Tank Davis vs Rolly Romero

Tank is in trouble if he fights Shakur. Look at the size difference. That's a matchup that will ONLY be winnable for Tank if they fight like right now. In another year, when Stevenson fills out more, I think he's an overwhelming favorite over Davis:

 

Shakur would be too much for Tank. Tank would have a puncher’s chance but the gap in skill and class is a bit much.

 

Yep.

Shakur’s Not Losing to a SMALLER Guy, and Tank’s Naturally Smaller, CLEARLY…





REED

 

I agree I can see Shakur losing as he moves up to 147. I can see a guy like Josh Taylor giving Shakur a run for his money.

 

We have no clue how Shakur would handle 140 yet. Premature to discuss Taylor. HOWEVER, if Shakur could handle 140 well, he would school Taylor.

Shakur has more talent in one testicle than Jack Catt has in his entire body.

 

Josh Taylor isn’t all that good. He can fight, but he’s limited.

 

I mean no, Josh is a good fighter. I would say "not all that good" sells him short. Is Taylor on Crawford, Spence, Usyk, Canelo level? Hell no.

Shakur is potentially special. So, if he can handle junior welter, he figures to be too talented for Josh.

It's premature though, cause we haven't even seen him at 135.

 

The gap between Taylor and Shakur in terms of ability isn't huge IMO; although it is decidedly in Shakur's favour. What'd mess Taylor up in a potential match-up is that Stevenson is an awful style for him.

Provided Stevenson can handle 135+.

 

His body sure looks like he can eventually handle 140.

Not that Shakur vs Josh will ever happen. By time Shakur is at 140, Josh will be at 147.

 

I think he'll likely cap at 140. Can't ever see him as a welterweight tbh. Unless he's a Mikey Garcia type welterweight. Doubt it though.

I'd be surprised if Stevenson ever fights any of the current 28-35 year old fighters. By the time he's in a position to get the fight, they'll probably be gone or ducking him.

 

Yeah, Shakur is too small for welterweight.

You really have to be a truly generational fighter to dominate at welter when you're a natural lightweight, and I'm specifically talking about Floyd, Whitaker, Duran, and Pac.

Shakur is fucking good, but he ain't Floyd, Duran, Whitaker, Pac good.

I excluded Mosley and DLH from that list, because those two were NOT really lightweights. Those are welterweights who fought at 135.

 

Neither of them dominated at welter anyway.

 

Floyd never dominated at Welter weight. You could argue Mosley was the man when he defeated Dela Hoya at 147. To say Mosley didn't dominated is misleading. It's a Lazy comment.

 

Mosley didn't dominate. He had two good wins a decade apart and a dozen close fights - most of which he lost - between.

Floyd certainly did a better job.

 

Well, maybe most of a dozen is hyperbolic, but you get my point.

Nobody going 50.50 against ranked fighters is 'dominating'.

 

That's very deceiving, and you know damn well why. As always, you're letting your Mosley hate distort reality.

Floyd's comp at 147 was nothing special at all.

Prime Mosley wipes Hatton, Baldomir, Victor Ortiz, and Maidana off the face of the Earth.

Floyd's two best wins during his entire Money May career came at 154 (Canelo and Cotto).

Wins over prime Oscar, and prime Margarito surpass any of Floyd's welterweight wins. Shane was a huge underdog in BOTH matchups.

Is Floyd a greater fighter than Mosley? Absolutely. But he accomplished nothing special at welter.

 

Mosley was dominant up until Forrest 1.

This is when it helps to have a bit of context. You might look back now and think of Floyd as head and shoulders above Mosley, but Floyd achieved that through longevity.

In 2001, Floyd wasn't even considered on Shane's level. Mosley and Jones were considered the absolute cream of the crop, and Floyd was thought of as a tier lower. Even AFTER Mayweather-Corrales, Floyd was still thought of as lesser than Shane. That changed following Forrest 1, but Floyd never fought a welterweight as good as Forrest, so no telling how he would have fared.

All that's to say you have a tendency to always write off Mosley like his whole career is a joke, and I get it, because by time you came around Mosley wasn't highly regarded. But he deserves a bit more respect from you because at his peak Floyd was viewed by 100% of the boxing world as inferior to Shane.

And how their actual fight went isn't much indicative of how it woulda gone if Floyd faced the circa 2000 Mosley. Cause we saw even an ancient Mosley rock Floyd. He was just too damn old and washed up to pull the trigger much after round 1.

 

To that above point, that's why I find Floyd so goddamn overrated. So much of his greatness is just based on his longevity. He outlasted all his contemporaries.

