Floyd Mayweather vs The Four Kings

[FistofIron]

It’s sounding like anytime Mayweather has a bad fight or struggles he just had a bad night or wasn’t the best version.

[big_adventure]

It’s sounding like anytime Mayweather has a bad fight or struggles he just had a bad night or wasn’t the best version.

That's true of ALL fighters!

We don't say Tyson sucked because he lost to Douglas the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man when Tyson should have been in his prime. We don't discount what a beast he was earlier in his career just because it went off the rails. We allow that he was great, then was less great. There are reasons for both.

The biggest thing with Mayweather compared to... literally everyone else ever not named "Marciano" is that Mayweather's bad days still resulted in WINS. Leonard can't say that (40-3), Hagler can't say that (62-2D-3L), Hearns can't (62-5), Duran can't (103-16), Pac can't (62-7), Ali can't (56-5). Was Mayweather always dominant? Nope. But he LITERALLY always won as a pro, even on his off days. That's greatness there.

[Beadle]

That's true of ALL fighters!

We don't say Tyson sucked because he lost to Douglas the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man when Tyson should have been in his prime. We don't discount what a beast he was earlier in his career just because it went off the rails. We allow that he was great, then was less great. There are reasons for both.

The biggest thing with Mayweather compared to... literally everyone else ever not named "Marciano" is that Mayweather's bad days still resulted in WINS. Leonard can't say that (40-3), Hagler can't say that (62-2D-3L), Hearns can't (62-5), Duran can't (103-16), Pac can't (62-7), Ali can't (56-5). Was Mayweather always dominant? Nope. But he LITERALLY always won as a pro, even on his off days. That's greatness there.

*cough* Joe Calzaghe *cough*

[FistofIron]

That's true of ALL fighters!

We don't say Tyson sucked because he lost to Douglas the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man when Tyson should have been in his prime. We don't discount what a beast he was earlier in his career just because it went off the rails. We allow that he was great, then was less great. There are reasons for both.

The biggest thing with Mayweather compared to... literally everyone else ever not named "Marciano" is that Mayweather's bad days still resulted in WINS. Leonard can't say that (40-3), Hagler can't say that (62-2D-3L), Hearns can't (62-5), Duran can't (103-16), Pac can't (62-7), Ali can't (56-5). Was Mayweather always dominant? Nope. But he LITERALLY always won as a pro, even on his off days. That's greatness there.

The Tyson example is a terrible one. There’s a difference between not training and your opponent giving you a tough fight.

[Little_Mac]

That's true of ALL fighters!

We don't say Tyson sucked because he lost to Douglas the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man when Tyson should have been in his prime. We don't discount what a beast he was earlier in his career just because it went off the rails. We allow that he was great, then was less great. There are reasons for both.

The biggest thing with Mayweather compared to... literally everyone else ever not named "Marciano" is that Mayweather's bad days still resulted in WINS. Leonard can't say that (40-3), Hagler can't say that (62-2D-3L), Hearns can't (62-5), Duran can't (103-16), Pac can't (62-7), Ali can't (56-5). Was Mayweather always dominant? Nope. But he LITERALLY always won as a pro, even on his off days. That's greatness there.

My major argument with this is that Mayweather never fought anyone in his later career until he KNEW that he could beat him. His promotional delay tactics are legendary (Manny Pac, etc). He waited until the other fighters showed some slippage or fault in other fights before he would agreed to find them. He opted for "safe" fights and easy money. So, in this scenario, I can't give him that credit.

Mayweather wins ALL rematches. His tactical game/fight strategy is brilliant. But I have him as a slight underdog against Hagler/Leonard. He's light for his weight class. I feel that both of them is going to score big on him in the early rounds (One knockdown) and force him to come from behind late. He haven't proven that he can knock someone out when trailing in a fight. He will not get the benefit of the doubt from the judges when facing those two.

[big_adventure]

My major argument with this is that Mayweather never fought anyone in his later career until he KNEW that he could beat him. His promotional delay tactics are legendary (Manny Pac, etc). He waited until the other fighters showed some slippage or fault in other fights before he would agreed to find them. He opted for "safe" fights and easy money. So, in this scenario, I can't give him that credit.

Mayweather wins ALL rematches. His tactical game/fight strategy is brilliant. But I have him as a slight underdog against Hagler/Leonard. He's light for his weight class. I feel that both of them is going to score big on him in the early rounds (One knockdown) and force him to come from behind late. He haven't proven that he can knock someone out when trailing in a fight. He will not get the benefit of the doubt from the judges when facing those two.

I stated on my initial analysis that it was only valid if they were all the same weight class. Most of Mayweather's career, he was a LOT lighter than Leonard and Hagler were during theirs, so if this were done as a straight prime versus prime thing, you'd have to allow for the extra 12 to 16 lbs they were carrying.

I do not think that Mayweather fighting as a lightweight would do as well at all against Hagler as a middleweight.

I'm fair with calling him even-ish with Hagler (big reach edge, big hitting power edge) and Leonard (stupidly durable, excellent technique, quickness, and a better showman). But not against Duran and Hearns - he'd just punk those guys the vast majority, both of them would get stupidly frustrated with never landing a hit.

