Floyd's 49-0

First topic message reminder :

Floyd has 5 fights left on his showtime contract. If he wins them it brings him up to the legendary score of 49-0. Will Floyd do a Larry on it and fall short? He's planning to fight in September, if this happens then he looks on track to fulfil his contract by 2015, which to me would mean fighting fighters who are names now. So who takes the remaining 5 slots? and will he finish on 49-0? He must have 50-0 and out in his head??

Personally I don't see him fighting Canelo ever, I think the fact that Floyd wouldn't sign up to a September fight in return for Canelo fighting on the undercard tells you all you need to know there. Imagine how many buys there would have been had Trout v Canelo been the undercard, and how much Floyd would have made. It really could not possibly be a better deal for Floyd, 2 massive PPV's with him in the driving seat for both. So unfortunately I think that fight will only ever be speculation now.

So in your opinions, will the mythical 49-0 be achieved? and who gets beaten in the process? It can hardly have been a coincidence that the 6 fight deal ties in with the most famous record in boxing, can it?

The same argument is enough Mate...........It can't be disputed...

FOUR current p4pers...can you dispute that!!

All you've done is say Hatton didn't fancy it...........blah bllah..

Chris argument is stupid and he knows it.............Whittaker lost to the best fighters he fought..........bar the draw......Nelson wasn't a lightweight and Mcgirt had been schooled 10-1 by Taylor before being stopped..

Same argument for sure...but indisputable..

owen10ozzy wrote:Again you just keep using the Ring list and not actually responding to my questions. The simple fact is that you can't argue against what I am saying so you just revert to type. 88chris05 already made the point that you never actually debate anything...you just come out with the same regurgitated sentence over and over again.

I'm not and haven't been talking about Whittaker in the slighest, my argument is that there are marks against Mayweathers record that are hard to ignore. Yes he has beaten 7 P4P and 4 current ones but almost everyone one of them can be debated as to the legitimacy of either a) whether they belonged there & b) was the win as good as their ranking suggested....

At least with Az he actually comes back with some retort and views, you just sit on the same argument time and again adding nothing new.

Az - Earlier you were saying Floyd is a natural WW...now all of a sudden he is a blown up SFW?! Make your mind up.

Cotto had been beaten twice and on both occasions was absolutely battered. He was no where near the fighter he was back in 2006-2008, before Marg got to him. He had been seeking a match with Mayweather before Marg and it had been touted but for whatever reason it didn't happen. The reasons why aren't important...the point is that a win over Cotto earlier would have been a heck of a lot better.

If RG is a blown up LW, then Floyd is a blown up SFW. RG is a WW. Fights regularly at the weight ergo he is a WW. No idea why people have to drag the fact he started off at a differemnt weight to make an anti Floyd point.

Floyd is a small WW who also holds a belt at LMW.

Who was Cotto's promoter?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:The same argument is enough Mate...........It can't be disputed...

FOUR current p4pers...can you dispute that!!

All you've done is say Hatton didn't fancy it...........blah bllah..

Chris argument is stupid and he knows it.............Whittaker lost to the best fighters he fought..........bar the draw......Nelson wasn't a lightweight and Mcgirt had been schooled 10-1 by Taylor before being stopped..

Same argument for sure...but indisputable..

Facts are facts.

Az..Why don't they just say he's flash and they don't like him??????????

All this Cotto had a headache..Castillo had a broken finger nail...Hatton didn't fancy it...

I mean geez it's puerile..

azania wrote:

owen10ozzy wrote:Again you just keep using the Ring list and not actually responding to my questions. The simple fact is that you can't argue against what I am saying so you just revert to type. 88chris05 already made the point that you never actually debate anything...you just come out with the same regurgitated sentence over and over again.

I'm not and haven't been talking about Whittaker in the slighest, my argument is that there are marks against Mayweathers record that are hard to ignore. Yes he has beaten 7 P4P and 4 current ones but almost everyone one of them can be debated as to the legitimacy of either a) whether they belonged there & b) was the win as good as their ranking suggested....

At least with Az he actually comes back with some retort and views, you just sit on the same argument time and again adding nothing new.

Az - Earlier you were saying Floyd is a natural WW...now all of a sudden he is a blown up SFW?! Make your mind up.

