How Would You Rate Mayweather, H2H, at Each Weight?

Thing is, Lopez and Floyd are 0 similar. Imo, Lopez beat Loma by making him wary of his firepower, it had nothing to do with ring generalship. Loma would be on Floyd's ass from start to finish. Would he win? Doubtful, but there have been fat bigger upset

 

No, he wouldn't be on Floyd's ass. Mr. Dropped by Linares. He would be ON his ass.

This isn't the light hitting 147-154 Floyd we're talking.

Junior lightweight Floyd had legit power, more than enough power to make Loma gun shy. And we see that Loma CAN be made gun shy.

It wasn't just Lopez's power that spooked him - Loma had never faced a guy with comparable quickness to himself.

It wouldn't take junior lightweight Floyd long at all to begin painting Loma with lighting fast lead rights, and stunning him with check hooks.

If Loma kept coming forward, rest assured, he gets stopped.

Floyd is both bigger than Loma, and much as Loma groupies hate to hear, Floyd is just a different caliber fighter.

Loma is NOT NOT NOT NOT Floyd, Whitaker, Duran, Chavez tier.

Never was, never will be.

 

1) Linares was another lightweight.

2) Gary Russell had "comparable quickness" to Loma, and Loma dealt with him just fine.

3) Floyd himself was, in the eyes of many, beaten by Castillo. Does this mean he also got exposed as a super-feather?

Again, I do pick Floyd here for sure, it is just the logic that is my problem.

 

I probably wouldn't have got quite so excited while saying it, but this is what I think as well

 

My views on Lomachenko right now are a bit in limbo, because I don't know how good Teo is. If Teo turns out to be a great Junior-Welter/Welter, is a close loss to him a real bad thing? Obviously it's not a good thing, but I remember getting on board with him after he sparkled Commey. He has that power and is an excellent ring general who obviously knows his way around. I have no doubt he's the best of the 'up and comers' right now, and I want to see how good he really is before I just Loma too harshly for the loss.

That said, I've been saying Loma wasn't good enough to beat any of the greats at 130/135 since before he lost to Teo. If there's a top tier at 130 that consists of Mayweather, Pacquiao, Arguello, etc; then Loma is in the second tier IMO, with Nelson, Marquez, and Mitchell. Pretty good level to be at, IMO. Certainly no slight on him. At 135, I'd put him around Ken Buchanan level. Unless I'm wrong about Teo and he turns out to be as a big a hypejob as the rest of them.

Lomachenko is an incredible technical fighter. He may not be up there with the best ever in that regard, but he is incredibly skilled. He reminds me Shibata, in that he's an awesome offensive technician who's really fun to watch but is quite fragile and fights in a manner that puts him in dangerous situations. I remember when the idea that Lomachenko was one of the most mentally strong fighters ever and that him imposing his will on other guys through his skill was why they all quit. I don't buy that for a second, but I think it's very, very harsh to say he's a mental midget. I don't think using a different strategy vs a big punching guy who's much bigger than you makes you a mental midget.

I know Loma fooled a lot of guys with 'new' techniques and a flashy, eye catching style and thay led to people saying he'd beat Sugar Rays on the same night and shit out Roberto Duran the next morning. While it was really overrated, it is still, very good.

 

I think lomachenko gives a good account of himself at 130lbs vs Mayweather Jr.

 

I mostly agree, but as you indirectly infer in your post, sometimes you do not need to be in the same tier to get a win (Marquez and Pac). No doubt Lomachenko is in a lower tier than Mayweather (at least now and most likely forever). And as you've stated, he has some pretty glaring flaws that even some relatively mediocre fighter like Campbell was able to exploit. But style wise, I feel he matches well with Mayweather. Enough to win?? I doubt it but I wouldn't be shocked either

 

Is marquez not in the same "tier" as pacquiao?

 

I'd definitely say he isn't.

 

For sure he isn't

 

I hope we all mean the same thing here.

Pac is a tier above JMM, right?

 

Pac is a tier above Marquez, despite JMM having his number.

 

Yeah, it's a stylistic thing IMO. Pac's Vernon Forrest.

