If Mayweather were to beat pacquiao and then accomplish the following, would you call him TBE?

I think in my mind Floyd would have beaten the pre-adult, pre-alcohol Benitez at 140

 

I give you a pass grade on this post.

2 out of 3 aint bad.

 

If you think Floyd beats Shane at 135 just as easily as he did 40-year-old Shane, then I can't even entertain the rest of this post.

 

Prime Shane obviously gives him a better fight, he was lightning fast if nothing else.

But I think peak Shane was actually early welter Shane. The not being drained made him even faster and snappier, he actually looked a bit weaker and more lethargic at lightweight.

So yeah, early welter Mosley would give Floyd a good fight I reckon, but I still don't think he'd win.

 

Whitaker was better than Floyd. Period. He simply didn't have Floyd's longevity due to his coke addition.

But at his lightweight peak he was better than Floyd ever was, and he would have outboxed Floyd with some room to spare on the cards.

 

To say Floyd beats a prime Shane isn't outrageous.

To say he beats him 11-1 like he did the 40-year-old Shane is outrageous.

I would pick the Mosley of 2000 over Floyd at 147.

Floyd has never been as good a WELTERWEIGHT as Shane was at that point.

 

Yeah that is true actually, Shane would be better than any welter Floyd has beaten to date.

 

Whitaker is the ONE fighter that had a better defense than Floyd. But it was only marginally better. Floyd's edge in offense, however, is more than marginally better than Whitaker's. Floyd hit harder, had longer reach and was more accurate. Ergo...Floyd is better overall.

 

Floyd at 147 has had problems with Judah and given a rough fight through 6 by Hatton, yet in Loadedgloves mind he easily beats a prime Mosley.

Makes perfect sense.........

It took a guy like Forrest, with length, range, and the power to hurt Mosley to beat him in his prime.

Floyd doesn't have those attributes.

He had a handspeed edge over the corpse of Mosley, but prime-for-prime Shane would have a rather large edge in handspeed, which that alone causes many issues for Floyd.

And unlike shot Mosley, prime Mosley could actually put together more than one punch at a time.

 

The whole notion that Whitaker wasn't skilled offensively is a joke. Did Floyd have more pop? Yes. But Floyd's not a big enough banger to hurt Whitaker. Whitaker's southpaw jab, and consistent workrate would bedevil Floyd, and he'd be able to score more effectively than Floyd.

 

Yeah, I was thinking of a lightweight fight, I think at 147 there's a far better argument for Mosley.

Let's not forget too, he beat a prime Oscar much more impressively than Floyd beat an older, slower Oscar. Shane won 9 rounds to 3, and looked pretty fucking good in the second half.

 

You've lost your mind. Shane is the most overrated Welterweight in history. He beat Oscar, sure, but that was it. When you examine the fight you realize why he beat Oscar....Oscar, after being criticized for running against Tito OVERcompensated by neglecting boxing altogether and just stalked Mosley without any gameplan other than to try to knock him out. Oscar underestimated Shane's toughness and paid the price. Mosley's a SLUGGER by nature and so this played into his hands. How quickly people foget that a PRIME Shane struggled in a slugfest against Rivera, was dominated by Forrest and (other than Oscar in an inspired performance) only ever beat Shannon Taylor (), Wise , Diaz and Stone at 147lbs. Mosley never could box. I was the only one on secondsout that called this out and knew Forrest was going to beat him. Shane had fast hands, good chin and decent power. Casual fans tend to mistake fast hands for boxing ability...but fast hands without boxing acumen do not a boxer make. Floyd would have outboxed him then as well. It may have been a closer fight...not 11-1, perhaps 8-4 but a clear win for Mayweather nevertheless.

 

mayweather has more advantages than Whitaker does, head to head. height and reach being just two of them. Whitaker was a wizard...I agree. But consider the styles matchup objectively. picture it. Short armed, short statured, soft punching whitaker against bigger stronger rangier floyd who would be virtually as elusive. Fascinating chessmatch...but one that Floyd would win 7 times out of 10.

 

Fast hands without any any boxing acumen or ability would be Amir Khan.

Your hate for Mosley knows no bounds so it's not even really worth discussing.

Mosley was never the technician Floyd is. And Mosley never had Floyd's IQ.

BUT..... the physical attributes and gifts he had in his prime would cause Floyd a world of trouble.

You're acting like shot Mosley didn't catch and HURT Floyd with the only clean right hand he hit him with. Lucky for Floyd, Shane was too old and slow to follow up.

Floyd gets hurt like that vs the 2000 Shane, and it's a WHOOOLE fucking different story.

Floyd would was able to pot shot Mosley at will after the 1st round, because Shane was too shot and slow to counter back with anything.

Given prime Mosley's handspeed and offensive reaction time, and Floyd becomes wary of opening up as much.

 

Both these statements in bold are bullshit.

Floyd was TALLER than Whitaker.

Bigger and stronger? No. Whitaker had much thicker legs, and a stronger base which made him a physically stronger man than Floyd.

