IF FLOYD BEATS MANNY DOES HE BECOME TOP 10 ATG ???

First topic message reminder :

...Me I think he's top 10 already but fairplay some intelligent posters regard him outside. Simple question....

If Floyd beats Manny is he an automatic Top 10 choice....and if not why not??

imperialghosty wrote:You can switch the argument and ask what is harder to do beat Baldomir for the 147lb title or Maxim for the 175lb title.

Go back to Robinsons era with the same fighters etc. but include all 17 divisions with the WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO and Ring titles and I think it's reasonable to say he'd be a 7 weight world champion. That of course didn't happen because he didn't have the opportunity to do and i've always rated wins over multi weight exploits.

Hard to beat Maxim for the 175lbs title. That was an easy one ghosty

Truss do have to wonder how much stock you can put in him beating modern P4P'ers when on the old 606 you have described one of the reasons we should be thankful for Floyd is standing out in an era of mediocrity.

If this era is indeed mediocre is beating P4P'ers, particularly in a couple of cases outside their best weight class really such a big deal.

I used Fritzie as an example...The suggestion is that oldtimers could clean up all the jr divisions today and I just said Oscar at 154 was nobodies fool..

Like I said too simplistic..

Talented as he is I don't think he's been dominant enough or in the last five years taken on big enough challenges. I'm a huge fan if his ability and 100% certain he'd have taken cotto's '0' and beaten marg back in '08 had he stepped up, but he's not a natural risk taker - either in terms of opponent choice or fighting style. I think this counts against him. If he beats manny, no matter how emphatically, I'd still say top 15 at a push.

To be honest if you reverse it and say 'if manny beats floyd' then I think that win would definitely make manny a top ten atg, as he has a better resume and has achieved more in his career, a win o er floyd would cement him as a top ten in my eyes, whereas a win for floyd still wouldn't be quite enough.

imperialghosty wrote:You can switch the argument and ask what is harder to do beat Baldomir for the 147lb title or Maxim for the 175lb title.

Go back to Robinsons era with the same fighters etc. but include all 17 divisions with the WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO and Ring titles and I think it's reasonable to say he'd be a 7 weight world champion. That of course didn't happen because he didn't have the opportunity to do and i've always rated wins over multi weight exploits.

You don't need to look at alphabet belts to consider Hatton was the best LWW, Mosley at Welter (Pacquiao too in this scenario), and Oscar at LMW.

Sugar Boy Sweetie wrote:Talented as he is I don't think he's been dominant enough or in the last five years taken on big enough challenges. I'm a huge fan if his ability and 100% certain he'd have taken cotto's '0' and beaten marg back in '08 had he stepped up, but he's not a natural risk taker - either in terms of opponent choice or fighting style. I think this counts against him. If he beats manny, no matter how emphatically, I'd still say top 15 at a push.

To be honest if you reverse it and say 'if manny beats floyd' then I think that win would definitely make manny a top ten atg, as he has a better resume and has achieved more in his career, a win o er floyd would cement him as a top ten in my eyes, whereas a win for floyd still wouldn't be quite enough.

And he is the naturally smaller boxer.

I was regarding the immediate era as one of mediocrity....Take Manny and him out of the equation there isn't much....

However guys like DelaHoya, Baldomir were good fighters and grace any record...as was Hatton....

"Mediocrity" is all about context...If there are ten good fighters around as compared to fifty in the nineties then it's mediocre..

Not to say that Floyd didn't beat a few of the ten!!!

all about context Rowley..You should have been a politician.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Tell me who has then????

If you look at all the old fighters and figure in who was a challenger and champion at the time..it's hard to see how any of them could have beaten 4 top 10 p4pers of their day...even Robbo and Ali..

Should think only Frazier, Liston and Foreman could be included...for Ali!!

How about that Pacquiao guy?

Barrera x 2, Morales, Marquez, Hatton, Cotto

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine%27s_Annual_Ratings:_Pound_For_Pound--2000s

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I used Fritzie as an example...The suggestion is that oldtimers could clean up all the jr divisions today and I just said Oscar at 154 was nobodies fool..

Like I said too simplistic..

I'm not saying transport the old timers to today and watch them clean out rather they would have cleaned out in their era. For what its worth think Robinson has nightmares with Hopkins who genuinely is an ATG who would be in with a fair chance against anyone between 160-175lbs.

If you hadn't noticed i'm backing up what you're saying, I rate the old timers but I don't rate them higher because of it, Mayweather gives anyone between 130-154lbs a good fight, only have Robinson, Leonard, Hearns and McCallum beating him comfortably.

Not sure why your so excited about that D4, could easily have compared Maxim to Cotto, Margarito or Hatton instead of Baldomir

I was thinking more about bonafide fights and not where a guy bleeds a guy dry like Leonard-Lalonde!!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I used Fritzie as an example...The suggestion is that oldtimers could clean up all the jr divisions today and I just said Oscar at 154 was nobodies fool..