Although, I've always thought giving Pacquiao any of the first three is completely reasonable - although I only had him winning the second.

 

In fairness Lomachenko has had very very few professional fights. Some guys have had careers within careers to learn and turn things around. When Floyd LOST [and he did LOST} to Castillo, it was shoulder issues. Castillo gave him the rematch he needed and even then it was close. When Loma loses to Lopez he's not allowed to talk about his shoulder and he's not offered a rematch.

I personally couldn't care less about Lomachenko, I never came on here touting him, same as GGG, I never really cared. Does Floyd beat him, Yes, but who is counting?

As for Mayweather I thought the purpose of the thread was which version of Floyd was best as regards the others? The answer to that is probably the heavier versions, 140 and upwards.

He wasn't a better fighter at 130 than he was at 147.

As far as which version of him goes furthest agains the GOATS of other eras then it has to be 130......anything over that he's running into stiffer and stiffer competition.

 

I find it really hard to see Floyd being better at 147 than 130. Especially if you're basing it on the fight with Castillo, which happened at 135 - and isn't worse than the fight with Maidana. Castillo also outweighed Floyd by 20lbs.

 

Pac is a tier above Marquez for the simple fact that Pac has a legit argument for being rated among the all-time top 10 P4P, while Marquez not so much. However, Marquez is an ATG in his own right (top 50, perhaps? - I've never attempted to make a list that long), and I think his win(s) over Pac put him in the discussion as the GOAT Mexican fighter alongside Chavez and Olivares.

 

I think he'd learned more and become rounded, polished.

 

Not even close to be honest, different stratosphere.

 

Marquez is definitely an ATG, top 50 is insane though. Maybe I'm too harsh but I can't even believe he would crack the the top 100

 

I'm sure that there aren't 100 fighters in history greater than Marquez, thats harsh.

I dunno where he would rank. Definitely not top 30 - but within the top 100.

 

marquez is the greatest of all time from mexico, unless you count duran

as for mayweather jr, apparently timothy bradley doesnt fancy his chances against a current welter

https://twitter.com/cobra_fade/status/1376623227263451141?s=20

 

I'm convinced that Bradley jerks off to Crawford weigh-in photos at night. The guy has a schoolgirl crush on Bud.

There's no basis for favoring Bud over Floyd, prime-for-prime.

The best win for one them remains Viktor Postol.

Its hard to speculate based on that, but I reckon Crawford gives a good account of himself at 147, but drops a clear decision.

At 140, I think Floyd would fuck him up, TBH.

 

Yeah, the TR broadcast are always hard to watch but especially so when Crawford fights. ''P4P, P4P'' or ''best in the world'' at every 10 seconds while Bud dispatch some overmatched scrub. Basically trying to manufacture greatness instead of making Bud earn it.

 

Bud is now on the cusp of facing the same man Floyd beat 6 years ago.

 

andre berto?

 

I'd have Marquez around the 100 mark. By that point, it's close enough to where you can argue him in or out.

 

I taut I taw a Panamanian. I did tee a Panamanian!!!

 

Who is this fucking Marquez dude?

 

No Hay Otro Como Duran, is the message of the day for anybody thinking of equating him with any other fighter.

 

Probably not, in the sense that others have outlined. Pac has a legitimate argument for being top 10-20 all time. JMM doesn't. That's probably the answer.

Having said that, JMM has always been, and continues to be, underrated IMO. The classic example has been given here, again - the idea that PAC was a much better fighter but that JMM simply 'has his number'. There is some truth to that to a point, but it really underrates the skills that JMM had to exploit the weaknesses in an ATG that other, arguably more revered fighters, came nowhere close to exploiting. And it wasn't like it was a one off. He has an argument for winning all four of their fights and his win in the fourth fight was an absolutely ATG kfto win. That's before you look at the rest of his resume, which was a good one. I loved watching him fight. He had a beautiful, in-the-pocket combination punching style matched with remarkable durability - he got out on his backside so many times and always seemed to just bounce back up.

I'd have him around the top 50 all-time, personally, though I'm not sure where or how.

MTF