter is probably Jose Luis Castillo - and once You went life and death, then beat him in a rematch but still were pushed to competitive fight... then it's safe to say You were very beatable, since there's hundrets of fighters in the great history of boxing that were levels above Castillo.

It's also funny that Floyd's undefeated record is such a big pillar supporting his greatness, when first fight with Castillo could clearly go either way. Put different trio of judges and He's not undefeated anymore and no one can argue that result... How meaningful is that then?

Robinson and Hearns are guarantees and probably via KO.

One that I’ve not seen mentioned who’d just be a total mess for Floyd would be Luis Rodriguez. Great legs, footwork, movement, busy as hell always throwing, going to the body and a good defense with a great chin plus he has size on Floyd. I don’t see Floyd winning many rounds at all with Feo.

Napoles, Griffith, Armstrong are all a nightmare for him too.

prime Ray Robinson would knock floyd out cold, i'd bet my life on it.

[IronDanHamza]

People who think that no one would beat Floyd have to understand that every great fighter in history would be undefeated if They didn't take the fights They lost...

If Hearns moved up to 154 without fighting Leonard, didn't fight Hagler or Barkley at 160, got a decision against Ray in a rematch that many thought He deserved - and retired before fighting Uriah Grant - He could retire 60-0, while holding titles at 147, 154 and 175... and on paper his career would look better.
If He played that right - People would be saying that He was unbeatable, that Leonard, Hagler ducked him... After all He destroyed Duran and outboxed Virgil Hill at 175... so how could anyone beat him at 147, 154 or 160? IMPOSSIBLE!

Tito Trinidad could've retired undefeated - and with better resume than Floyd - if He didn't fight Hopkins... There's many other fighters like that. All about career management.

Floyd was great fighter, but what separates him from other great fighters is that He was carefully managed, fought in an era where it was easier to avoid fights...
He didn't fight Freitas or Casamayor at 130 or 135...
Didn't fight Stevie Johnston, or Spadafora at 135..
Didn't fight anyone who was any good at 140.
Didn't fight Margarito, Cotto, Williams, prime Pacquiao, Clottey at 147 - or any of the highly regarded young guns from next genaration.
At 154 He fought old ODLH, past-prime Cotto(Not a real 154 pounder), Canelo (Still young and at a catch-weight)...

..right now, it's easy to say "Oh, Floyd would beat them ANYWAY", because He had better career at the end, but there's a reason You fight a fight.

Think of any upset You ever seen, with undefeated champion losing. Roy Jones didn't have to fight Tarver to be considered better than him. If He retired undefeated, naive fans would believe He was unbeatable.
Shane Mosley didn't have to fight Vernon Forrest or Winky.


If Your best win over prime fighter is probably Jose Luis Castillo - and once You went life and death, then beat him in a rematch but still were pushed to competitive fight... then it's safe to say You were very beatable, since there's hundrets of fighters in the great history of boxing that were levels above Castillo.

It's also funny that Floyd's undefeated record is such a big pillar supporting his greatness, when first fight with Castillo could clearly go either way. Put different trio of judges and He's not undefeated anymore and no one can argue that result... How meaningful is that then?

Do you genuinely believe that Trinidad's resume pre Hopkins is better than Mayweather's?

[IronDanHamza]

. He has better single win on paper... maybe even two best wins.
Floyd's resume is probably deeper, but tito always could've taken Floyd's approach - and instead of fighting Hopkins, He could stack his record with a lot of B-level fighters like Joppy for years.

In any case - Floyd's resume surely isn't levels above Trinidad. They fought and beat roughly the same level of fighters.
Floyd's resume is stacked with "champions", but that just looks good on paper... Has He fought anyone better than Oba Carr at Welterweight, for example?

Floyd's resume is levels better.

Floyd fought a long list of #1 ranked guys in the division. P4P guys, etc. It's easy to consider them B level in hindsight but realistically a lot those guys aren't.

I'd say yes certainly he beat better fighters than Oba Carr at WW but even if he didn't that's his 4th weight class.

[The Big Dunn]

Floyd fought a long list of B level fighters.. That's exactly what They realisticaly were - which is why those type of guys, like Genaro, Jesus Chavez, Baldomir - would come up short against best They fought...
A level fighters Floyd fought were mostly past prime or with weight benefiting him (JMM, Canelo).

I probably give him more credit than others for beating Jose Luis Castillo twice. That's his biggets scalp in my book... and not by accident his toughest rival also.

In any case - I concur Floyd's resume is better(Not by much though, to me - He just beat more B level guys than Tito...). Trinidad probably not the best example of what I tried to prove, but point still stands.
A lot of great fighters would retire undefeated - with better resume than Floyd - if They didn't take fights that They ended up losing. In other era's, it wasn't as easy to do, though.

Floyd's about as unbeatable as any undefeated champion We see in boxing every year. If They don't step-up, They can keep their 0.

Just curious how do you assess losses on fighters resume when they lose to guys that are inferior to them?

Take for example Roberto Duran-has a litany of great wins in his prime. His losses to Benitez and De Jesus, ok understandable as they are quality boxers. But Kirkland Laing? That is a terrible loss for someone as great as Duran.

Upsets happen but Doesn't that say something about any pro that doesn't suffer a bad upset loss to "b level" fighters as opposed to those that do?

[The Old LefHook]

Mayweather has a mediocre resume for anyone calling himself TBE. He has a mediocre KO percentage against mediocre opposition for an ATG. He was a cherry picker through and through.