Floyd, JCC and Duran

Why are two of those guys often ranked above Floyd? Their records aren't better than Floyd's by any stretch of the imagination. OK Duran has Leonard on his ledger, but lets not forget he was pancaked by Hearns, thoroughly outboxed by Laing and lost to Benitez. Floyd has beaten everyone in front of him without looking like losing. OK he got a dubious decision against that mexican and put the record straight the very next fight.

Why people rank Chavez ahead of Floyd is beyong.

Floyd beats them both so should be ranked higher.

Thoughts

Shouldn't be ranked higher because he beats them.....and he does beat them..

Should rank higher because he's a better technician who has had a better career!!

Well I certainly wouldn't rank Chavez ahead of Floyd! Julio a great fighter of course, an all time great in fact, but not quite on that absolute, most elite of elite levels. I agree that Mayweather's style, much like Whitaker's, Taylor's and Randall's, is custom made to give him an upperhand against Chavez, too. No real discussion there, for me.

As for Floyd against Duran, well in a head to head I'd personally pick Floyd a little more often than not (something like six out of ten), but in terms of record the waters are a little more murky, in my opinion. Duran beat world champions from Featherweight to Light-Heavy, beat his first champion in 1970 and his last in 1997 and picked up his first and last titles seventeen years apart. Unbelievable statistics really and it'd be asking a lot of any of today's crop to even get close in that respect.

On the other hand, Floyd's been more consistent for a longer period of time and hasn't been put in his place as emphatically as Duran was against Hearns or Benitez. I can let Hearns slide in a wide sense, but the clowning he got off Benitez came only eighteen months after Duran's greatest night in Montreal and, while Wilfred was bigger than Duran naturally, he wasn't to the extent that Roberto can hide behind it as an excuse like he can for the Hearns drubbing.

I tend to think that Duran has a few more truly 'great' wins than Mayweather if we take all aspects in to account, while Mayweather has more 'good' wins underneath that. Mayweather has consistency and the fact that he's never been put to the sword be it by knockout or stylisticly on his side, and Duran counters that with his unbelievable longevity.

In summary, I see little between their respective records right now and it's down to personal opinion rather than there being a right or wrong answer. I'd probably have Duran just edged a couple of spots or so ahead right now, largely because it's tricky to properly evaluate Mayweather's career while he's still around in an all-time sense, but if someone disagreed I wouldn't get in a twist over it.

Fair point Az.

Duran also has plenty of slaps to add to the loss side of the ledger..

No way higher than Floyd for me.

In between those great wins came dreadful defeats against average fighters. OK, he was past his best but losing to Laing is unforgiveable.

Floyd has been on top for 14 years and never looked like losing. An amazing talent and totally under appreciated by us today. For me a nailed on top 10 and higher than Duran.

Also no bias here as Duran is my second favourite fighter after Ali. Its just that Floyd is on another level to him in every department. I don't buy the argument that he beat a higher level of opponent. OK SRL. But that has to be countered with his shocking losses which often gets ignored or glossed over with excuses. Loved the guy's style and attitude, but lets get real.

Depends whose doing the rankings, I guess. Always think active fighters get short changed in all time lists, and i usually have mayweather higher than most others do. I guess the negatives with him are not so much the names, but when he fought them.

For me he beats jcc and easily ranks above him. Not so clear cut on Duran. Either on record or head to head. As truss reminds us, he struggled with boxers... But a fit and mobile duran was a hell of a lightweight. If there was someone to take floyd into the trenches its Duran. Not a fight I'd bet on.

I've seen some ranlk Duran as high as 5. Perhaps because he was exciting and thus given some lattitude. It certainly can't be due to his record.

No way for me does DelaHoya at 154 lose to Duran................

Peak for peak no way does Floyd beat Duran for me

Who did Duran beat in Mayweather's league that didn't fight the wrong fight..........ie Leonard.

I think Chavez get discounted pretty quickly in comparison to the other two, great as he was he's not quite the best of the best, top 25 but he was decidedly average against a good mover with speed.