At his physical peak, he was never thought of as some God above everyone else. He was on Vitali's undercard at his peak for fuck's sake.

Floyd ONLY reached P4P #1 after two things happened - Jones losing to Tarver, followed by Hopkins losing to Taylor a year later. It was ONLY AFTER those two things occurred that we gave Floyd the P4P title.

He didn't do a goddamn thing to earn it. He inherited it because Roy and Hop got old. At the time, all the fuck he had done lately was beat Chop Chop, Henry Bumselles, and Gatti.

Mosley after beating Oscar had actually EARNED P4P #1. Roy earned P4P king in the 90s after the Toney win. Hopkins earned P4P #1 after the Tito fight.

Floyd was the DEFAULT P4P #1 when he reached it.

So once again, context is important, and Shane's being sold short. And Floyd, as always, is being overrated.

 

pbf never dominated at 147

 

I actually agree there and said as much if you read down.

Having said all that, despite Floyd being overrated, Shakur's never gonna be on his level.

Objectively, though I don't like Floyd, he was better at 21 than Shakur is now at 24.

 

Actually it was wald's undercard. Floyd vs. Castillo II was on the undercard of wald vs. McCline

 

wald pussy mcCline was the walk out fight. i left midway thru that horse shit

 

Ahhh shit. For some reason my brain told me it was the undercard of Vitali-Sanders. Now I remember.

 

Mosley never dominated DLH, and his opposition before Forrest I was shit, so the point is moot. He was then never rated the number one in his division after 2001... that isn't dominating.

I didn't even shit on Shane, nor do I dislike him. I just don't extremely overrate him. And no, I couldn't give a fuck what the boxing world thought in 2001. They were wrong, as time proved. Mayweather was always better, and has a better record at welter. Its not even really close; and so what if he achieved it by longevity? He still achieved it.

What backwards logic have you used to rate Mosley's win over Margarito higher than Mayweather's win over Mosley? Mosley so thoroughly out-classed Marg that he has to be rated as better, then lost his very next fight - by a complete schooling - to Mayweather. That's a better win. And Mayweather always beats Mosley. Mosley had a minute's success and it took Mayweather less than that to figure out why, then he out-classed him badly.

Mayweather is naturally a helluva lot smaller than Mosley. The fact he's held to the standard of never fighting a guy as good and big as Forrest - when Floyd was naturally three weight classes below Shane shows how much better he was.

 

Mayweather Jr would have lost to Forrest and Wright as well

And if they fought at lightweight when the fight was discussed, a Young Mayweather Jr would have lost to mosley

 

You forgot to add the fact that Mayweather-Mosley occurred well over a year after Mosley-Margarito.

If I'm remembering correctly, the former was Jan. 2009, while May-Mosley took place either May or Sept. of 2010, without looking at Boxrec.

The context i laid out and you ignored is important because it highlights how overrated Floyd is compared to his contemporaries.

And its fucking hilarious that you attempted to diminish Shane's Oscar win when the fact is that Shane beat a PEAK Oscar more convincingly than Floyd beat a well faded Oscar.

 

Floyd's track record at 135 was utterly underwhelming save for the Ndou fight. He dropped 4 fucking rounds to Victor Sosa. Shane would be dragged to this day if he were competitive with Victor Sosa at lightweight. Picture the flack a Whitaker or Duran would get if they were competitive at their peaks with a fighter as bang mediocre as Sosa.

I think anybody who believes Floyd handles Shane easily at lightweight is being totally unobjective. I fully agree. I'd pick Shane at 135.

 

The more I talk about Floyd the more I realize that even though I dont like, even I'VE been overrating him.

Christ Almighty the guy is overrated.

Make no mistake, he's the second best fighter I've ever witnessed in my boxing fandom lifetime (Roy being the best) but my God... theres a lot of holes in his resume when you dig into it.

Floyd only beat 4 quality fighters in their primes: Corrales, Castillo, Hatton, and Judah.

Everyone else was faded or in the case of Canelo, still green.

 

Floyd is overrated at 147 and above.

 

If you think Mosley fell to a level worse than Margarito in a year, that's whatever. He obviously didn't, and it's obviously not a better win.

Whether or not Mayweather fought on Wladimir's undercard isn't particularly important at all. Neither is public opinion of him in 2001. The 'context' you laid out, was just overrating mosley and hating on Mayweather.

No, he really didn't. Mayweather beat Oscar 116-112, Mosley beat him 115-113. And Mosley is the same size as De La Hoya, Mayweather isn't.