Cotto had been beaten twice and on both occasions was absolutely battered. He was no where near the fighter he was back in 2006-2008, before Marg got to him. He had been seeking a match with Mayweather before Marg and it had been touted but for whatever reason it didn't happen. The reasons why aren't important...the point is that a win over Cotto earlier would have been a heck of a lot better.

If RG is a blown up LW, then Floyd is a blown up SFW. RG is a WW. Fights regularly at the weight ergo he is a WW. No idea why people have to drag the fact he started off at a differemnt weight to make an anti Floyd point.

Floyd is a small WW who also holds a belt at LMW.

Who was Cotto's promoter?

Yet Mayweather is to small to fight Alvarez because the guy is big for the weight. Mayweather has fought at 154 3 times so by all accounts is just as much a LMW as he is a WW...based on your argument that a fighter who fights regularly at a weight is 'ergo in that weight class'. Would you agree with that?!

I also didnt say Guerrero was a blown up LW...I said that his record wasn't deserving to be in the P4P list. He has one decent name on his ledger who had already been beaten.

Truss...I haven't mentioned any of those things as reasons why I don't rate some of his wins simply because they were on a mythical P4P list.

Here is my argument rounded up nice and simple for you to understand:

Corrales & Castillo are Mayweathers best wins on his ledger. Against Corrales he put on a clinic of the highest order and schooled a fighter who was supposed to give him plenty of problems. Against Castillo he showed he could tough it out in fight number 1 and then in the rematch he showed he learnt his lessons and breezed to victory.

Hatton is a very good win which would have been a lot better if Mayweather had beaten him at 140 where he was the undisputed number 1. He wasn't that at WW regardless of whether he had a belt or not.

Cotto is a decent victory...but not what it should have been. He didn't face him when the fight was really wanted by fans and pundits back between 2006-2008 when Cotto was running riot through the WW division and was seen as a legitimate challenge to Floyd. Instead he took him on after he had been beaten to a pulp by both Marg and Manny. Everyone says that Miguel is a natural LMW and its his best weight yte his record stands at 3-2 with 2 of those wins coming against pretty sub standard names.

Guerrero was another good win. But not this amazing victory that Truss is suggesting just because he was ranked #8 in the P4P list. The guys best win was over Berto who had been beaten by Ortiz, who has time and again been accused of lacking the mental strength required to really be a top top name. Other than that he has beaten Katsidis, Casamayor & Selcuk Aydin. If you genuinely think that is a record worthy of top 10 P4P then I worry for you.

Mayweather has a fantastic record...is naturally one of the most gifted athletes in the history of boxing. He has a skillset up their with the best of all time and has many future hall of famers on his ledger. Is he top 10 all time great...perhaps...is he top 20...most definitely...could he have done more and without a shadow of a doubt cemented himself as a legitimate top 3 p4p all time great without question.....yes most definitely!!!

Then If that's the case Whittaker didn't deserve to be in a list either.........

Do you actually believe in your arguments..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Guerrero was 8.............Marquez was 5......Hatton was 8.............Corrales was 5.....

At the time that's four current ones......No one can match that apart from Leonard.

Certainly not Whittaker.

A bit simplistic and black and white, T-Bone. Not much in it between Whitaker and Floyd and you don't have to disparage one to admire the other.

Not suggesting it tells the whole story...Just refutes the mistaken belief that the guy has never fought anybody..........

and promotes the obvious fact his competition was stiffer than Pernell's........

He did beat Oscar....too.

Look I think Whittaker was great but in a Calzaghe type of way..........

He stunk but he could box........

He's only being chucked in the mix as a desperate left field candidate to displace Floyd..........

and it is desperate..Here is the juice..

15 years as opposed to 7.........

4 current p4pers as opposed to 2

Unbeaten as opposed to four losses.............

All due to Floyd envy!!

Yet Mayweather is to small to fight Alvarez because the guy is big for the weight. Mayweather has fought at 154 3 times so by all accounts is just as much a LMW as he is a WW...based on your argument that a fighter who fights regularly at a weight is 'ergo in that weight class'. Would you agree with that?!

