Does Mayweather get enough credit?
+18
hazharrison
hogey
JabMachineMK2
captain carrantuohil
DuransHorse
TRUSSMAN66
3fingers
Hands Of Stone
bhb001
88Chris05
AdamT
ShahenshahG
TopHat24/7
Strongback
Lance
catchweight
Gentleman01
mark_england
22 posters
The v2 Forum :: Sport :: Boxing
Page 2 of 3
Page 2 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Does Mayweather get enough credit?
First topic message reminder :
Personally I'd say no.
Of course everything is about opinions, but I've seen people on here saying he wouldn't even make their all time top 20!! Really?!
For someone who has mastered defence so impressively, never been beaten in a tough era, makes top fighters look ordinary, and who has a resume of De La Hoya, Pacquiao, Cotto, Marquez, Alvarez, Hatton, plus other notable wins, I think he deserves more credit than he's given.
Best I've ever seen personally.
Personally I'd say no.
Of course everything is about opinions, but I've seen people on here saying he wouldn't even make their all time top 20!! Really?!
For someone who has mastered defence so impressively, never been beaten in a tough era, makes top fighters look ordinary, and who has a resume of De La Hoya, Pacquiao, Cotto, Marquez, Alvarez, Hatton, plus other notable wins, I think he deserves more credit than he's given.
Best I've ever seen personally.
mark_england- Posts : 44
Join date : 2011-06-28
Age : 31
Location : England
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:All this top 25 crap.......
You don't even know what your Top 25 is..
In fairness Farah isn't as "forgetful" as your 400m chick.......
Banned for a year and woman of the year in 2014....
Say no more..
I would have banned her for life Truss, not awarded her, same as i would strip Carl Lewis, Justin Gatlin and Tyson Gaye of every medal and title and ban them for life.
As for my top 25 i have a pretty good idea, all subjective though and if you agree with me or if you dont i aint gonna lose any sleep, argue or attempt to bulldozer over other peoples opinions.
hogey- Posts : 1367
Join date : 2011-02-24
Location : London
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
hogey wrote:TRUSSMAN66 wrote:All this top 25 crap.......
You don't even know what your Top 25 is..
In fairness Farah isn't as "forgetful" as your 400m chick.......
Banned for a year and woman of the year in 2014....
Say no more..
I would have banned her for life Truss, not awarded her, same as i would strip Carl Lewis, Justin Gatlin and Tyson Gaye of every medal and title and ban them for life.
As for my top 25 i have a pretty good idea, all subjective though and if you agree with me or if you dont i aint gonna lose any sleep, argue or attempt to bulldozer over other peoples opinions.
Nor should you lose sleep...........
sleep well !!
![thumbsup](/users/3014/26/22/82/smiles/732107.gif)
TRUSSMAN66- Posts : 40654
Join date : 2011-02-02
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
I will do mate, helped by a big case of ice cold beer
![Ale](/users/3014/26/22/82/smiles/2055835545.gif)
![Ale](/users/3014/26/22/82/smiles/2055835545.gif)
![Ale](/users/3014/26/22/82/smiles/2055835545.gif)
![Ale](/users/3014/26/22/82/smiles/2055835545.gif)
![Ale](/users/3014/26/22/82/smiles/2055835545.gif)
hogey- Posts : 1367
Join date : 2011-02-24
Location : London
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
That kind of day isn't it.....
TRUSSMAN66- Posts : 40654
Join date : 2011-02-02
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Well, this one's new....
When you're ranking fighters in an all-time sense, you probably need to set the criteria before you start the debate. Clearly, stating that Floyd's the best fighter you've seen, while also admitting you haven't seem much isn't going to hold as much water as the opinions of these "hoary old experts" - who've clearly seen a good deal more.
If you're rating fighters on the eyeball test - how good they look in terms of performance - then that's clearly different to debating fighters' records. Floyd ranks highly on the first front, not quite as highly on the second, for me at least.
His best win - in terms of how live a guy was at their best weight - is probably Castillo. He was a real marvel at the lower weights.
I would place greater emphasis on how many challenges a fighter faced (and how great those challenges were in reality). In that regard, he'd rank below the likes of Duran, Ali and Leonard in the modern era and certainly outside any top ten.
If you're ranking him using a different criteria - longevity, dominance etc. - then fair play but not for me (unless a fighter rules a division and takes on all-comers). If you're going to move around the weights then I prefer a fighter who takes on great challenges. I don't see anyone on Floyd's record at the time he fought them that would have troubled someone like De la Hoya.
When you're ranking fighters in an all-time sense, you probably need to set the criteria before you start the debate. Clearly, stating that Floyd's the best fighter you've seen, while also admitting you haven't seem much isn't going to hold as much water as the opinions of these "hoary old experts" - who've clearly seen a good deal more.
If you're rating fighters on the eyeball test - how good they look in terms of performance - then that's clearly different to debating fighters' records. Floyd ranks highly on the first front, not quite as highly on the second, for me at least.
His best win - in terms of how live a guy was at their best weight - is probably Castillo. He was a real marvel at the lower weights.
I would place greater emphasis on how many challenges a fighter faced (and how great those challenges were in reality). In that regard, he'd rank below the likes of Duran, Ali and Leonard in the modern era and certainly outside any top ten.