I would have both Duran and Mayweather top ten with Leonard seperating the two with Duran at around 6 with Mayweather at 9. For all that Mayweather has achieved he doesn't have a single win that comes close to Duran beating Leonard. Head to head it's a 50/50 depending on what it's at, 135lbs I give the slight edge to Duran, above that and it swings in favour of Mayweather.

Duran- Marcel, De Jesus, Buchanan, Mamby, Leonard, Palomino, Cuevas, Moore, Barkley and Castro has enough quality to airbrush over his loses, has to be said that Hearns, Benitez and Hagler are all better than anything Mayweather has faced. Hearns and Hagler in particular would be huge favourites over him for my money.

There is the Laing issue but it's something that gets used against Duran yet Morrow isn't used against Moore for instance, Saddler amongst various others also has poor losses on his record.

I don't see how you can rate SRL below Duran.

Amongst Duran's list it's only SRL I'd have as favourite to beat Floyd. I reckon Floyd handles the others pretty well including Barkley. But I doubt Duran would beat Oscar at 154.

Swings and roundabouts to me. It comes down to Head to Head and that's where I'd pick Floyd over Duran. Floyd may not have SRL's footspeed, but neither did Benitez or Laing. Floyd to win a close UD in an exciting fight.

Leonard is above Duran easily.............

Beat Hearns and Hagler and Duran 2/3............add in Benitez and you've got all the guys that beat Duran....

Take Leonard 1 contentious decision out of the equation and you are left with basically Duran's lightweight reign.............

Can't say i'd be backing Mayweather to beat Barkley at middleweight, there's a reason he's not moved up and if he beats Barkley then he has a damn good chance of beating someone like Geale or Sturm, he's just too small for the weight.

I don't think De La Hoya was all that to be honest and it's a big if regarding Duran north of lightweight but if he's on it then he wins fairly comfortably, if he's not then he loses, a 50/50 depending on what version of him turns up.

Have to factor in the eras they fought in too, for all his god given talent Mayweather simply didn't have Benitez, Leonard, Hagler and Hearns around, three of whom he's simply too small to beat. Duran had one thing that helped him at the higher weights and that's his power, I don't think Mayweather punches hard enough to make Barkley respect his power, there comes a point when size beats skill.

No-one's suggesting floyd got a prime Oscar are they? Seems to me that floyd is getting a bit too much credit for that one.

Can't say I'd back Duran against the ordinary Robbie Sims...........

Duran lost to all those guys though. He also lost to every slick boxer he fought. Great fighter who moved up in weight. But Floyd has the style and skills to beat Duran by a distance. Over 15 rounds I'd give is 10-5 or 9-6. Over 12 it would be 8-4 (Cant be bothered to work out the scores).

Not strictly true though is it, Buchanan, Marcel, Palomino and De Jesus were all slick boxers not to mention Leonard (don't give me the 'he fought the wrong fight' rubbish). Once Leonard beat him he became woefully inconsistent but his legend was already sealed and yes he lost to them all but it puts into context the level of opposition he had to face moving through the weights.

Palomino was nothing special.............Dejesus beat him and then decked him in the third............

None of those guys are in DelaHoya's league..........

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Not strictly true though is it, Buchanan, Marcel, Palomino and De Jesus were all slick boxers not to mention Leonard (don't give me the 'he fought the wrong fight' rubbish). Once Leonard beat him he became woefully inconsistent but his legend was already sealed and yes he lost to them all but it puts into context the level of opposition he had to face moving through the weights.

I've always been of the opinion that Duran made SRL fight that fight. Whilst SRL is a better boxer than Floyd, Floyd is by far the more intelligent fighter and would not allow Duran to bully him the way he did SRL. Floyd is probably the most cerebral fighter I have seen. You can see his brain working as he figures out an opponent and with surgical precision dissects them.

With the exception of Pac, who has Floyd not fought? I doubt Pac would have added much to his ledger if truth be told.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one Truss, not a massive fan of De La Hoya and certainly wouldn't make the version Mayweather beat a strong favourite over Duran by any means.