I also didnt say Guerrero was a blown up LW...I said that his record wasn't deserving to be in the P4P list. He has one decent name on his ledger who had already been beaten.

Truss...I haven't mentioned any of those things as reasons why I don't rate some of his wins simply because they were on a mythical P4P list.

Here is my argument rounded up nice and simple for you to understand:

Corrales & Castillo are Mayweathers best wins on his ledger. Against Corrales he put on a clinic of the highest order and schooled a fighter who was supposed to give him plenty of problems. Against Castillo he showed he could tough it out in fight number 1 and then in the rematch he showed he learnt his lessons and breezed to victory.

Hatton is a very good win which would have been a lot better if Mayweather had beaten him at 140 where he was the undisputed number 1. He wasn't that at WW regardless of whether he had a belt or not.

Cotto is a decent victory...but not what it should have been. He didn't face him when the fight was really wanted by fans and pundits back between 2006-2008 when Cotto was running riot through the WW division and was seen as a legitimate challenge to Floyd. Instead he took him on after he had been beaten to a pulp by both Marg and Manny. Everyone says that Miguel is a natural LMW and its his best weight yte his record stands at 3-2 with 2 of those wins coming against pretty sub standard names.

Guerrero was another good win. But not this amazing victory that Truss is suggesting just because he was ranked #8 in the P4P list. The guys best win was over Berto who had been beaten by Ortiz, who has time and again been accused of lacking the mental strength required to really be a top top name. Other than that he has beaten Katsidis, Casamayor & Selcuk Aydin. If you genuinely think that is a record worthy of top 10 P4P then I worry for you.

Mayweather has a fantastic record...is naturally one of the most gifted athletes in the history of boxing. He has a skillset up their with the best of all time and has many future hall of famers on his ledger. Is he top 10 all time great...perhaps...is he top 20...most definitely...could he have done more and without a shadow of a doubt cemented himself as a legitimate top 3 p4p all time great without question.....yes most definitely!!!

owen10ozzy wrote:

azania wrote:

owen10ozzy wrote:Again you just keep using the Ring list and not actually responding to my questions. The simple fact is that you can't argue against what I am saying so you just revert to type. 88chris05 already made the point that you never actually debate anything...you just come out with the same regurgitated sentence over and over again.

I'm not and haven't been talking about Whittaker in the slighest, my argument is that there are marks against Mayweathers record that are hard to ignore. Yes he has beaten 7 P4P and 4 current ones but almost everyone one of them can be debated as to the legitimacy of either a) whether they belonged there & b) was the win as good as their ranking suggested....

At least with Az he actually comes back with some retort and views, you just sit on the same argument time and again adding nothing new.

Az - Earlier you were saying Floyd is a natural WW...now all of a sudden he is a blown up SFW?! Make your mind up.

Cotto had been beaten twice and on both occasions was absolutely battered. He was no where near the fighter he was back in 2006-2008, before Marg got to him. He had been seeking a match with Mayweather before Marg and it had been touted but for whatever reason it didn't happen. The reasons why aren't important...the point is that a win over Cotto earlier would have been a heck of a lot better.

If RG is a blown up LW, then Floyd is a blown up SFW. RG is a WW. Fights regularly at the weight ergo he is a WW. No idea why people have to drag the fact he started off at a differemnt weight to make an anti Floyd point.

Floyd is a small WW who also holds a belt at LMW.

Who was Cotto's promoter?

Yet Mayweather is to small to fight Alvarez because the guy is big for the weight. Mayweather has fought at 154 3 times so by all accounts is just as much a LMW as he is a WW...based on your argument that a fighter who fights regularly at a weight is 'ergo in that weight class'. Would you agree with that?!

I also didnt say Guerrero was a blown up LW...I said that his record wasn't deserving to be in the P4P list. He has one decent name on his ledger who had already been beaten.

I have no idea what game you're playing here. I'll repeat. Floyd should fight Canelo. It will be a huge fight, a massive payday for him and an easy fight.

But after he's beaten Saul, haters will be screaming for him to fight GGG and saying the same shyte here by saying it will harm his legacy.

Floyd is the best there is and the best since RJJ, with the best record since SRL. For me a nailed on top 10 and probably high top 10.