If you're ranking him using a different criteria - longevity, dominance etc. - then fair play but not for me (unless a fighter rules a division and takes on all-comers). If you're going to move around the weights then I prefer a fighter who takes on great challenges. I don't see anyone on Floyd's record at the time he fought them that would have troubled someone like De la Hoya.
hazharrison- Posts : 7540
Join date : 2011-03-26
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Yep....The Captain, Hammer, Chris and all the rest of us know f**k all compared to your journalist mates...
In fairness though you're objective on the subject..
"Maidana shows that 37Yr old Floyd doesn't belong in a top 10"
" (10-1) Murray is a good win for GGG"..........."Manny-May isn't worth watching because Manny is a 3-1 underdog"
Post an article about Mayweather why don't you !!.............But don't leave half of it out containing all his good points like you did last time.....
By the way this isn't coming from a Hopkins fan !!
In fairness though you're objective on the subject..
"Maidana shows that 37Yr old Floyd doesn't belong in a top 10"
" (10-1) Murray is a good win for GGG"..........."Manny-May isn't worth watching because Manny is a 3-1 underdog"
Post an article about Mayweather why don't you !!.............But don't leave half of it out containing all his good points like you did last time.....
By the way this isn't coming from a Hopkins fan !!
TRUSSMAN66- Posts : 40654
Join date : 2011-02-02
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
catchweight wrote:Im not one for making lists but I think hes generally an overrated boxer with an overrated record as a result of extremelly opportunistic matchmaking. Certainly extremelly talented but I wouldnt have him in the same calibre as a Leonard, Hearns or Whitaker. I think its debateable how he would fare even against an on form de la Hoya, Benitez, Pacquiao or Mosely.
I'd have to rate him over Hearns. Hearns lost his biggest fights. Head to head, though, I'd fancy Tommy to undo him. Again, though, depends how we're rating them.
hazharrison- Posts : 7540
Join date : 2011-03-26
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Mayweather has no defining win.
Floyd can never rank higher than SRL and that means outside the Top 10.
Floyd was a defensive master but as an offensive fighter he wasn't too exciting. There are plenty of top class defensive fighters who were much better than Floyd on the front foot.
Floyd can never rank higher than SRL and that means outside the Top 10.
Floyd was a defensive master but as an offensive fighter he wasn't too exciting. There are plenty of top class defensive fighters who were much better than Floyd on the front foot.
Strongback- Posts : 6529
Join date : 2011-07-01
Location : Matchroom Sports Head Office
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
captain carrantuohil wrote:In general, people accord Mayweather the respect that he deserves as a fighter. There will always be one or two who won't but no fighter, all-time top 10 or not, has ever managed to escape completely from sticklers who would insist that his record is padded/missing at least one great contemporary (more in Robinson's case)/ inconsistent or that Fighter A or B had his number. Doesn't much matter - Floyd is equalled only by Jones, Whitaker and maybe Nunn in terms of pure talent over the past thirty years or so. As far as achievements/CV are concerned, we can't totally ignore Roy's catastrophic downfall at an age when Floyd was still befuddling some of the best of his generation and Nunn falls clearly short of this sort of class. Only Pea, then, to touch him overall since the end of the 80s, in my view.
I havered for months and years before deciding where exactly to put Mayweather in my all-time list. I honestly don't see too many people he should have fought and didn't, with the shining exception of Pacquiao 4 or 5 years before he actually did. Any names such as Paul Williams are red herrings of the Jones Jr/Michalczewski ilk and are not to be taken too seriously. Nevertheless, I was once for putting him a step below Whitaker, Tunney, Ray Leonard and Duran at around the 14-15 mark - until he fought Alvarez. It was then that I felt that I was under-selling Floyd somewhat. Past his best in age and speed; fighting above his best weight; up against a young gun in the prime of life with some excellent recent wins behind him, the consensus number one at this higher weight - and Floyd took him to school. It was a rare display of virtuosity against someone who continues to take extremely high rank among his pound for pound contemporaries. For that reason, I have lifted him to number 10 in my list, which is where he will now remain until an even greater fighter hoves into view.
Not everyone will buy my reasoning, which is fine and dandy. No monopoly on wisdom here. However, not many could construct a reasonable case that Mayweather is not one of the greatest practitioners of his sport of any era.
Floyd was generally regarded the best 154 pounder before facing Alvarez (after defeating Cotto). Alvarez was number two in various ratings (those that rate fighters in more than one division at least).
hazharrison- Posts : 7540
Join date : 2011-03-26
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Yep....The Captain, Hammer, Chris and all the rest of us know f**k all compared to your journalist mates...
You've quoted Hammer in the same breath as Captain. Are you trying to ensure Captain's sparse output on this board reduces to nothing?
Strongback- Posts : 6529
Join date : 2011-07-01
Location : Matchroom Sports Head Office
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Strongback wrote:TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Yep....The Captain, Hammer, Chris and all the rest of us know f**k all compared to your journalist mates...
You've quoted Hammer in the same breath as Captain. Are you trying to ensure Captain's sparse output on this board reduces to nothing?
You can hardly blame him.
hazharrison- Posts : 7540
Join date : 2011-03-26
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Were would you rate him Haz? Around 20-25?
AdamT- Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Haz is cosying up to Strongy the troll..Like me getting Waingro to back an argument up..
