I'd pick Napoles in a close one. But he was prone to cuts and swelling at 147 and that could make a difference due to Floyd's hand speed. But Floyd never met any prime fighters with Mantequilla's skill level.
I know you're waiting for me to say "FLOYD!", so that you can call me a nuthugger...but I wont indulge you this time. ;)
Seems like Floyd sucks at Welterweight. if I understand this forum correctly, all of the following Welterweights would have beaten him: Napoles Curry Quartey Forrest Trinidad De La Hoya (Prime) Duran Benitez Whitaker Leonard Hearns Robinson Mosley (Prime) Mayweather, fat out sucks. He defensive genius, reaction time, ring generalship and overall boxing acumen is obviously easily mitigated by any championship level fighter pre-2000.
From that list, I'm kinda iffy about Quartey and Forrest beating him. Both those guys are historically pretty overrated. The rest of those guys beat him.
I'd pick him over Quartey, Forrest and Trinidad, though with 55/45 type surety. De la Hoya, Mosley and Whitaker are pretty much pick 'ems at welter, I think. I'd favour Curry and Benitez but he'd have a fighting chance. Napoles, Duran, Hearns, Leonard & Robinson would be heavily favoured.....he'd have next to no chance in my mind against Leonard or Hearns.
You can add the add the Palomino/Montreal version of Duran to the list of guys he'd have vitually no chance against.
I think he beats Quartey and Mosley. A fight with Whitaker goes the distance 11 times out of 10 and i wouldn't be surprised to see Floyd get a controversial decision. ODLH beats him but that's probably another one where opinions of both the judges and fans are divided. I'm not sure how he does against Forrest. Forrest wouldn't chase after him and Floyd would have difficulties getting offensive against somebody with the reach and style of Vernon. It would be a stinker.
Not to sound like Cdogg, but replace Quartey and Forrest with Starling, as Starling was a better fighter than both those guys.
Only fighters I'd pick over Floyd at 147lbs with any degree of certainty are Leonard and Hearns. Duran, Benitez and Whitaker are pick'em..Robinson at Welterweight is an unknown commodity so I wont venture a guess there and I'll pick Mayweather to beat the rest.
It's hard for me to imagine how Floyd does against guys like that because to me, at 147 he hasn't really done enough. His best wins at 147 are Hatton, Judah, old Mosley and Pac. You can even add old De La Hoya, Canelo, and Cotto even though those were at 154. All those guys were either old, too small, or not on the level of those top welterweights listed. I'm just not 100% sure this proves that Floyd could handle naturally bigger and stronger fighters IN THEIR PRIMES at 147 lbs or above. Floyd's greatness at 130-135 lbs cannot be questioned. But I have not see enough to suggest he's just as good as a welterweight. It's not even a KNOCK on Floyd. But it is a fact that he has benefited from good matchmaking as well. Not to the degree Pacquiao has. But benefited nonetheless.
I hear you, but the thing is, he's scarcely even been close to losing at that weight, especially when he was prime. So it's not good enough to say he's never fought big prime great welterweights, so he'd lose to big prime great welterweights. Floyd has been dominant over his opposition and that's all a man can do.
For my money, he should have beaten 2007 De La Hoya more convincingly. I could see having trouble if it was a 2000 Oscar but 2007 De La Hoya was essentially retired. And there is no way Marquez should have gone 12 rounds with Floyd. Not with how fat he looked and how disadvantaged he was going into that. Things like that make me believe that Floyd didn't really establish himself at 147 the way he did at 130-135 with his epic performances against Corrales, Hernandez, Manfredy, Castillo, N'Dou.
Frankly we've had our expectations beaten down & our whole sense of context successfully mind-fucked if we're taking the idea of Mayweather vs Leonard or Hearns at welterweight remotely seriously.
That's the thing. You mention Leonard and Hearns, those are BIG welterweights. Especially when you compare them to the guys Floyd has fought since he moved to 147 lbs. And it's not just Floyd. But guys like Pac, Cotto, Judah, Hatton, Ortiz, Berto, Marquez, Guerrero, I dare say do NOT move up to that weight with guys like that around. Especially in an era were PEDs were not as prevalent for these guys to use so that they could build some unnatural size and muscle. Those guys would have all stayed at the 135-140 lbs weight classes. A lot of these "welterweights" today are anything but that. They're blown up fighters who fight at higher weight classes.
In the absence of a time machine, neither you or I could be proven correct. The case, however, is stronger for Floyd beating Duran than the other way around, if we use facts, results and statistics instead of "personal intuition, gut feelings, hairs on the back of your neck, little devils or angels sitting on your shoulder".