No order

Leonard
Armstrong
Ali
Robbo


Floyd

Guys like Fits, Greb, Johnson et al didn;t box, they did stand up so they don't count.

Is anyone saying he hadn't fought anybody or that Whitaker is streets ahead? I think the argument being made is that, post Oscar and with a bit more willing on Floyd's part, he could be much closer to being widely looked upon as the greatest ever.

It's a fair point. He's top dozen, perhaps top 10, in my book but throw in Manny and Cotto at the right time and he'd be pushing the top half dozen or so.

superflyweight wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Guerrero was 8.............Marquez was 5......Hatton was 8.............Corrales was 5.....

At the time that's four current ones......No one can match that apart from Leonard.

Certainly not Whittaker.

A bit simplistic and black and white, T-Bone. Not much in it between Whitaker and Floyd and you don't have to disparage one to admire the other.

It is simple. Why make it more complex?

Floyd will never get my respect unless he moves up in weight and fights wladimir klitschko

Azania I accept your opinion and it should be vice versa, but just because my opinion differs from you on Floyd dosent mean I'm wrong. As for rankings I'd put floyd between 15-20 in ATG list. As for Trussman you keep justifying floyds resume and choice of opponent by playing down guys like Hearns, Leaonard etc, but any boxing writer or historian contradicts what you say. Floyd in a fantasy matchup with robbo, duran, hearns, hagler, armstrong etc floyd loses! The only guy he may beat is leonard, that's what majority of historians say! Now if you are a boxing historian I'll change my tone, until then floyd hasn't fought anyone near the names above therefore I can't rank him above them.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Look I think Whittaker was great but in a Calzaghe type of way..........

He stunk but he could box........

He's only being chucked in the mix as a desperate left field candidate to displace Floyd..........

and it is desperate..Here is the juice..

15 years as opposed to 7.........

4 current p4pers as opposed to 2

Unbeaten as opposed to four losses.............

All due to Floyd envy!!

Absolutely ridiculous in just about everything you say here.

Whitaker dumps on Calzaghe

Stunk but he could box same as Floyd

He's only being chucked in the mix as a desperate left field candidate to displace Floyd This is without doubt one of the most stupid things I've ever read on here. Whitaker is a genuine great which anyone with a level head can see is in the same ball park as Floyd, above or below him is up for debate but to suggest he's being thrown around as some form of Floyd hating argument is beyond idiocy

15 years instead of 7, they had the same amount of fights during their time at the top, Whitaker had 27 fights from Ramirez to Hurtado (28 if you count De La Hoya which should really be a win) and Mayweather has 27 Hernandez to Guerrero, I'm not sure why Floyd gets credit for longevity in terms of years when he has been "retired" or inactive for large parts of it. Hard to claim he was "at the top" as he likes to say for 21 months between Hatton and Marquez when there were perfectly good fights waiting for him.

Unbeaten as opposed to four losses............. This is beyond stupid. Are you really holding daylight robberies and fighting past his best against Whitaker? Do you hold Roy Jones current fights against him? Do you count Berbick as a bad loss for Ali?

Belchees just admit that they are right and your wrong, that's the only way you will get them to accept your opinion

The blind ignorance in how the opinion is expressed is much worse than the opinion itself which is actually legitimate.

Did sweet pea whitakher not use the shoulder role? And I'm sure I've heard uncle roger lost to him! As for floyd v whitakher that would be fantastic to watch.

PPVxHOTTY wrote:Did sweet pea whitakher not use the shoulder role? And I'm sure I've heard uncle roger lost to him! As for floyd v whitakher that would be fantastic to watch.

That wouldn't be a fight for me, I appreciate the defensive counter puncher but they need someone looking for them to show their stuff, Floyd vs Whitaker could would be 20-30 punches per round thrown each with between 5-10 landing at most. It would be horrific and I would make Floyd a narrow favourite.

When this one was talked up a few months back, one common theme in people's opinions is that the outcome could rest pretty heavily on who exactly was appointed to judge it, and I'd agree that this would play a part.

The weight is another thing to consider, for me. At Lightweight, I'd go with Pernell to win a close one. 135 really was his home and Castillo showed that Floyd could be taxed in that weight class. At Lightweight there were certain elements of Pea's game which, although they existed at the higher weights, found themselves reduced as he went through the divisions.