Haz has Jack Johnson at 7 so it's redundant asking him where he places Floyd..
Haz has Jack Johnson at 7 so it's redundant asking him where he places Floyd..
TRUSSMAN66- Posts : 40654
Join date : 2011-02-02
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Haz is cosying up to Strongy the troll..Like me getting Waingro to back an argument up..
Haz has Jack Johnson at 7 so it's redundant asking him where he places Floyd..
You are the biggest most consistent troll I have seen in my 8 years posting on BBC/V2 606.
Strongback- Posts : 6529
Join date : 2011-07-01
Location : Matchroom Sports Head Office
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Does anybody know who the Captain really is?
This guy interest me more than so many boxing writers.
He really knows his stuff and would like to read more stuff from him and his views.
This guy interest me more than so many boxing writers.
He really knows his stuff and would like to read more stuff from him and his views.
AdamT- Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
AdamT wrote:Were would you rate him Haz? Around 20-25?
No idea really Adam. In the modern era I'd say he's clearly behind Ali, Duran and Leonard. He'd probably be in the vicinity of Whitaker and Jones for me. You'd have to be pretty bloody qualified to compile a decent all-time listing, though.
Last edited by hazharrison on Wed 01 Jul 2015, 7:12 am; edited 1 time in total
hazharrison- Posts : 7540
Join date : 2011-03-26
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
That's a fair post Haz. It is hard putting a number to these lists.
I say Floyd is top ten but how many great fighters do I overlook?
At the end of the day, it's really all about peoples preference and opinions.
I say Floyd is top ten but how many great fighters do I overlook?
At the end of the day, it's really all about peoples preference and opinions.
AdamT- Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
AdamT wrote:That's a fair post Haz. It is hard putting a number to these lists.
I say Floyd is top ten but how many great fighters do I overlook?
At the end of the day, it's really all about peoples preference and opinions.
Exactly. These things are good for a bit of knockabout banter but some people take it far too seriously. All you can be is the best of your time. I'd say Mayweather has just about done that - albeit in a less daring and heroic fashion than many fans would have preferred.
hazharrison- Posts : 7540
Join date : 2011-03-26
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
When enough opinions bang him 10-20 then you have to take consensus seriously.
I don't like Duran but I have him 11 on my list...
Haz is irrational towards certain fighters. .
I don't like Duran but I have him 11 on my list...
Haz is irrational towards certain fighters. .
TRUSSMAN66- Posts : 40654
Join date : 2011-02-02
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
How come you don't like Duran? Was it because Hearns beat him easily?
I think Duran was amazing.
I think Duran was amazing.
AdamT- Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
I have Louis in my top 15 too and get accused of disrespecting him..
Watch Gil Clancy's commentary on the Hearns fight and you'll see where I'm at..
Fighting a taller foe with the best jab in boxing on the outside..keeping his chin in the air..
Amateur night..
Watch Gil Clancy's commentary on the Hearns fight and you'll see where I'm at..
Fighting a taller foe with the best jab in boxing on the outside..keeping his chin in the air..
Amateur night..
TRUSSMAN66- Posts : 40654
Join date : 2011-02-02
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Truss Duran vs Pacquiao in their primes, who have you got?
AdamT- Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Duran by 8th round massacre.
Hammersmith harrier- Posts : 12060
Join date : 2013-09-26
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Good pick. I think he wins too.
No matter what happened with Leonard and Hearns, I have Duran vs Floyd as 50-50.
Floyd more skilled but he hasn't the natural size or power of Hearns and Leonard.
Might lean to Floyd but he would get hit a lot and would need to throw more leather.
No matter what happened with Leonard and Hearns, I have Duran vs Floyd as 50-50.
Floyd more skilled but he hasn't the natural size or power of Hearns and Leonard.
Might lean to Floyd but he would get hit a lot and would need to throw more leather.
AdamT- Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
TBE is between Robinson and Mayweather.
Mayweathers cellmate- Posts : 685
Join date : 2012-05-01
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Hammersmith harrier wrote:Duran by 8th round massacre.
I love it how the ordinary Viruet goes the distance twice as does Mamby, Lampkin goes 14...... and Manny gets massacred..
TRUSSMAN66- Posts : 40654
Join date : 2011-02-02
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
hazharrison wrote:captain carrantuohil wrote:In general, people accord Mayweather the respect that he deserves as a fighter. There will always be one or two who won't but no fighter, all-time top 10 or not, has ever managed to escape completely from sticklers who would insist that his record is padded/missing at least one great contemporary (more in Robinson's case)/ inconsistent or that Fighter A or B had his number. Doesn't much matter - Floyd is equalled only by Jones, Whitaker and maybe Nunn in terms of pure talent over the past thirty years or so. As far as achievements/CV are concerned, we can't totally ignore Roy's catastrophic downfall at an age when Floyd was still befuddling some of the best of his generation and Nunn falls clearly short of this sort of class. Only Pea, then, to touch him overall since the end of the 80s, in my view.