Whitaker was physically man handling CHAVEZ for Christ sake! Floyd would be VERY surprised in close how strong Pea was.

 

What I'm going to say next may shock you but...old age wouldn't be a factor as early as the 2nd round. if Shane could have stopped Floyd, he would have done. It was early...long before his age would have caused the fatigue and teh resulting slow down. Your point would have been more vaid if this happened in the later stages of teh fight. Floyd survived not because Shane was too old to finish him, but because Floyd is tough and knows how to survive.

Also...I think you were the one who said in another thread that there is a difference between handspeed and thinking speed (or something to that effect). Shane was never a fast counter puncher. I disagree with you point about his prowess in "offensive reaction time". His speed was all handspeed, not countering speed, not upperbody speed, not speed of thought. All handspeed. Timing beats handspeed. Floyd would have countered him to death back then also.

 

Only fighter I'd confidently pick to demolish Floyd at the lower weights.. just too much everything

At 147, of course, it's a different ballgame (Hearns, Leonard, etc)

 

http://oi57.tinypic.com/nf4aiq.jpg

 

Good point..

One thing I almost tell people that don't know shit about boxing when they say pac is so fast..faster than Floyd.. Etc.

Pac has amatuer type speed, fast hands,, fast feet
Floyd though has a real pro type speed, it's speed of sight, thought, decision
He sees and counters fast

Not just flailing his arms like a druken crack hoe but they are precision placed shots

 

There is nothing amateur about Pacquiao ::

He is also very precise and accurate, and thinks about what he's doing all the time. He is simply more aggressive than Floyd by nature, and less textbook.

If you want amateur speed, look no further than Khan. Pacquiao has always had a pro style. Even Oscar was a bit more shoe shiney and amateurish.

 

Robinson was 121-0 at one point. 121-1 after losing to LaMotta.

Yeah, a win over GGG and 50-0 makes Floyd the greatest.

Robinson got 19 losses

 

That is mental, I forgot Robinson was undefeated for that long.

Still, you have to admit, a win over Gaybox would be incredible, especially age 38 or 39.

 

What has GGG done?

It's not like Mayweather was retired for 3 years (had 1 fight in 6 years) then came back and fought Marvin Hagler who at that time held the record for most consecutive middleweight title defenses and was the undisputed champion.

Wait...Leonard did that. Shouldn't he be the best ever? Wait...Leonard got three losses.

 

Robinson won about 40 in a row and then lost to Lamotta, then won another 80 or so fights, barring
a couple draws.

Pretty insane. He beat the lightweight champion Sammy Angott in a non-title bout within a year of his pro debut.

 

Agreed, obviously given his awful resumé a Gaybox win couldn't be compared to Hagler, he has done nothing in the grand scheme of things. Not his fault, but, you know.

Gaybox is a beast though, and Floyd is smaller and older than Leonard, so it would be an epic win without a doubt. I did add a disclaimer to say if Golovkin does carry on destroying everyone in his path. Obviously if Floyd beat him now, and Golovkin retired, it wouldn't exactly be an all time great win, Gaybox would be considered a bust.

Amazingly, despite having been retired for years, Leonard was only 31 when he beat Hagler.

 

GGG aint done shit

PAC is fast, very fast but not fast like Floyd, not THINKING fast.. just fast

 

To put this argument to rest....no.

Even with a win over GGG Floyd's resume doesn't surpass Manny's let alone qualify as the best ever. Manny's won titles in 8 divisions and along the way defeated three of the greatest Mexican fighters of all time (Morales, Marquez and Barrera). All when they were in their prime.

Regardless of what happens next week that fact won't change. Floyd could KO Manny in 2 rounds and nothing changes. It's no different than Hearns starching Duran. Duran is a greater fighter than Hearns all day every day. Wasn't Duran something like 70-1 when he beat Leonard?

Duran got losses.

 

exactly

 

Robinson was never 121-0. He was 40-0 before losing to Lamotta.

Secondly....

If total number of fights is a main criteria for greatness then leonard slips waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down the list.

Try again.

 

"Oh Lord you gave them eyes yet they cannot see.....and neither can Superman through lead!" - Lex Luthor

You guys say some sillly things at times even though you show intelligence at others. Don't let's Muzse's "logic" trick you.

A mayweather win over GGG exceeds Leonard's win over hagler for a few reasons.

Hagler's resume at the time Leonard fought him vs GGG's resume now is almost irrelevant...at the very least it falls far back into teh criteria of evaluating this hypothetical achievement.

1. leonard started titles at 147lbs, Hagler was at 160lbs. Floyd started at 130lbs, GGG is at 160lbs. This ALONE trumps the resume argument.

but at the chance this may not convince you let me state the obvious...

2. GGG is IN HIS MOTHERFUCKING PRIME. Hagler was waaaaaaaaaaaaay past prime.


It should't even be debatable which would be the better achievement.


Honorable mentions reason (just to put this to bed) Mayweather would be THIRTY NINE if he achieves this, Leonard was 30.