History tells us that Mayweather is all wrong for Duran..........

It's not a personality contest in which your favourite fighter wins. I'm on record here of totally disliking SRL, but appreciate his amazing skills and rank him the best boxer ever. Not a fan of Wlad but can see that he's an amazing fighter.

I'd want Duran to batter Floyd, but I can't see it. Floyd wins 9 out of 10 times.

azania wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Not strictly true though is it, Buchanan, Marcel, Palomino and De Jesus were all slick boxers not to mention Leonard (don't give me the 'he fought the wrong fight' rubbish). Once Leonard beat him he became woefully inconsistent but his legend was already sealed and yes he lost to them all but it puts into context the level of opposition he had to face moving through the weights.

I've always been of the opinion that Duran made SRL fight that fight. Whilst SRL is a better boxer than Floyd, Floyd is by far the more intelligent fighter and would not allow Duran to bully him the way he did SRL. Floyd is probably the most cerebral fighter I have seen. You can see his brain working as he figures out an opponent and with surgical precision dissects them.

With the exception of Pac, who has Floyd not fought? I doubt Pac would have added much to his ledger if truth be told.

Pacquiao would have added loads to his record, a win over your main rival and a top 20 guy of all time, yes of course that win would have added very little.

It's not so much a case of who he's not fought but more a case of the actual standard, although he should have faced Cotto and Mosley years earlier, took the easy option at 140lbs and 154lbs when Tzuyu and Wright would have been great victories. His record certainly doesn't match up to his talent, he doesn't lose to Tzuyu or younger Cotto or Mosley but they'd have been great wins. Wright is a tricky one to call, a stinker of a fight that sends everyone to sleep.

azania wrote:With the exception of Pac, who has Floyd not fought? I doubt Pac would have added much to his ledger if truth be told.

Come on now, Az, let's be reasonable here!

If Mayweather had fought - and beaten - Pacquiao in 2010, then it would have made this kind of discussion moot. How many other fights in the past fifty years would have carried as much significance, been as highly anticipated and given such a boost to the winner's all-time pound for pound standing?

I genuinely think that, if Mayweather had taken care of that business when it was relevant and when Pacquiao was operating at that phenomenal level he occupied between 2008 and 2010, then his place above Duran and inside the top ten would have been a gimme. You can still make a case for both of those, don't get me wrong, but to suggest that beating a peak Pacquiao wouldn't have helped him further in that regard is a bit far-fetched, for me.

Floyd missed the boat on that one, I think.

The reason why I say that is because if they had fought and Floyd beat him, people would have gone through Pac's record with a fine toothcomb. Claims that JMM beat him only to get robbed, he beat a weight drained Oscar and Erik, weight stips blah blah blah. It wouldn't have added much imo.

Utter tosh Az and you know it, all you need to do is look at the credit Leonard gets for beating Benitez and Hearns, two guys who are going to find way below Pacquiao in the all time standings. You are one of the very few who has such a one eyed view of him and weight stipulations have been around forever, it doesn't get used against Canzoneri so it wouldn't be used against Pacquiao.

Quite how anyone can that win wouldn't have added much is beyond me; Marquez, Barrera, Morales, Cotto and Hatton are all top quality wins.

I thik Ghosty has proven my point. Floyd's record is scrutinised in detail. He should havefought x, y and z at this time. Duran gets a bye and losses get glossed over all too easily. Beatig Pac would have been met with more arguments about him being a blown up Fly who fought weight drained fighters.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Utter tosh Az and you know it, all you need to do is look at the credit Leonard gets for beating Benitez and Hearns, two guys who are going to find way below Pacquiao in the all time standings. You are one of the very few who has such a one eyed view of him and weight stipulations have been around forever, it doesn't get used against Canzoneri so it wouldn't be used against Pacquiao.

Quite how anyone can that win wouldn't have added much is beyond me; Marquez, Barrera, Morales, Cotto and Hatton are all top quality wins.