I havered for months and years before deciding where exactly to put Mayweather in my all-time list. I honestly don't see too many people he should have fought and didn't, with the shining exception of Pacquiao 4 or 5 years before he actually did. Any names such as Paul Williams are red herrings of the Jones Jr/Michalczewski ilk and are not to be taken too seriously. Nevertheless, I was once for putting him a step below Whitaker, Tunney, Ray Leonard and Duran at around the 14-15 mark - until he fought Alvarez. It was then that I felt that I was under-selling Floyd somewhat. Past his best in age and speed; fighting above his best weight; up against a young gun in the prime of life with some excellent recent wins behind him, the consensus number one at this higher weight - and Floyd took him to school. It was a rare display of virtuosity against someone who continues to take extremely high rank among his pound for pound contemporaries. For that reason, I have lifted him to number 10 in my list, which is where he will now remain until an even greater fighter hoves into view.
Not everyone will buy my reasoning, which is fine and dandy. No monopoly on wisdom here. However, not many could construct a reasonable case that Mayweather is not one of the greatest practitioners of his sport of any era.
Floyd was generally regarded the best 154 pounder before facing Alvarez (after defeating Cotto). Alvarez was number two in various ratings (those that rate fighters in more than one division at least).
Think that's clutching a bit....
TopHat24/7- Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 40
Location : London
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Would somewhat share TopHat's doubts there. I've no doubt that Mayweather was propelled to the top of the 154 ranks in certain quarters by dint of the Cotto win, but I'm equally sure that there was a general reluctance to accept the fact that Floyd was really a light-middle, just as there was when Whitaker beat Vasquez at the weight years earlier. Good enough to beat the 154 pounders, of course, but basically a welter, all the same.
Cotto's stock was also seen to be very much a sell after Floyd beat him, a fact accentuated by the beating he took from Trout in his next fight after Floyd. Alvarez, meanwhile, was thought by many to be the best man who was genuinely plying his trade at 154, the leader of a group that didn't really include Mayweather. Plenty felt before his fight with Mayweather that Alvarez would at least give Floyd a serious examination; in the event, Mayweather proved conclusively that he WAS the number at both 154 and 147, a status that he hadn't truly nailed down beforehand (again, rather like Whitaker or Ray Leonard after he had beaten Kalule - both didn't bother to fight at light-middle at all after winning a strap).
Mayweather achieved all this at an age when most are already well on the path to the Sunset Rest Home for retired pugs. That longevity, the ability to continue at a high level, if not quite at the standard that he had set for himself as a younger man, when other greats have merely fallen apart and embarrassed themselves, is not the least compelling reason for placing Floyd as highly as I do.
Cotto's stock was also seen to be very much a sell after Floyd beat him, a fact accentuated by the beating he took from Trout in his next fight after Floyd. Alvarez, meanwhile, was thought by many to be the best man who was genuinely plying his trade at 154, the leader of a group that didn't really include Mayweather. Plenty felt before his fight with Mayweather that Alvarez would at least give Floyd a serious examination; in the event, Mayweather proved conclusively that he WAS the number at both 154 and 147, a status that he hadn't truly nailed down beforehand (again, rather like Whitaker or Ray Leonard after he had beaten Kalule - both didn't bother to fight at light-middle at all after winning a strap).
Mayweather achieved all this at an age when most are already well on the path to the Sunset Rest Home for retired pugs. That longevity, the ability to continue at a high level, if not quite at the standard that he had set for himself as a younger man, when other greats have merely fallen apart and embarrassed themselves, is not the least compelling reason for placing Floyd as highly as I do.
captain carrantuohil- Posts : 2508
Join date : 2011-05-06
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
mark_england wrote:There was nothing wrong with Pacquiao in their fight, he just couldn't land a shot because Mayweather was too good defensively.
De la Hoya was hardly past it when they fought either, and FMJ clearly won that fight as well.
I laughed out loud at this comment...
Mayweather isn't as great defensive as you think he is, at least since his last few fights, it was a seriously close fight, watch it in slow motion and you will see that Pacquiao landed plenty of leather and the much more effective shots. He also made Mayweather miss a lot.
A lot of the punches Mayweather landed, brushed Pacquiao, these shots don't even get scored in the amateurs. Schooling and Masterclass are not words I would use to describe it.
I thought Floyd won, I don't argue either way, but I cannot fathom how it is an 'easy nights work' or 'Pacquiao didn't land a shot'.
I think there is a huge bias towards Mayweather when scoring fights.
That being said, Pacquiao is no mug at all and its a great win, but don't pretend that Manny did nothing
BoxingFan88- Posts : 3759
Join date : 2011-02-20
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
captain carrantuohil wrote:Would somewhat share TopHat's doubts there. I've no doubt that Mayweather was propelled to the top of the 154 ranks in certain quarters by dint of the Cotto win, but I'm equally sure that there was a general reluctance to accept the fact that Floyd was really a light-middle, just as there was when Whitaker beat Vasquez at the weight years earlier. Good enough to beat the 154 pounders, of course, but basically a welter, all the same.
Cotto's stock was also seen to be very much a sell after Floyd beat him, a fact accentuated by the beating he took from Trout in his next fight after Floyd. Alvarez, meanwhile, was thought by many to be the best man who was genuinely plying his trade at 154, the leader of a group that didn't really include Mayweather. Plenty felt before his fight with Mayweather that Alvarez would at least give Floyd a serious examination; in the event, Mayweather proved conclusively that he WAS the number at both 154 and 147, a status that he hadn't truly nailed down beforehand (again, rather like Whitaker or Ray Leonard after he had beaten Kalule - both didn't bother to fight at light-middle at all after winning a strap).
