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

Apparently in another 15 years people will start saying that Terry Norris is the goat because he hammered "Sugar Ray Leonard" because how shopworn your opponent is doesn't matter... #Norris>Duran #Boxing

 

?

I don't see how this is analogous to anything anyone has said on this thread.

 

I did point out that Floyd's age and the bigger size difference would count a lot in Floyd's favour, no doubt.

But also "like I said", Gaybox would have to carry on thumping everyone else, and probably get a marquee name on his resumé for the win to really carry much weight. If, hypothetically, Floyd won and Gaybox retired, he'd probably be considered a bust, and it would be seen as Floyd exposed him.

He simply doesn't have the resumé for the win to carry as much weight as Hagler, especially in the history books, despite the age and size difference.

But it would obviously be an epic win, because it doesn't seem like a winnable fight for Floyd at all. Nor does it seem like one that has the faintest chance of happening ;)

 

I just had to point out, this is utter bollocks. Hagler wasn't way past prime at all, he was only 32 :: Barely older than Leonard, and in his previous 2 fights he'd bashed Hearns and Mugabi. Leonard was also coming off a 3 year layoff.

He had slowed down a bit as is expected, but at worst he was at the tail end of his prime. Put it this way, he was younger than Golovkin is now ::

 

Ok, I see your point.

 

;)

 

Fair enough, I concede that point. My recollection of him was that he was older, but you're right.

 

To be fair, me too. My recollection was that Leonard was early to mid 30's and Hagler was somewhere around late 30's.

It's actually pretty weird they were only 30 and 32 :dunno:

Both significantly younger than Pacquiao and Floyd of course, for this upcoming megafight.

 

Hagler at 32 seemed to have far more mileage on him than fighters today at that age. I mean...who retires at 32 these days? Like they say....40 is the new 30.

 

To some extent it's true. Even Leonard wasn't really in his prime in the Hagler fight, age 30. Yet Pacquiao and Floyd were absolutely prime age 30, and are still arguably the 2 best fighters in the world at their current age.

Weird thing is, fighters even used to look older age 30. I wonder if it's modern diet, nutrition, lifestyle, or... something else... :scared2:

 

You threw Mosley, Hoya, etc in there as some sort of convoluted analogy to Basilio, Fullmer etc when Basilio and Fullmer were in their primes when the past-prime Robinson was tangling with them ... You said that with the passage of time the names become more meaningful... They may became more meaningful to people who don't enjoy critical thinking or an accurate picture of past events but they don't become more meaningful to people who are serious followers of a sport ... The Norris example is simply the absurd conclusion of the absurd premise ... Basilio and Fullmer were fresher, better opponents than the Hoya and Mosley Mayweather fought ... There's no comparison

 

Having far fewer prizefights

 

i have heard it alleged that the elite prize fighters only step in the ring once or twice a year now-a-days because it makes it easier to cycle PEDs

 

That has to be a part of it yeah, but like I said, even Leonard was less prime age 30 than many fighters today, and he had hardly any fights.

 

The point on Mosley I can accept, the De La Hoya point, I don't agree in totality. De La Hoya's looked good in his previous fight against mayorga and wasn't yet washed up. He may not have been as fresh as Basilio and Fulmer, but the difference in Class and objective historical greatness vis a vis Carmen and Gene, negates that. Secondly...let's put Basilio in perspective here...he was a Welterweight...a 5'6" welterweight at that...a Welterweight that had already lost 10 or more fights by the time he fought Robsinson at middleweight. So if you enjoy "critical thinking or an accurate picture of past events" consider that. Fulmer was young, definitely and a rough and tough Middleweight. But seeing as he had lost a few times before he fought Robinson was SRR beating him really a better achievement than, say, Mayweather beating Cotto? I don't think so.

 

Not washed up no, but noticeably past prime. He looked good against Mayorga partly because of how scrubby Mayorga is.

That's the main problem with Floyd's resumé, he hasn't beaten many elite fighters in their prime.

Corrales and Castillo, but even then, they're sort of borderline elite fighters, neither of them were true elite fighters. Cotto was still prime, and that wasn't exactly his most impressive showing. I reckon Hatton and Cotto are the only elite fighters he beat in their primes, and those 2 are entry level elite fighters, they are hardly Duran and Leonard.

His resumé is good, and he's largely been very dominant, but it should be better. He doesn't have a Morales/Barrera/Marquez or Leonard/Duran/Hagler level fighter on his resumé, in their prime.

