Pernell Whitaker v Floyd Mayweather Jr

I remember a quote from Raiders of the lost Ark when Marian said to Indiana "You're not the man I knew ten years ago" to which he replied "It's not the years, sweetheart, it's the mileage".

In terms of the first Castillo fight it wasn't the mentality it was the injury.

 

Once again let me say.... ALLLLLL Floyd has over Whitaker is better longevity.

Whitaker had a better/more dominant prime, which is really what matters.

 

dont forget sobriety

 

I didn't forget. That's the REASON for Floyd having better longevity.

 

Maybe you should take a leaf out of this guy's book and stop sucking on Mayweather's bollocks.

Seriously man, you're embarrassing.

 

be a fascinating fight I'd pay big bucks to see it

 

Longevity proves a lot though. Think about it. Take it to the extreme and a very short prime suggests that the fighter only looked good against a selected few opponents. Curry looked good agains a couple fighters and then got beat up by Honeyghan, McCallum and others. Does that mean that Curry was GREAT in his prime and then suddenly was no longer prime...or does it suggest that perhaps he wasn't that good for if he was he would have been more dominant for a longer period of time over more opponents?

Was Buster Douglas' prime the ONE Tyson fight? Think about it man. Think.

 

me too

 

Don't get me wrong, Floyd deserves credit for staying a GREAT fighter for a LOOONNGGG time. It IS very impressive.

But I'll name off these four.... Whitaker, Jones, Leonard, and Ali. Four guys with shorter primes than Floyd, but in their primes they were at a level that quite honestly, Floyd was NEVER at. Not saying he was behind them by an astronomical margin, but I think he was a level below.

It goes back to basketball. Kobe Bryant had a LONGER prime than Jordan.... but not a better one.

 

Floyd longevity is mind boggling actually. he's been on p4p lists every year ive followed the sport and I'm getting old

 

Greatest longevity of all time?

 

People still tend to forget that Floyd's prime was at super-feather. He didn't stay there for long but to me, his best performances there looked to be on all-time great level

 

Weakest era in eons

don't forget Hopkins being relevant at 50 despite throwing 4 punches per round

 

Does this necessarily have to mean that the era is poor though? Couldn't it also mean that Hopkins is one of the greatest thinkers and strategists of the boxing history? And how can you tell the difference?

 

Weak era my big black sexy ass!

Corralles Castillo Judah hatton de la Hoya cotto Canelo Pacquiao can't be called a weak era by any credible observer

 

Who is the best defensive fighter before the 60s?

 

Willie Pep

 

There was no injury. He was ready to quit or let himself lose and that was the excuse. His corner realized it as soon as he said it and couldn't believe it. "Fuck ya shoulda!!!". And then he went out and fought like his shoulder was fine...

Overall Floyd passed the test in that fight because he abandoned the technical bullshit and fought Castillo off and he was better for it. But he was read to quit.

 

There's two weights where I think Floyd was awesome - 130, where I consider him the best super feather of all time, and 140, where he looked damn good.

135 he didn't look spectacular, accept against Ndou. I've always maintained that Floyd loses to Duran, Whitaker, Chavez, and Mosley at 135. Probably a few other lightweights too, like possibly Carlos Ortiz.

 

If those were the very best guys from 135 to 147 in an era, except DLH and Pac, it wouldn't be a very strong era. Those guys would be favored to lose against the top guys from other eras. DLH was a remnant of the 90's when Floyd fought him and Pac was past prime on top of being way outsized.

 

If he can implode against Castillo at 135 it can happen to a younger version of Floyd at 130.

 

Floyd was amazing at 130. In the last 20 years, there's only been one fighter that looked more invincible at a single weight, and that was Roy at 168.

 

Would make for a stronger argument if he had 'imploded'

 

Due to styles, the guy with the BEST chance in history at beating Floyd at 130 would be Camacho.

 

I would go with Armstrong, Chavez and Pacquiao over Camacho.

 

Pac's best chance to beat Floyd was at 147, in 09.

Pac never beats Floyd at any weight below 147.

At 130, Floyd would have stopped Pac imo. He would have lit Pac up terribly at 130.

 

He was making excuses and ready to resign to losing or getting a gift until his corner threatened to fuck him up. It was his toughest fight to that point but not all that rough or tough a fight. Floyd showing that kind of doubt in his first real taste of a competitive fight against a guy like Castillo gives me real doubts as to how he'd respond if his first real competitive fight was against someone like P, Chavez, Duran, etc

 

by watching the fights and the fighters?

 

I think its ridiculous the way you are delimiting his performance by weightclasses. There's no rational argument to claim that PBF was great at junior lw, not so great at lw, but great again at 140. PBF was pretty much the same fighter at all these weights, he looked as spectacular as he ever did against NDou. He just happened to face a very good (dare I say great) fighter in Castillo, and a guy he didn't matched up well with in Sosa. And let's not pretend he always looked dominant at 130. He had a few Sosa-like performance at that weight.

 

It is impressive, but it's not unprecedent. And it's not like he faced the best opposition available in that stretch. I'd bet on him having a few losses (or controversials decisions) if he did so.