Mayweather achieved all this at an age when most are already well on the path to the Sunset Rest Home for retired pugs. That longevity, the ability to continue at a high level, if not quite at the standard that he had set for himself as a younger man, when other greats have merely fallen apart and embarrassed themselves, is not the least compelling reason for placing Floyd as highly as I do.
Floyd was ranked number one by Ring Mag and TBRB - which are about as half-sensible a set of rankings as there are these days (well, the TBRB maybe). Boxing Monthly had Alvarez number one based on him squeaking past Trout (they didn't rank Floyd as a light middle). Regardless, Floyd re-emphasised he was the best at 154 lbs. with the Alvarez win.
Alvarez, though, was something of an overrated fighter at that point. His aptitude for selling tickets far outsripped his ability. Saying that, he has time to progress - still being only 24 - yet his fights with Lara and Trout could have gone either way (I think I may have scored against him in both). He's plenty fun and you can't fault his willingness to fight the best but he's struggled with good boxers (he didn't even get a look in against Floyd).
I guess you'd have to rate Hopkins highly in that regard?
I look for fighters who face other great fighters, or great challenges. The flipside to that is, in taking on other great fighters, they attract the sort of mileage that precludes the sort of late-career performances Floyd has enjoyed.
hazharrison- Posts : 7540
Join date : 2011-03-26
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
BoxingFan88 wrote:mark_england wrote:There was nothing wrong with Pacquiao in their fight, he just couldn't land a shot because Mayweather was too good defensively.
De la Hoya was hardly past it when they fought either, and FMJ clearly won that fight as well.
I laughed out loud at this comment...
Mayweather isn't as great defensive as you think he is, at least since his last few fights, it was a seriously close fight, watch it in slow motion and you will see that Pacquiao landed plenty of leather and the much more effective shots. He also made Mayweather miss a lot.
A lot of the punches Mayweather landed, brushed Pacquiao, these shots don't even get scored in the amateurs. Schooling and Masterclass are not words I would use to describe it.
I thought Floyd won, I don't argue either way, but I cannot fathom how it is an 'easy nights work' or 'Pacquiao didn't land a shot'.
I think there is a huge bias towards Mayweather when scoring fights.
That being said, Pacquiao is no mug at all and its a great win, but don't pretend that Manny did nothing
Pacquiao landed next to nothing. Floyd landed only a tad more. It was as atrocious a "super fight" as there's ever been.
hazharrison- Posts : 7540
Join date : 2011-03-26
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
They both threw roughly the same 435 & 429 but Mayweather landed 34% to Manny's 19%.
I'd normally expect May to be more like 40%+ but Manny suffered worse.
Either way, tawdry punch stats from a supposed 'super fight', throwing just over 30 punches a round and landing only 6 to 12.
I'd normally expect May to be more like 40%+ but Manny suffered worse.
Either way, tawdry punch stats from a supposed 'super fight', throwing just over 30 punches a round and landing only 6 to 12.
TopHat24/7- Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 40
Location : London
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
I think ranking Floyd as #1 at LMW after Cotto is akin to ranking RJJ as #1 at HW after Ruiz.
Neither beat the best man at the weight and both were simply the most talented boxer with a strap in the division, but did nothing to amass a CV or divisional credibility.
And the Ring mag is a joke for rankings, has been for years.
Neither beat the best man at the weight and both were simply the most talented boxer with a strap in the division, but did nothing to amass a CV or divisional credibility.
And the Ring mag is a joke for rankings, has been for years.
TopHat24/7- Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 40
Location : London
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
I whole-heartedly agree, haz, that the boxers whom one would rate highest have generally beaten great opponents or, in the absence of a marquee name, have entirely dominated one or more of their weight divisions, taking on the biggest challenges that circumstances would permit them.
With these parameters in mind, it doesn't seem to me that Floyd has much to defend himself against. He has been the best fighter in each division through which he has graduated over a spread of 24 pounds, as great a range as all but a handful of the elite. There are very few names not already on Floyd's CV that one would wish to see there. The Pacquiao saga did neither fighter much credit and is something that prevents me from ranking Floyd any higher than 10 but there aren't many other missed challenges that stick out to his discredit from my angle. Not fighting Golovkin seems like a non-issue to me. How many other fighters at the age of 38 are being asked to take on a murderous hitter at a weight 30 pounds above that at which he started and 13 above his normal theatre of operation in order to prove himself worthy of a high rank in boxing history? None is the answer, and for good reason.
Think that Alvarez is an extremely accomplished fighter, who may still be improving and boasts decent notches on his belt both before and after his meeting with Floyd. Close wins, some of them, but all the greats have had their close shaves and it speaks to their credit that they are able to nick the tight ones. No-one, after all, bags Robinson too strenuously for his showings and results against Henry Brimm when in the prime of his welterweight magnificence. Not that Alvarez is Robinson, of course, but he is arguably one of the best ten boxers currently plying his trade at any weight; Floyd's showing against him is a career highlight and one of the most impressive things that I've seen in the sport since the turn of the millennium.
