Why was Margarito considered a hard puncher and Mayweather feather fisted?

[sunny31]

My point is you can't base it only on how he did at a WW especially if that's not his natural weight. If Golovkin move all the way up to HW and stop KO'ing other HWs you don't go back and say he wasn't a devastating puncher. A HW fighting WWs or MWs would probably have a 100% KO ratio. It should simply be based on their KO percentage. If Mayweather's and Margarito's have similar KO percentage then the argument is correct, neither one was a devastating puncher or they were both good punchers. Which ever argument you have for one should apply to the other.

People always have to parse information that's available to make whatever cuckoo argument they're trying to make.

Floyd is not as big a puncher as Margarito period.

If you are talking in a p4p sense, then you would compare Floyd's punching ability when he was at 130-135 to Margarito, and in that case you can say it is pretty even, Maybe Floyd even edges it out.

Its a weird argument either way, and not one worth arguing over.

The way the TS has worded it is stupid though. Because the easy answer is that their power was mostly compared when they were fighting in the same weight division around the same time, and in that case it is correct to assume that Margarito was a pretty good puncher at 147 certainly bigger than Floyd, and Mayweather himself was only a reasonable puncher at that weight.

[Ray*]

Margarito throws mostly power punches, he stops his victims in relentless fashion. So i could see why people would refer to him in that way, as you know Money boxes you but if we are talking about PBF then i would refer to him as a puncher too.

[CHOWWOKKA]

Well after he got caught cheating he accumulated 0 KO's in 5 fights so Floyd obviously hits harder then Margarito

[HarvardBlue]

Floyd is not as big a puncher as Margarito period.

If you are talking in a p4p sense, then you would compare Floyd's punching ability when he was at 130-135 to Margarito, and in that case you can say it is pretty even, Maybe Floyd even edges it out.

Its a weird argument either way, and not one worth arguing over.

The way the TS has worded it is stupid though. Because the easy answer is that their power was mostly compared when they were fighting in the same weight division around the same time, and in that case it is correct to assume that Margarito was a pretty good puncher at 147 certainly bigger than Floyd, and Mayweather himself was only a reasonable puncher at that weight.

If Mayweather was throwing power punches 90% of the time, who is to say? They're two different fighters in style and their physical make up.

I just don't buy the narrative that Mayweather is a "feather fisted" puncher when his KO percentage is comparable to other fighters considered to be hard punchers.

[WesternChamp]

i havent seen anyone say marg is a hard puncher??

he wears his opponents down by his high activity rate

[Mr Objecitivity]

You're probably only comparing their overall career knockout percentage / record. If you compare their KO percentage / record against opponents at 147 pounds or above, Margarito will have the higher KO percentage. Thus, Margarito has the higher KO percentage in an ABSOLUTE sense.

In a P4P sense, you might be right in claiming both are equal in punching power since both have a similar KO percentage in their own natural weight divisions.

[Tom Cruise]

i dont remember anyone calling margarito a hard puncher, maybe big volume puncher but never a ko artist or anything like that. and floyd well not surprised people called him feather fisted.

Yeah Marg was never considered a big puncher.

[j0zef]

My point is you can't base it only on how he did at a WW especially if that's not his natural weight. If Golovkin move all the way up to HW and stop KO'ing other HWs you don't go back and say he wasn't a devastating puncher. A HW fighting WWs or MWs would probably have a 100% KO ratio. It should simply be based on their KO percentage. If Mayweather's and Margarito's have similar KO percentage then the argument is correct, neither one was a devastating puncher or they were both good punchers. Which ever argument you have for one should apply to the other.

People always have to parse information that's available to make whatever cuckoo argument they're trying to make.

I understand what you're trying to say, but it's absolutely wrong. Judging someone's quality as a puncher strictly by KO% is horrid. There are wayyyy too many factors that can influence it.

As the poster above you is arguing, a fighter like Manny who has a ton of KOs at lower weights but none at WW is no longer a KO artist. You can say the same about Arthur Abraham. A great puncher for MW, nothing more than a veteran boxer at SMW.
Another argument can be made about quality of the competition. If a boxer is fed really weak competition, that it inflates their KO percentage. It's very common with soem Mexican boxers. Even Canelo has 50 professional fights even though he's only 27. Blanket statements rarely mean anything.

"All generalizations are dangerous, even this one."
Alexandre Dumas

[HarvardBlue]

I understand what you're trying to say, but it's absolutely wrong. Judging someone's quality as a puncher strictly by KO% is horrid. There are wayyyy too many factors that can influence it.

As the poster above you is arguing, a fighter like Manny who has a ton of KOs at lower weights but none at WW is no longer a KO artist. You can say the same about Arthur Abraham. A great puncher for MW, nothing more than a veteran boxer at SMW.
Another argument can be made about quality of the competition. If a boxer is fed really weak competition, that it inflates their KO percentage. It's very common with soem Mexican boxers. Even Canelo has 50 professional fights even though he's only 27. Blanket statements rarely mean anything.

"All generalizations are dangerous, even this one."
Alexandre Dumas

I'll accept quality of competition as an argument. You can also throw in fighting style. Power punchers vs pure boxers. I'm still not with you on moving up in weight. It's natural to expect punching power to lessen when a fighter move up in weight. However, there probably only a handful of boxers that carry their punching power up in weight. I guess you would categories those boxers as heavy handed fighters. I would put Maidana in that category. I'm sure there are others I cant' think of right now.. With that being said, when we're talking about world class fighters the best marker of solid puncher has to be KO percentage.

[j0zef]

I'll accept quality of competition as an argument. You can also throw in fighting style. Power punchers vs pure boxers. I'm still not with you on moving up in weight. It's natural to expect punching power to lessen when a fighter move up in weight. However, there probably only a handful of boxers that carry their punching power up in weight. I guess you would categories those boxers as heavy handed fighters. I would put Maidana in that category. I'm sure there are others I cant' think of right now.. With that being said, when we're talking about world class fighters the best marker of solid puncher has to be KO percentage.

You're right, there are fighters who carry their power up in weight. But most don't. Floyd did not.

For the purposes of the fight between Margarito and Floyd at WW, Floyd was featherfisted, and Margarito was heavy handed.