How would you rate the SIGNIFICANCE of Mayweather vs Pacquiao?

Should the fight come off?

I really believe that this fight is THE most significant non-heavyweight fight in history.

When have you ever had the undoubted P4P #1 and #2 go at it?

You have Pacquiao..a true phenomenon winning titles from Flyweight to Jnr Middle..knocking men out that are twice his size..and you have Floyd who's won titles from 130 to 154 and who is still undefeated after fighting guys like Corrales, Castillo, De La Hoya, Mosley, Hatton, Judah etc...


Personally I would rank the significance of this fight above the following:

Leonard Hearns 1
Chavez Whitaker
Hagler Leonard
Leonard Duran 1
Jones Toney


and I think it rivals Ali-Frazier 1 and Louis-Schmeling 2

 

I hope Pacquiao doesn't fight him. At this point, PBF should have lost his chance.

 

If this fight comes off it will be the biggest fight I have ever had the privilege of watching.

 

cool......

but answer the question.

 

At least as significant as Duran - Leonard 1 and Hagler - Hearns.

 

I'd rate Duran-Leonard I as the most significant fight ever, historically. The Charles-Moore , Pep-Saddler & first Hearns-Leonard fights coming next. I think this might rate slightly below the 2nd group along with fights like Chavez-Whitaker, Jones-Hopkins, Ali-Foreman, Greb-Tunney etc.

Obviously I rate fights on their historical significance in terms intrinsic to the sport rather than the size of the fights in terms of public interest.

 

What made SRL/Duran so significant? Duran had barely accomplished anything in the welterweight division before facing SRL. And SRL, had one significant win under his belt.

 

This is a fight with immediate all time great significance to it. I don't think any other fight can claim that, unless you count the Ali vs Marciano computer fight.

Most of the fights listed were proven historically significant after the fact.

 

No offense dude but this is another one of these questions you ask that I really resent having to answer on the grounds of the answer being so obvious to it's just too tedious to type. If you disagree fine, but you know exactly what Im gonna say, why ask?

Greatest lightweight ever against another of the top 10 fighters of all time, both prime, both at 100% etc. Extremely historically significant fight; probably the greatest aggregation of boxing talent in a ring at one time.

 

Well said.

 

In my opinion this is the biggest fight ever and clearly so when we judge its significance to the sport itself. No other time two fighters who were as clearly the two best in the world, who both had already an all-time great career and both were a close to their primes, have fought each other.

 

:Giggle:..I like the way you put that.

 

anyway..hut hut...May-Pac is CLEARLY more significant a fight than Leonard-Duran 1 was. Clearly. Shouldn't even be a discussion.

Leonard was somewhat GREEN at the time of that fight (Benitez his only big win at the time) and Duran had never fought at Welterweight.

Don't be silly.

 

Correct. Looking back that fight was huge but at the time it wasn't close to this

 

Historical significance, not significance at the time. It's no longer 1980 we can judge that fight in it's complete context now. Manny and Floyd are both near the end so we can judge this fight in close to it's complete context too. And Floyd is past his prime. That precludes it form being the most meaningful fight ever IMO.

I also think both Duran & Leonard beat both Pacquaio and Floyd at welterweight. Opinions are like assholes. Mines no more or less silly or smelly than yours here ::

 

yeah. knew what you were going to say - well, was pretty sure i knew. and as it turns out, i was right. which is exactly why i disagree with the claim. i was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you had some alternate explanation i hadn't thought of that could possibly explain how/why SRL/Duran I was so historically significant.

agree to disagree.

 

It wasn't as big as Tyson-Lewis either. As I said, it isn't 1980 anymore, we don't have to feign suspense as if we're watching the movie for the first time.

 

Both are top 5-7 of all time fighters. Both prime, both without any injuries or problems. I don't see any precedent in boxing history prior to it, and Floyd-Pac won't equal that combination of factors either.

IMO, you can only disagree if you're judging by entirely different criteria to me, which is of course fair enough.

 

"Historical significance, not significance at the time. It's no longer 1980 we can judge that fight in it's complete context now. "

With that logic we have to put Jones vs Hopkins 1 up there too...when you consider they were both young and in prime condition and considering what each achieved since then. But should we really do that? Significance at the time that they fought is what's important.

"And Floyd is past his prime. That precludes it form being the most meaningful fight ever IMO."

Floyd may be past his prime..but because he's still undefeated...that doesn't matter. Both are still on top of their games in terms of relative to their peers. THAT'S what matters here.

 

Agreed.

 

Yup, you understand! I do put Jones Hopkins very close to the top in terms of historical significance.:mj: Floyd-Pac is on that level, IMO.

 

Well you are consistent and so I respect your viewpoint although I disagree.

 

Even looking back I fail to see its great historical significance.

For Duran, it was a great achievement, especially in retrospect. But he was beaten by SRL almost immediately afterwards in the rematch.

For SRL, the fact he lost the fight to Duran turned out to be insignificant not only because of the rematch, but because of his subsequent accomplishments.

As for Duran, his legacy was largely cemented even before facing SRL - he was more famous at the time than SRL.

Obviously, the win helped Duran's legacy. But it didn't make it. And SRL's wasn't broken by the loss.

It was a decent fight - wasn't an all-time exciting fight.

I just don't get it.

 

Entire Leonard-Duran 1 fight is on youtube btw...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SwxhqOpA1M

 

It was a great fight, one of the best ever. Brilliant mesh of styles with 2 fighters at their peak.

It was a very significant win for Duran, beating a prime Leonard, the best win of his career actually. An incredible 15 round performance, with him still bouncing around in the 15th round.

The rematch is less significant. Ray got the W, but against a Duran that was downright disinterested compared to the one that showed up on fire in Montreal.

The rematch is mainly significant because Duran quit, producing the infamous No Mas stigma.

If you can't see that the fight is very, very significant, and one of the rare matches between two of the greatest fighters ever at their best, then I don't know what to say.

 

Duran's legacy was cemented by the Leonard win, no doubt. Without it, he's a top 20 guy alongside your Arguello's of the world, with it he's top 5. It'd take a really dominant win from Floyd or Pac to change either's historical regard by that kind of margin going into this one, if it's even possible.

 

What he said. If you don't see it then I don't even know where to begin in explaining it. We're clearly coming from different compass points.

 

How was the rematch less significant? It happened right after the first so they both were as good, the first fight had been a classic and proved that they both were greats and it ended via very close decision, which left things to be settled. The fight itself wasn't as good of course as Ray used his brain and proved to be on different level, but as a fight it was as big

 

YAWN

again, if you need it explained the conversation is pointless. People making obvious points/asking obvious questions that bait obvious answers they already know are coming in advance is really rather annoying.

 

Neither Leonard and Duran were regarded as top 20 all time locks at that point in time. PBF and Pacquaio (top 10 perhaps) are going into this fight.