With these parameters in mind, it doesn't seem to me that Floyd has much to defend himself against. He has been the best fighter in each division through which he has graduated over a spread of 24 pounds, as great a range as all but a handful of the elite. There are very few names not already on Floyd's CV that one would wish to see there. The Pacquiao saga did neither fighter much credit and is something that prevents me from ranking Floyd any higher than 10 but there aren't many other missed challenges that stick out to his discredit from my angle. Not fighting Golovkin seems like a non-issue to me. How many other fighters at the age of 38 are being asked to take on a murderous hitter at a weight 30 pounds above that at which he started and 13 above his normal theatre of operation in order to prove himself worthy of a high rank in boxing history? None is the answer, and for good reason.
Think that Alvarez is an extremely accomplished fighter, who may still be improving and boasts decent notches on his belt both before and after his meeting with Floyd. Close wins, some of them, but all the greats have had their close shaves and it speaks to their credit that they are able to nick the tight ones. No-one, after all, bags Robinson too strenuously for his showings and results against Henry Brimm when in the prime of his welterweight magnificence. Not that Alvarez is Robinson, of course, but he is arguably one of the best ten boxers currently plying his trade at any weight; Floyd's showing against him is a career highlight and one of the most impressive things that I've seen in the sport since the turn of the millennium.
captain carrantuohil- Posts : 2508
Join date : 2011-05-06
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
TopHat24/7 wrote:They both threw roughly the same 435 & 429 but Mayweather landed 34% to Manny's 19%.
I'd normally expect May to be more like 40%+ but Manny suffered worse.
Either way, tawdry punch stats from a supposed 'super fight', throwing just over 30 punches a round and landing only 6 to 12.
Don't give me compubox stats, they are a load of complete rubbish.
Watch the fight, there are plenty of people doing punch counting, Floyd didn't land ANYWHERE NEAR 34%, but Manny has no defence right? He can't slip and counter? He can't change his style for one fight and have a game plan, not to throw 100 punches a round but to instead block Floyds counter on the way in and land his own. Or slip floyd's lead and counter him.
Manny is much better than you lot give him credit for, its just he is too fast to actually see what he is doing, watch it in slow mo and you will see what I mean
BoxingFan88- Posts : 3759
Join date : 2011-02-20
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
hazharrison wrote:BoxingFan88 wrote:mark_england wrote:There was nothing wrong with Pacquiao in their fight, he just couldn't land a shot because Mayweather was too good defensively.
De la Hoya was hardly past it when they fought either, and FMJ clearly won that fight as well.
I laughed out loud at this comment...
Mayweather isn't as great defensive as you think he is, at least since his last few fights, it was a seriously close fight, watch it in slow motion and you will see that Pacquiao landed plenty of leather and the much more effective shots. He also made Mayweather miss a lot.
A lot of the punches Mayweather landed, brushed Pacquiao, these shots don't even get scored in the amateurs. Schooling and Masterclass are not words I would use to describe it.
I thought Floyd won, I don't argue either way, but I cannot fathom how it is an 'easy nights work' or 'Pacquiao didn't land a shot'.
I think there is a huge bias towards Mayweather when scoring fights.
That being said, Pacquiao is no mug at all and its a great win, but don't pretend that Manny did nothing
Pacquiao landed next to nothing. Floyd landed only a tad more. It was as atrocious a "super fight" as there's ever been.
Aw diddums.....did Floyd win ??
TRUSSMAN66- Posts : 40654
Join date : 2011-02-02
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
captain carrantuohil wrote:I whole-heartedly agree, haz, that the boxers whom one would rate highest have generally beaten great opponents or, in the absence of a marquee name, have entirely dominated one or more of their weight divisions, taking on the biggest challenges that circumstances would permit them.
With these parameters in mind, it doesn't seem to me that Floyd has much to defend himself against. He has been the best fighter in each division through which he has graduated over a spread of 24 pounds, as great a range as all but a handful of the elite. There are very few names not already on Floyd's CV that one would wish to see there. The Pacquiao saga did neither fighter much credit and is something that prevents me from ranking Floyd any higher than 10 but there aren't many other missed challenges that stick out to his discredit from my angle. Not fighting Golovkin seems like a non-issue to me. How many other fighters at the age of 38 are being asked to take on a murderous hitter at a weight 30 pounds above that at which he started and 13 above his normal theatre of operation in order to prove himself worthy of a high rank in boxing history? None is the answer, and for good reason.
Think that Alvarez is an extremely accomplished fighter, who may still be improving and boasts decent notches on his belt both before and after his meeting with Floyd. Close wins, some of them, but all the greats have had their close shaves and it speaks to their credit that they are able to nick the tight ones. No-one, after all, bags Robinson too strenuously for his showings and results against Henry Brimm when in the prime of his welterweight magnificence. Not that Alvarez is Robinson, of course, but he is arguably one of the best ten boxers currently plying his trade at any weight; Floyd's showing against him is a career highlight and one of the most impressive things that I've seen in the sport since the turn of the millennium.
He's just beaten a fighter rated higher than GGG...........
What I find amusing about Haz is he makes excuses for Hagler to fight crap at middle for nearly 7 years when Spinks would have been a huge fight..Spinks routinely weighed 171 and he could have probably done a catchweight...
But Mayweather gets marked down for not going from 130 -160 to fight GGG...
It's ridiculous..............His hatred of Mayweather throws all balanced thinking out of the window...