 

Basilio would have kicked the fuck out of Cotto so yeah a victory over him is more impressive ... How many times had Basilio been utterly and completely destroyed in fights prior to facing Robinson?

 

phonetap would not consider Floyd TBE if he beats pac. also wouldn't disparage anyone that would consider him TBE.

 

And what about if he beat Gaybox too, that's the main question in this thread.

 

that would help the argument for TBE but it still wouldn't confirm anything for many years to come. What if GGG ends up having a lackluster career after a loss to Floyd? time will determine whether mayweather is truly TBE or not.

 

Gaybox ::

 

Leonard faced Benitez, Duran twice and Hearns...all by the age of 25. beat Hagler after a 3 year layoff by age 30. And had a total of 40 career fights.

That alone shits on everything Floyd has done.

"HOWEVER"

FloydIdiots would say Leonard lost to a lightweight so Floyd is TBE.

 

Duran was a poor man's Castillo and Floyd beat him 10 rounds to 2 with a broken arm, hand and dislocated shoulder. Duran quit against Leonard in the rematch. Imagine how frustrated he'd get against Floyd. Duran would say "no mas" after the 2nd round.

 

::

 

I'm not sure Floyd even has an edge overall in offense. Floyd has more consistent pop in his shots. Whitaker could do more damage with single left hands, do to timing or loading up on it or whatever. He unified the LW titles on a single left hand in the 1st round against Nazario, basically ended the Lomeli fight with one left hand, rocked Chavez briefly in the 8th round of their fight, and turned the Hurtado fight around with one left hand, and then almost killed him with the follow up lefts while Mercante Jr. stood there and watched. I guess Mercante Jr. can be really active when it comes to helping fighters "suck it up" and deliberately ignoring the requests of the chief second, but just stands there when guys almost get killed with punches.

Whitaker had the superior jab as his right jab was simply brilliant, although Floyd's jab is excellent too, as he has the best jab to the body I have ever seen. Floyd's left hook is better than Whitaker's right hook IMO. Floyd's straight right is better overall in effectiveness than Whitaker's straight left. Whitaker has the edge in workrate and combinations. They are both excellent body-punchers. I give Whitaker the slight edge due to him letting his hands go more and how frequently he contorted his body to get the angles on body punches. There is one instance early in the 8th round against Hatton that I've seen probably 1,000 times because it's so great to watch, when Floyd pivots his body to get the angles on these bodyshots against Hatton (during the part when Manny Steward says Ricky is bringing out the best out of Floyd). He then again uses the jab to the body to set up a right to Ricky's head.

Whitaker did this quite often. He got these weird angles due to his body movements and how he got low. Unorthodox but not necessarily technically unsound either, it would give him angles for offense and also for defense.

Anyway, on offense they are pretty close as they both have areas in which they were better at. Whitaker had an edge on defense. I doubt anyone would get hurt since they were defensive masters and the chances of Whitaker landing a shot on Floyd like he did against Nazario or Lomeli is very slim.

I think Whitaker's pesky jab and superior workrate would be the difference in a close decision. 7-5

 

:bears::bears:

 

The only reasonable chance I'd give Floyd to beat Whitaker would be at 147. Certainly not 135.

 

I would pick Whitaker at 135.....147 it's closer...I been watching videos on youtube for years...the Mayweather's are a bunch of cocky bumptious fools...but every time it comes up Mayweather jr vs. Duran...the Mayweather all of them..Roger...Floyd Sr....that other more civil brother...they all stop running their mouths..and return with an answer of...."uhhhh that will be a hell of a fight...that would be tough"....

https://youtu.be/SM6wGS7SXkA?t=16m50s


Here is ROGER...setting up his nephew vs. the WORSE version of Ray Leonard.......and again stammer when Duran is mention...
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8vIrUXFdg30?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8c5gIMJc3GM?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>


Considering DURAN has made it obvious that he completely dislike and hates Floyd jr......the Mayweatehr show him a lot of respect...

 

Jeff Mayweather

The one who used to post here and Jim Lampley referred to as "literate" (as opposed to the other Mayweathers). I had to watch it again to make sure I heard it right.

They know how great Duran was. They're respectful of Chavez too, as they should be since Roger knows firsthand how great he was.

 

Agreed ILLU, you can tell for sure they know Duran would bust Floyd up.