As I get reminded a great deal, ATG rankings are not solely on ability but record. Pac has a better record than Hearns or Benitez. But both would have handled him pretty easily.

Duran gets massive credit for beating the king of stipulations, that win doesn't get diminished because Leonard used his standing to get every single advantaged he could. The only weight drained fighter Pacquiao fought was De La Hoya and it's not really a fight he gets much credit for.

Well there's always going to be cretins who want to run down anything a fighter does, Az, but I think you've got to credit the proper boxing fans with more intelligence than that, personally. And I'm confident that any real fan of the sport would acknowledge it as a wonderful win for Floyd, one that would stand above all but a select few in boxing history when you consider the magnitude of the fight, the form Pacquiao was in beforehand and the fact that it would have brought a sense of closure and finality to the debate over who was the best fighter in the world, not only right then but for this 'era' as a whole.

When you've got the two best fighters in the sport campaigning in the same weight class, a win propels one of them right to the upper echelons.

No doubt if Pacquiao had beaten Floyd, the same kind of fools would have rolled out all the lines regarding Floyd robbing Castillo, only beating a washed up Mosley, avoiding the 140 lb king in Tszyu for an easy, paper title at the weight against Gatti and so on. But again, in the wider sense the boost that a win for Pacquiao would have given his all-time standing would have been massive.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Duran gets massive credit for beating the king of stipulations, that win doesn't get diminished because Leonard used his standing to get every single advantaged he could. The only weight drained fighter Pacquiao fought was De La Hoya and it's not really a fight he gets much credit for.

SRL only made stips after he moved up. No stips against Duran.

Come on, Cotto, Erik was a walking skeleton in their rematch. He lost because he gassed. But that is an aside to the thread.

88Chris05 wrote:Well there's always going to be cretins who want to run down anything a fighter does, Az, but I think you've got to credit the proper boxing fans with more intelligence than that, personally. And I'm confident that any real fan of the sport would acknowledge it as a wonderful win for Floyd, one that would stand above all but a select few in boxing history when you consider the magnitude of the fight, the form Pacquiao was in beforehand and the fact that it would have brought a sense of closure and finality to the debate over who was the best fighter in the world, not only right then but for this 'era' as a whole.

When you've got the two best fighters in the sport campaigning in the same weight class, a win propels one of them right to the upper echelons.

No doubt if Pacquiao had beaten Floyd, the same kind of fools would have rolled out all the lines regarding Floyd robbing Castillo, only beating a washed up Mosley, avoiding the 140 lb king in Tszyu for an easy, paper title at the weight against Gatti and so on. But again, in the wider sense the boost that a win for Pacquiao would have given his all-time standing would have been massive.

Maybe so, but to be honest I don't want to go down that road................yet.

Mayweather does not like high work rate fighters that throw a lot of punches particularly to the body. Duran at lightweight to welter could punch a hole in anybody in history on his best night.


Mayweather is also a cherry picker who has never risked his '0'.

azania wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Utter tosh Az and you know it, all you need to do is look at the credit Leonard gets for beating Benitez and Hearns, two guys who are going to find way below Pacquiao in the all time standings. You are one of the very few who has such a one eyed view of him and weight stipulations have been around forever, it doesn't get used against Canzoneri so it wouldn't be used against Pacquiao.

Quite how anyone can that win wouldn't have added much is beyond me; Marquez, Barrera, Morales, Cotto and Hatton are all top quality wins.

As I get reminded a great deal, ATG rankings are not solely on ability but record. Pac has a better record than Hearns or Benitez. But both would have handled him pretty easily.

Hearns yes Benitez no, not that it has any real bearing when he made his name as a featherweight, Mayweather would get more credit than that because he too started out as an amateur flyweight.

Strongback wrote:Mayweather does not like high work rate fighters that throw a lot of punches particularly to the body. Duran at lightweight to welter could punch a hole in anybody in history on his best night.


Mayweather is also a cherry picker who has never risked his '0'.