TRUSSMAN66- Posts : 40654
Join date : 2011-02-02
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
BoxingFan88 wrote:TopHat24/7 wrote:They both threw roughly the same 435 & 429 but Mayweather landed 34% to Manny's 19%.
I'd normally expect May to be more like 40%+ but Manny suffered worse.
Either way, tawdry punch stats from a supposed 'super fight', throwing just over 30 punches a round and landing only 6 to 12.
Don't give me compubox stats, they are a load of complete rubbish.
Watch the fight, there are plenty of people doing punch counting, Floyd didn't land ANYWHERE NEAR 34%, but Manny has no defence right? He can't slip and counter? He can't change his style for one fight and have a game plan, not to throw 100 punches a round but to instead block Floyds counter on the way in and land his own. Or slip floyd's lead and counter him.
Manny is much better than you lot give him credit for, its just he is too fast to actually see what he is doing, watch it in slow mo and you will see what I mean
Pacquiao is too fast to see his punches land?
I take it you watched that 15mins highlight in slow motion, on youtube.
AdamT- Posts : 6651
Join date : 2014-03-27
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
captain carrantuohil wrote:I whole-heartedly agree, haz, that the boxers whom one would rate highest have generally beaten great opponents or, in the absence of a marquee name, have entirely dominated one or more of their weight divisions, taking on the biggest challenges that circumstances would permit them.
With these parameters in mind, it doesn't seem to me that Floyd has much to defend himself against. He has been the best fighter in each division through which he has graduated over a spread of 24 pounds, as great a range as all but a handful of the elite. There are very few names not already on Floyd's CV that one would wish to see there. The Pacquiao saga did neither fighter much credit and is something that prevents me from ranking Floyd any higher than 10 but there aren't many other missed challenges that stick out to his discredit from my angle. Not fighting Golovkin seems like a non-issue to me. How many other fighters at the age of 38 are being asked to take on a murderous hitter at a weight 30 pounds above that at which he started and 13 above his normal theatre of operation in order to prove himself worthy of a high rank in boxing history? None is the answer, and for good reason.
Think that Alvarez is an extremely accomplished fighter, who may still be improving and boasts decent notches on his belt both before and after his meeting with Floyd. Close wins, some of them, but all the greats have had their close shaves and it speaks to their credit that they are able to nick the tight ones. No-one, after all, bags Robinson too strenuously for his showings and results against Henry Brimm when in the prime of his welterweight magnificence. Not that Alvarez is Robinson, of course, but he is arguably one of the best ten boxers currently plying his trade at any weight; Floyd's showing against him is a career highlight and one of the most impressive things that I've seen in the sport since the turn of the millennium.
I agree on Golovkin. I don't think any fighter should be hounded to move up through the weights, even in this crazy era where day before weigh-ins and multiple weight classes have all but eradicated them.
I think Alvarez is good but, as the Lara and Trout fights illustrated, he's still learning. I would question whether Canelo legitimately nicked the Lara fight (he probably did enough to oust Trout) or whether his marketability played a part (didn't one judge manage to give him the nod against Floyd?).
At the risk of stirring up the predictable hornet's nest: while Mayweather was ranked number one in various divisions - he rarely dominated any of them in the traditional sense. His matchmaking has been selective and highly opportunistic. Mosley, Oscar, Pacquiao were all past their best (not that he can be faulted for the Oscar fight - De la Hoya was in the box seat for that one); Marquez and Hatton were above their best weights. The Cotto win looks more solid by the day and his exploits at super feather and lightweight are a big shot in the arm. He actually used to be one of my favourite fighters back when he was fighting the likes of Sosa and N'Dou and I enjoyed him showing up Oscar but the Pacquiao situation was a real sickener.
Such a shame also that he didn't get in the welterweight mix back when Margarito, Williams, Cotto and Mosley were at the top of the division. The Pacquiao fight was the one, though.
hazharrison- Posts : 7540
Join date : 2011-03-26
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Top 20, not top 10. Coming out on top of a triology 5 years ago with Pacquiao might have put him there.
Very difficult for a modern fighter to crack the top 10 as they fight so rarely. Leonard did it, but he beat Duran, Benitez, Hearns and Hagler.
I'd also rate him alongside the likes of Jones and Whitaker. However, in terms of ability and head to head ratings I'd rate him a bit below Jones and Whitaker. They both looked completely untouchable at their best weight, Mayweather didn't.
Very difficult for a modern fighter to crack the top 10 as they fight so rarely. Leonard did it, but he beat Duran, Benitez, Hearns and Hagler.
I'd also rate him alongside the likes of Jones and Whitaker. However, in terms of ability and head to head ratings I'd rate him a bit below Jones and Whitaker. They both looked completely untouchable at their best weight, Mayweather didn't.
fearlessBamber- Posts : 458
Join date : 2011-02-17
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
You don't think Mayweather looked untouchable 130-140?? Castillo I is the only fight I can think of.
TopHat24/7- Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 40
Location : London
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
At 130, I'd have to agree. Can only place Arguello ahead of Floyd as a super-featherweight.
captain carrantuohil- Posts : 2508
Join date : 2011-05-06
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
TopHat24/7 wrote:You don't think Mayweather looked untouchable 130-140?? Castillo I is the only fight I can think of.
That was the one I was thinking of. Pretty harsh I guess, but honestly can you imagine Whitaker not making a fool of Castillo.