Like I said too simplistic..

Bit like your condescending argument.

Cheers

Rodders

Baldomir

They have been some great fighters in this era.

Hopkins, Jones, Calzaghe, Marquez, Martinez, Donaire

Scottrf wrote:

imperialghosty wrote:You can switch the argument and ask what is harder to do beat Baldomir for the 147lb title or Maxim for the 175lb title.

Go back to Robinsons era with the same fighters etc. but include all 17 divisions with the WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO and Ring titles and I think it's reasonable to say he'd be a 7 weight world champion. That of course didn't happen because he didn't have the opportunity to do and i've always rated wins over multi weight exploits.

You don't need to look at alphabet belts to consider Hatton was the best LWW, Mosley at Welter (Pacquiao too in this scenario), and Oscar at LMW.

Hatton and Mosley were without doubt the number one in their respective divisions but how often do we consider someone a world champion nowadays without them beating the recognized number one?

Why am I being condescending........You're the one with the attitude..

You seem to have changed......lately.

The oldtimers couldn't just clean up today..

imperialghosty wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

imperialghosty wrote:You can switch the argument and ask what is harder to do beat Baldomir for the 147lb title or Maxim for the 175lb title.

Go back to Robinsons era with the same fighters etc. but include all 17 divisions with the WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO and Ring titles and I think it's reasonable to say he'd be a 7 weight world champion. That of course didn't happen because he didn't have the opportunity to do and i've always rated wins over multi weight exploits.

You don't need to look at alphabet belts to consider Hatton was the best LWW, Mosley at Welter (Pacquiao too in this scenario), and Oscar at LMW.

Hatton and Mosley were without doubt the number one in their respective divisions but how often do we consider someone a world champion nowadays without them beating the recognized number one?

Of course, my point was just that he hasn't been picking up belts for the sake of it, he's beat a lot of guys who would be considered the strongest and would likely be the world champion if there was only one. It would obviously be misleading to say he's won X belts in X divisions and compare him to someone in the past based on just that, but don't think that's the argument anyone has made. He's probably suffered from the proliferation on belts in his ranking, although benefited from the increase in divisions.

Which is exactly why world titles mean so little now, beating Mosley without a title on the line means more than beating Gatti for one.

Pacquiao has destroyed much of Floyd's legacy, without Pacquiao, Floyd would have pointed to his wins over Oscar, Hatton and Mosley to say he beat top fighters. But Pacquiao has dismantled the myth of Oscar and Hatton being great fighters at that time by destroying them vastly more impressive than Floyd. If Pacquiao does the same to Mosley then all Mayweather has to hang his coat on is beating Mad Zab, Bordomir and his super-feather career, hardly ATG top 50 let alone top 10.

Scotty is on the money...The guy's record has a positive answer to every question and yet the inquisitors keep changing the wording to try to smokescreen giving him just due..

Nicely done D4 you've just discredited most of Pacquiaos recent wins

Not sure if we're on the same page or not here Truss?

imperialghosty wrote:Which is exactly why world titles mean so little now, beating Mosley without a title on the line means more than beating Gatti for one.

Such a shame really, we can read back about the lineage of divisions from the past and they are relatively clean. Look back to this era and I'm not sure how you could explain most of it.

Paccy has destroyed Floyd's legacy.....

Dear oh dear..How by beating his sloppy seconds!!!

By being slapped by Marquez and losing to Morales ????

Just don't!!!!!

Pacman fought ODLH's corpse

It is confusing as hell nowadays, very rarely does someone put beyond any doubt that they are the main man at a division. The main reason I feel Hopkins will be remembered more fondly than any of these weight hoppers.

D4 makes a great point. Similarly Trevor Berbick destroyed Frazier's legacy by beating Ali better than he did.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Paccy has destroyed Floyd's legacy.....

Dear oh dear..How by beating his sloppy seconds!!!

By being slapped by Marquez and losing to Morales ????

Just don't!!!!!

Floyd we leave behind a legacy of ducking, he is definitely an top 10 ATG ducker.

Floyd could only get a SD against Oscar, he level on the scorecard against Hatton at the half way point in there fight, Pacquiao blitz both of them.

You seem unfair to Weight hoppers...

I'll say it again......I'd rather have seen Hagler take on Spinks than defend four times in a row against Hamsho, Obelmijas and Vito etc..

Hoppo is an atg but he shouldn't be above Jones jr who sought challenges..

Do you notice how everyone can debate this sensibly without letting personal dislike get in the way other than one person?

Just to remind you, D4, that this thread concerns Floyd's status IF HE BEATS PACQUIAO.

If you mention ducking one more time.....