Mayweather may have started at Super-Feather, but just watching him these days you can tell he's really grown in to Welterweight in a way that Whitaker never did. He's probably a touch stronger at 147 than Whitaker was and certainly carries more pop at the weight, too. Pea was still a defensive whizz at Welterweight, but wasn't quite as elusive as he was lower down. Mayweather's taken all of his accuracy up through the weights with him and, at 147, I think he'd reverse their Lightweight outcome and land enough while pressing the action and pace to win over the judges. Whitaker had a lot more variety in his attack at Lightweight than people give him credit for, but at 147 it wasn't quite all there, even though he was a superb Welter in his own right. I do think that part of that was down to Benton leaving his team in late 1994, but either way, I think he'd need all of that arsenal, rather than just some, to beat Mayweather at the higher weight.

Whitaker by tight decision at 135, Mayweather by tight decision at 147 would be my best guess. Draw at 140!

Ali lost more than Floyd and didn't "rule for 15 years (pfft)", does that mean Floyd is better than him too?

Lumbering_Jack wrote:Ali lost more than Floyd and didn't "rule for 15 years (pfft)", does that mean Floyd is better than him too?

Which is where we get to if we make the argument as simplistic as Spazania would like it to be.

Does anyone have any opinions about any boxers other than Mayweather?

I like Floyds new moustache. What do you think Jeff? Maybe I should make a thread about it.

joeyjojo618 wrote:I like Floyds new moustache. What do you think Jeff? Maybe I should make a thread about it.

Do it is actually a topic we have not yet discussed, I do fear though that if I express the opinion on the thread that John L Sullivan's soup strainer was better I will just get accused of favouring old timers again and not giving modern tashes enough credit.

Modern grooming techniques have made old time taches laughably bad Rowley, everyone knows that. No gillette fusions, back then if you had a pair of scissors you were ahead of the game.

You can keep your modern grooming techniques. Floyd has never worn anything as majestic as this

People throw out all time ranking positions for Floyd like confetti. I would doubt if there's much research behind the vast majority of these affirmations.

Floyd being the greatest of all time is the talk of madmen.

There's a couple of posters in this debate that should genuinely watch a few more fights.

Hagler had an underrated moustache. Campaigned solely at middleweight but cleared out the rest of the moustaches in that division until it was unfairly beaten by that no good, clean shaven face of Sugar Ray Leonard.

azania wrote:Come on oz. Hatton was the bigger man in the ring. You're asking Floyd to weight hop in a bad way which is a health rink because you're also losing muscle mass. And then to go up again... Not a healthy option. Moreover Hatton asked for the fight. I dare say Floyd would probably be more comfortable at 140 than 147. Most 147 fighters blow up to 160 come fight night. Floyd hovers around the 150 mark. I believe Hatton was 152 or more.

What seems to be missing here is the top rank/GBP problems which hindered much of the proposed fights.

Ricky hattons 5,6 while Floyd is 5,8. its hatton who was small at the weight. never understood the mayweathers a small WW he was the same size as guerrero and has always looked like a natural welter

http://www.queensberry-rules.com/2013-articles/may/floyd-mayweather-stands-alone.html

"Mayweather is not -- and no matter what he does for the rest of his career, never will be -- the greatest fighter ever, as he was once so fond of proclaiming and as his most blindly loyal fans will swear. He and his family dialed back some of that rhetoric temporarily during this promotion, for whatever reason. Mayweather has all-time talent, absolutely, but his resume suffers from an affliction within an affliction: the level of competition available to him, as well as who he fought and didn't fight within that subset. Mayweather, earlier in his career, fought most of the best available opponents. Since moving up from lightweight, he's done it very little. He has faced some awfully good fighters, no doubt, pound-for-pound level elites, and beaten them all. While people will both rightly and wrongly critique when and how he fought those boxers (Yes, Juan Manuel Marquez was far too small; yes, Shane Mosley was clearly an aged version of himself, but he also was justifiably ranked in the top three pound-for-pound at the time, and showed himself at least a little dangerous still)... the body of work is impressive. It's just not impressive enough for him to sniff an all-time great resume. Sugar Ray Robinson had available to him a nearly-endless list of Hall of Famers; Mayweather's list of future Hall of Famers faced is much shorter."