I'm a big fan of Whitaker - pick him to beat anyone in history at 135, including Duran.
fearlessBamber- Posts : 458
Join date : 2011-02-17
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
AdamT wrote:BoxingFan88 wrote:TopHat24/7 wrote:They both threw roughly the same 435 & 429 but Mayweather landed 34% to Manny's 19%.
I'd normally expect May to be more like 40%+ but Manny suffered worse.
Either way, tawdry punch stats from a supposed 'super fight', throwing just over 30 punches a round and landing only 6 to 12.
Don't give me compubox stats, they are a load of complete rubbish.
Watch the fight, there are plenty of people doing punch counting, Floyd didn't land ANYWHERE NEAR 34%, but Manny has no defence right? He can't slip and counter? He can't change his style for one fight and have a game plan, not to throw 100 punches a round but to instead block Floyds counter on the way in and land his own. Or slip floyd's lead and counter him.
Manny is much better than you lot give him credit for, its just he is too fast to actually see what he is doing, watch it in slow mo and you will see what I mean
Pacquiao is too fast to see his punches land?
I take it you watched that 15mins highlight in slow motion, on youtube.
Rather the round by round in slow motion, where in real time I think Floyd lands, when actually he misses and gets countered with a right hook.
He blocks and slips a lot more than we give him credit for. He isn't a face first brawler.
BoxingFan88- Posts : 3759
Join date : 2011-02-20
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
I'm still not sold on Alverez, he has been Oscar's protege for a long time and it has been reported he has received a disproportionate amount of hype in Mexico in his early career.
My main criticism of him would be his feet, he just doesn't get around the ring very well. This means good boxers have a big one up on him from the get go. How ponderous he looked against Mayweather.
I equate Alverez to David Beckham, good but not great but they sell tickets, watches, perfume, t-shirts so they stay in the limelight.
My main criticism of him would be his feet, he just doesn't get around the ring very well. This means good boxers have a big one up on him from the get go. How ponderous he looked against Mayweather.
I equate Alverez to David Beckham, good but not great but they sell tickets, watches, perfume, t-shirts so they stay in the limelight.
Strongback- Posts : 6529
Join date : 2011-07-01
Location : Matchroom Sports Head Office
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
hazharrison wrote:catchweight wrote:Im not one for making lists but I think hes generally an overrated boxer with an overrated record as a result of extremelly opportunistic matchmaking. Certainly extremelly talented but I wouldnt have him in the same calibre as a Leonard, Hearns or Whitaker. I think its debateable how he would fare even against an on form de la Hoya, Benitez, Pacquiao or Mosely.
I'd have to rate him over Hearns. Hearns lost his biggest fights. Head to head, though, I'd fancy Tommy to undo him. Again, though, depends how we're rating them.
I dont really rate fighters in a list because the variables are too many and inconsistent. Hearns lost his biggest fight but he was a better boxer than Mayweather in my opinion and lived up to the idea of being "great" more. He didnt engineer an record based around conservatim and opportunistic matchmaking. If you served Hearns the same opponents Mayweather faced (at the time Mayweather faced them) I dont think many, if any would hear the final bell. Most of them would be massacred. If you put Mayweather in against Leonard, Duran, Hagler, Benetiz etc then you are probably talking about a guy who loses most of his big fights as well.
catchweight- Posts : 4339
Join date : 2013-09-18
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
You can't compare Mayweather who started at Super Featherweight and Hearns who started at Welterweight like for like, not entirely sure why you have in all honesty. I would wager that a majority of Mayweather's opponents would beat Hearns of the simple fact he'd have to chop off an arm to get down low enough in weight to face them, even with 24 hour weigh ins he is not getting down to 130 or 135lbs.
Hammersmith harrier- Posts : 12060
Join date : 2013-09-26
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
Of course you can compare them. Isnt tht what these useless "hes in my top ten lists" crappola is about?
Mayweather spent the majority of his career at welterweight and above just like Hearns. At welterweight and light middleweight Hearns would have massacred the guys Mayweather faced.
And who knows what weight Hearns could have made with all the potions and rehydration nowadays. Chavez Jr fought at superfeatherweight starting out.
Mayweather spent the majority of his career at welterweight and above just like Hearns. At welterweight and light middleweight Hearns would have massacred the guys Mayweather faced.
And who knows what weight Hearns could have made with all the potions and rehydration nowadays. Chavez Jr fought at superfeatherweight starting out.
catchweight- Posts : 4339
Join date : 2013-09-18
Re: Does Mayweather get enough credit?
He actually spent the majority of his career below Welterweight but don't let facts get in the way of things and Hearns struggling to make 147lbs doesn't lead me to think he could get anywhere near Super Featherweight.
Hammersmith harrier- Posts : 12060
Join date : 2013-09-26
Page 2 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
![-](https://2img.net/i/empty.gif)
» Should Mayweather Be Given More Credit For His Win Over Marquez?
» Mayweather v Pac is on!!!!
» Mayweather's Next Run Out
» IRS after mayweather again...
» Mayweather p4p $$$$$
» Mayweather v Pac is on!!!!
» Mayweather's Next Run Out
» IRS after mayweather again...
» Mayweather p4p $$$$$
The v2 Forum :: Sport :: Boxing
Page 2 of 3
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|