Duran beat Leonard, good achievement, but he lost to every other great fighter North of 135lbs. How do we not know that his beating Leonard was simply the sun shining on a dogs ass? Leonard was the heavy favourite going in, was over confident, fought Duran's fight and paid the price. Duran's ENTIRE Welterweight reputation is based on that one fight. ONE fight! Shit Duran was favoured over hearns when they fought, based again on that ONE FIGHT (ok and Davey Moore...giggle). Duran lost left right and centre to all manner o other fighters north of 135lbs....but yet based on that ONE fight, it's not even a pick'em between him and Floyd Mayweather? Come now. Who's using facts and who's going by bias?
Geez Louise. See this is where i wanna throw the ball to Clogg to sort this out for me....where is he?
Ummm, firstly, don't fall into Leonard's bullshit excuse. Duran FORCED him to fight in Montreal. Leonard wasn't doing it by choice or for pleasure. That's simply the bullshit myth the media and Leonard have promoted over the years. Duran hurt Leonard in the 2nd round, and for then on he took Leonard out of whatever strategy he may have had going in and FORCED a rough, inside fight. He was also much quicker on his feet than Leonard expected, and was able to rapidly close the distance on Ray. That quickness Duran had is one reason he would have been a major problem for Floyd. Along with his deceptively fast right hand that WOULD land on the shoulder roll, and the fact that he could fight at a high level pace without tiring. Secondly, Montreal wasn't even his best performance at 147, arguably. You're acting like you don't know who Carlos Palomino is. Duran put on an all time master class against Palomino, and Palomino was better than ANY weltweight Floyd fought or beat. Give me some actual evidence to support Floyd beating a prime Duran. Cause beating Hatton sure isn't convincing enough.
Whether or not Hatton, Judah, Baldomir were as good as Duran is, is irrelevant when matching the Floyd who fought those guys vs Duran. More people than not would pick the Ali who beat Williams and Foley to beat a prime Tyson...but prime Tyson was MUCH better than Williams or Foley. Ya feel mi! It's more to do with the style, the abilities on display and the consistency of work during that period than it is about how good or not good his opponents were vis a vis another prospective opponent. Else, as i said before, Foreman should have never beaten Frazier the first time. Floyd was faaaaaast, in terms of movement and defensive and offensive reflexes. Better reflexes than Leonard. Better defense than Leonard. Smarter than Leonard. Mayweather had as much stamina as anyone in the game, at his best he could maintain the same workrate for 12 rounds without looking tired. He kept his speed and power into the later rounds. Physically, compared with Duran, Floyd would not be at a size disadvantage...at least not where it matters (height and reach) as far as his style is concerned. Stylewise he frustrates the hell out of Duran.
Floyd had better reflexes than Leonard, but sure as Hell not better feet. Especially considering that Leonard was in his physical prime at 147, whereas Floyd's physical prime was 130-140, and at 147-154 he wasn't quite as athletic. And there's NO REASON to believe that Duran couldn't successfully corner, and work Floyd on the ropes when farrrrr lesser fighters than Duran have had pockets of success with it. And opposition DOES matter. At the end of the day, no matter what excuses you have, Duran owns a win over a top 3 all time welter. Meaning, he beat a man with not only comparable ability than Floyd, but most would say superior ability. Floyd has never anything remotely CLOOOSSSEEEE to Montreal Duran's ability. The best/most talented fighter he faced was Cotto (Mosley and Oscar don't count cause they were both shot), and it's no coincidence that Cotto was his toughest fight at 147-154. Not, take Cotto's ability, and magnify it by 20, and you have Duran. Yet you're telling me he's just gonna frustrate the Hell outta Duran when there's no evidence of Floyd ever easily defeating a fighter of Duran's caliber. That's where your nut huggery comes into play, and you start trying to intent this invisible version of Floyd which never really existed.
Floyd would be more successful against Forrest than Mosley was. Just like prime Mosley would be more successful against Floyd than Forrest would be. Forrest was technically skilled, yes, but I have a hard time seeing him outbox and outhink Floyd. I think to outbox Floyd, it takes more than Forrest's solid fundamentals. It takes exceptional gifts, like Leonard, Robinson, and Hearns, and to a lesser degree Curry. Either that, or you need big firepower and great pressure. Forrest had none of those things. At his CORE, he was a pretty basic fighter who simply had the right style to beat a better fighter than himself. I think Forrest was too basic to beat Floyd. Give him problems? Yes. Beat him? No.
Oh really? Well name one tall welterweight with solid fundamentals that pbf beat. Oh wait. We cannot. Because pbf's whole game is bullying short lightweights.