And to add balance:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9245788/the-boring-excellence-floyd-mayweather-jr

"Consider boxing's logline: A kid from nothing comes up through the ranks, shocks the world, and then sits fat and lazy on the top of the sport until the next kid from nothing comes up through the ranks to shock the world. This is admittedly a good story, and like all great stories it can be replicated over and over. The health of boxing relies on the refresh rate — nobody likes a champion once he's been champion for too long. Fans start to gripe about handpicked opponents and boring fights. Alarmists declare the sport dead. Only in boxing is a champion considered greater for losing and then coming back to win a title than for simply never losing in the first place — the downward swing and the redemption reminds the fans of the young man they fell in love with. Variations of this redemption happen in other sports, but a champion who loses his title faces a specific type of humiliation that might not befall athletes in team sports. When it's all over, you're either sprawled out on your back or standing half-naked in the ring while the announcer tells the world that you have lost."

http://deadspin.com/floyd-mayweather-is-unbeatable-goddammit-493112976

"The fight proceeded exactly according to the Floyd Mayweather Fight Script: The first couple of rounds looked somewhat competitive. This is because Mayweather uses the first couple of rounds to figure his opponent out. He is like a deadly virus that mutates constantly to overcome all attempted remedies. By the third or fourth round, Mayweather starts landing his straight right hand, a video of which should be posted in a science museum as a testament to the possibility of perfecting human movement. Mayweather is so fast that he can throw his right—his back hand, his power hand—straight into his opponent's face, snapping his head back, before his opponent can even react to the punch, and then swing his back foot around and square up and bend low at the waist and roll under and off to the side, so that any punch in response hits mere air, because Mayweather is gone before it comes. It is impossible to overstate how frustrating, enraging, and shocking it must be to eat this punch over and over and over again, as Guerrero did all night. It means getting hit with a punch you don't see that is, paradoxically, coming from right in front of your face. And having no one to punish for it."

Lot of people jumped on the Guerrero bandwagon claiming he was the man to beat Floyd only for the wheel to come off that. There are plenty on the Alvarez bandwagon already so a few more won't make any difference.

Alvarez is good and he's improving with every fight however, there's nothing he has that Floyd hasn't seen before and dealt with before (and all with relative ease). I pick Mayweather to make a comfortable job of the fight should it happen.

However, if Floyd chooses to fight him, he should probably do it sooner rather than later before Canelo becomes a more rounded fighter and thus minimise any risk. However, this opens the floodgates for a hundred "Floyd beats a 'green' Alvarez" or "Alvarez beats an 'on the slide' Mayeather" articles.

Many have said the only person to beat Floyd is Floyd, so in that respect, the person most likely to upset the applecart is Broner but I don't see that fight happening. Mayweather isn't a "pass the torch" kinda guy and they also want to sell Broner and Mayweather II which is difficult to do if he's already been given a boxing lesson.

superflyweight wrote:Is anyone saying he hadn't fought anybody or that Whitaker is streets ahead? I think the argument being made is that, post Oscar and with a bit more willing on Floyd's part, he could be much closer to being widely looked upon as the greatest ever.

It's a fair point. He's top dozen, perhaps top 10, in my book but throw in Manny and Cotto at the right time and he'd be pushing the top half dozen or so.

My argument isn't about floyd being the ATG (that's SRL) but that he is nailed on top 10.

If SRR hadn't ducked Burley he would be my number 2.

azania wrote:

superflyweight wrote:Is anyone saying he hadn't fought anybody or that Whitaker is streets ahead? I think the argument being made is that, post Oscar and with a bit more willing on Floyd's part, he could be much closer to being widely looked upon as the greatest ever.

It's a fair point. He's top dozen, perhaps top 10, in my book but throw in Manny and Cotto at the right time and he'd be pushing the top half dozen or so.

My argument isn't about floyd being the ATG (that's SRL) but that he is nailed on top 10.

If SRR hadn't ducked Burley he would be my number 2.

If we hadn't have told you about Pongsaklek Wonjongkam being beaten by a journeyman that time, he would still be your number 5 P4P

Yes.