Floyd as a LW had excellent work rate. Cherry picker. OK. No point in responding to someone with myopia.

I wouldn't say he's actively seeked out the best throughout his career, hard to use Baldomir against him as he was technically the man but picking Gatti over Tzuyu was a very low risk strategy while there were better options at 154lbs than De La Hoya. He's all about the money which is all well and good but lets not make out his matchmaking has been very low risk high reward for the most part. Bizarrely it's improved quite a bit since he's returned from retirement.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I wouldn't say he's actively seeked out the best throughout his career, hard to use Baldomir against him as he was technically the man but picking Gatti over Tzuyu was a very low risk strategy while there were better options at 154lbs than De La Hoya. He's all about the money which is all well and good but lets not make out his matchmaking has been very low risk high reward for the most part. Bizarrely it's improved quite a bit since he's returned from retirement.

Those were the money fights. Oscar was the top ranked fighter at 154 at the time. Whether he was the best fighter is another matter. The biggest grossing fight of all time or at least the biggest PPV fight.

He was the biggest sell in the division at the time not the top ranked man, Winky Wright had been calling him out for a long time prior to then but was always too high risk for little reward.

Hardly Floyd's fault that Oscar didn't fight Winky is it. Also both Winky and Oscar would have beaten Duran at 154. But I find the minute scrutiny of Floyd's record interesting given the many passes Duran gets. Show me a lightweight Duran beat who wouldn't have been beaten by Floyd with greater ease?

Find me a Leonard on Mayweathers resume, I mean Wright was calling Mayweather out. The difference is you can scrutinise the matchmaking of Mayweather but you can't really do the same for Duran because he simply fought anyone and everyone. I personally don't see Duran needing the help of the judges to get past Castillo but that rather poor decision gets ignored by a fair few.

Show me the Laing on Floyd's record. Do you think Floyd could lose to a boxer like Laing? I haven't ignored Castillo. In fact I mentioned him in the OP (the mexican). But as I said the record was put straight the very next fight.

It's easier staying undefeated when you not willing to fight the dangerous fights

Floyd doesn't have a career defining win (excpet DLH but that was more for money than legacy in career defining) and he only has himself to blame

Beating the biggest name in boxing is not career defining? Lets not forget that the Coralles fight was looked at as a pick em fight. Because he wins easily he is not given the credit he deserves. If he had been bounced and got a come from behind win in a wild shoot out, pople would rate him higher.

A victim of his own brilliance.

So wait De La Hoya is career defining but Pacquiao wouldn't have been?

Well the level of scrutiny Floyd's opponents seem to be getting suggests so. Face it Ghosty, had he beaten Pac you would have used Pac's post FW career and the stips as a tool to down grade the win. Your criticism of Floyd's career suggests so.

azania wrote:Show me the Laing on Floyd's record. Do you think Floyd could lose to a boxer like Laing? I haven't ignored Castillo. In fact I mentioned him in the OP (the mexican). But as I said the record was put straight the very next fight.

Firstly, let me say that there's nothing wrong with Laing. He was a good, skilled fighter who's style just happened to be all wrong for Duran....it happens! Benitez lost to Davey Moore, Mustapha Hamsho etc.. We've all heard the old saying "Styles makes fights". A surprise defeat is always going to happen when you fight everybody.

Why did Floyd never fight Paul Willaims? Williams was a good fighter who was making a lot of noise especially after beating Martinez. He claimed that he could still make 147lbs. I wanted to see him get his chance against Floyd but this fight never happened.

Glossing over Duran's record again with more excuses. I'm sorry but a fighter of Duran's stature should not be losing to Laing. Can you imagine Floyd losing to Carson Jones and still getting ranked top 10 ATG?

I'm not trying to gloss over anything Az because I was never a Duran fan.

And I only mention Paul Willaims because he's a fighter that Floyd could have fought but didn't. There's this belief in boxing today that just fighting the big names means that you can beat everyone else and I don't agree with that. Sometimes the lesser known fighters are all wrong for you so they just get conveniently avoided like Willaims.