I'm not unfair to them if they beat the best available, I don't agree with moving to a weight and beating a weak champion for a title.

I'd rather have seen Hagler move up to fight Spinks but not everyone has the possibility of doing it, Hagler was ripped at 160lbs as it was.

D4thincarnation wrote:Pacquiao has destroyed much of Floyd's legacy, without Pacquiao, Floyd would have pointed to his wins over Oscar, Hatton and Mosley to say he beat top fighters. But Pacquiao has dismantled the myth of Oscar and Hatton being great fighters at that time by destroying them vastly more impressive than Floyd. If Pacquiao does the same to Mosley then all Mayweather has to hang his coat on is beating Mad Zab, Bordomir and his super-feather career, hardly ATG top 50 let alone top 10.

Oh dear oh dear. You should be sternly beaten with a fence post for even contemplating this utterly cack argument.

D4thincarnation wrote:Floyd could only get a SD against Oscar

I think that judge had a doctors appointment and had to fill in his card before he left.

Who's the one person....and who does he hate???

imperialghosty wrote:It is confusing as hell nowadays, very rarely does someone put beyond any doubt that they are the main man at a division. The main reason I feel Hopkins will be remembered more fondly than any of these weight hoppers.

Pacquiao has cleaned out 147lbs.

When Pacquiao move up to welter he was ranked no.5 by your bible. The 4 fighters above him were, Cotto, Margarito, Clottey and Mosley.

Who has Pacquiao beaten since moving up?

Floyd on the other hand has ducked all the top contenders, has taking long breaks from boxing and has Pacquiao trump him in his best victories, will not make top 20 even if he somehow manages to beat Pacquiao, which will never happen.

It's annoying that we're having a sensible debate about something for once and one person decides to ruin it.

Out of interest Truss where have you got Mayweather at the current time?

He fought Oscar at 154 mate..pity Manny didn't....

Notice Leonard didn't make Hagler come in at 153 after he hadn't been below 160 for years..

Leave it out....Floyd fought at Oscar's weight.

Scottrf wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:Floyd could only get a SD against Oscar

I think that judge had a doctors appointment and had to fill in his card before he left.

Floyd's dad had Oscar winning by two round as well

So, if Floyd beats Pacquiao ..........................

Windy can you do something about this, it's getting beyond a joke now, how are we meant to debate when we have someone seeking to ruin it for the rest of us.

D4thincarnation wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:Floyd could only get a SD against Oscar

I think that judge had a doctors appointment and had to fill in his card before he left.

Floyd's dad had Oscar winning by two round as well

The same man who you have told us time and again speaks utter rubbish when he slanders Pacquiao? Now we're supposed to believe that his word is gospel, because it suits you.

I have Mayweather at 10 Ghosty.........Think the top 6 or 7 are pretty safe...

Skill, longevity, titles and victories wise i think he deserves a slot around ten..

But it's all about opinions.

imperialghosty wrote:Windy can you do something about this, it's getting beyond a joke now, how are we meant to debate when we have someone seeking to ruin it for the rest of us.

Yes, let's get back on topic.

Shame Pacquiao won't step up to the challenge of refusing the PED-use allegations against him in the clearest manner possible; namely by submitting to a iddy biddy drug test. What's the big deal? No harm in a little prick, right D4?

What I find interesting in all this is that we judge boxers not solely on what they've done, but what they've not done. We all praise Ayrton Senna for his achievements, but no-one points out that if he'd been a little better on the corners his career needn't have stalled.

Or as Scotty would say "Let's get back to basics"

I've got him at around 17/18 at the moment but in time can imagine him moving up a few places, it's people like Chavez who I find difficult to rate in comparison but like you my top 9/10 are fairly safe for now.

A win over Pacquiao would push him upto to around 11/12

BALTIMORA wrote:Shame Pacquiao won't step up to the challenge of refusing the PED-use allegations against him in the clearest manner possible; namely by submitting to a iddy biddy drug test. What's the big deal? No harm in a little prick, right D4?

What I find interesting in all this is that we judge boxers not solely on what they've done, but what they've not done. We all praise Ayrton Senna for his achievements, but no-one points out that if he'd been a little better on the corners his career needn't have stalled.

Then to improve the situation we get comments like this, works both ways

Senna's car was faulty................He did brilliantly to try to correct it as quickly as he did...

Wasn't his fault the crash....Pretty poor and tasteless analogy.

Ok, ok, it was uncalled-for, but I've just read through this thread on the bus home and by Christ, if it isn't apparent that one particular person will lie, backtrack and manipulate in order to ruin a thread, then nothing ever will be.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Senna's car was faulty................He did brilliantly to try to correct it as quickly as he did...

Wasn't his fault the crash....Pretty poor and tasteless analogy.

Was Ratzenberger's car faulty too?