And for the first point, sure, he was smart. Especially late. He wanted to give a show and get the payday. He also had no reason at all to take something not on his terms - he was the biggest draw in PPV history, he made more money on this than anyone ever, he never lost a fight, and that includes something ridiculous like 24 or 25 title fights. He had literally no reason at all to take offers that didn't meet his needs. More power to the guy, even if all of us would have loved to see him fight Pacquaio years earlier. Saying that, I have literally no doubt that he would have beaten Pac like a drum, any day of any year. He was just that much better.

[Little_Mac]

I stated on my initial analysis that it was only valid if they were all the same weight class. Most of Mayweather's career, he was a LOT lighter than Leonard and Hagler were during theirs, so if this were done as a straight prime versus prime thing, you'd have to allow for the extra 12 to 16 lbs they were carrying.

I do not think that Mayweather fighting as a lightweight would do as well at all against Hagler as a middleweight.

I'm fair with calling him even-ish with Hagler (big reach edge, big hitting power edge) and Leonard (stupidly durable, excellent technique, quickness, and a better showman). But not against Duran and Hearns - he'd just punk those guys the vast majority, both of them would get stupidly frustrated with never landing a hit.

And for the first point, sure, he was smart. Especially late. He wanted to give a show and get the payday. He also had no reason at all to take something not on his terms - he was the biggest draw in PPV history, he made more money on this than anyone ever, he never lost a fight, and that includes something ridiculous like 24 or 25 title fights. He had literally no reason at all to take offers that didn't meet his needs. More power to the guy, even if all of us would have loved to see him fight Pacquaio years earlier. Saying that, I have literally no doubt that he would have beaten Pac like a drum, any day of any year. He was just that much better.

Minor point: If you check Floyd weight during the weigh-ins, he is always under the weight limit with room to spare. He doesn't bulk up much after the weight-in either. Hagler/Leonard is going to probably outweight him by 10-15 pounds min at fight-time.

Floyd's used to it and it normally isn't a factor in the fights. With Hagler/Leonard, it's a factor. In this scenario, Floyd doesn't have the ability to force them to match weight at fight-time.

(And yes, Floyd is maybe the smartest fighter/greatest businessman that ever lived. But I refuse to call him the GOAT with that strategy.)

[FistofIron]

I stated on my initial analysis that it was only valid if they were all the same weight class. Most of Mayweather's career, he was a LOT lighter than Leonard and Hagler were during theirs, so if this were done as a straight prime versus prime thing, you'd have to allow for the extra 12 to 16 lbs they were carrying.

I do not think that Mayweather fighting as a lightweight would do as well at all against Hagler as a middleweight.

I'm fair with calling him even-ish with Hagler (big reach edge, big hitting power edge) and Leonard (stupidly durable, excellent technique, quickness, and a better showman). But not against Duran and Hearns - he'd just punk those guys the vast majority, both of them would get stupidly frustrated with never landing a hit.

And for the first point, sure, he was smart. Especially late. He wanted to give a show and get the payday. He also had no reason at all to take something not on his terms - he was the biggest draw in PPV history, he made more money on this than anyone ever, he never lost a fight, and that includes something ridiculous like 24 or 25 title fights. He had literally no reason at all to take offers that didn't meet his needs. More power to the guy, even if all of us would have loved to see him fight Pacquaio years earlier. Saying that, I have literally no doubt that he would have beaten Pac like a drum, any day of any year. He was just that much better.

Dude you are severely underestimating Hearns speed. If he can handle Leonard’s speed then he can definitely handle Mayweather’s. Especially at 154. I can see Hearns doing what De La Hoya did against Floyd. The difference is Hearns isn’t going to fade.

[grampagen]

I'm fair with calling him even-ish with Hagler (big reach edge, big hitting power edge) and Leonard (stupidly durable, excellent technique, quickness, and a better showman). But not against Duran and Hearns - he'd just punk those guys the vast majority, both of them would get stupidly frustrated with never landing a hit.

As the old cliche goes, 'styles make fights'.

Duran, likely. His go-to in earlier rounds was to pry apart guards to sap stamina for close-in fights, then go in for the finish. Floyd wouldn't let him get started

Hearns, I'd have to disagree. He has a 15cm armspan advantage on Floyd and was notorious for his power, and these are the same advantages you listed for Hagler. It's possibly Floyd would adapt to him on the fly in some manner, but I'm at a loss to how. It'd be difficult for him to get in, so would lining up a pull-counter on someone of Hearns' build as he dominates the outside game.

[big_adventure]

Dude you are severely underestimating Hearns speed. If he can handle Leonard’s speed then he can definitely handle Mayweather’s. Especially at 154. I can see Hearns doing what De La Hoya did against Floyd. The difference is Hearns isn’t going to fade.

First: I stipulated that they's be fighting at equal weights in my analysis. I don't mean "Mayweather adds 16 lbs of fat and water to be equal" - I mean "if these guys legitimately fought at the same weight."

As far as underestimating Hearns, I'm really not - I watched a ton of both guys fight, and Hearns was great and by no means slow, but Floyd is arguably the fastest boxer ever. Leonard was not as quick or as fast. He was both, clearly, cmpared to most fighters, but less so than Mayweather. He also hit harder and had a visibly tougher head, given the number of times he was beaten and battered and kept on coming. I don't see Mayweather getting many KOs against any of these guys, but DEFINITELY not against Suger Ray.

Anyway, Leonard beat Hearns and then drew. Hearns "handling" of Leonard's quickness involved all of him just not winning.

I want to make clear that I'm not saying any of these guys are bad or slow. Mayweather is just a better tactician and better defender - titles he holds on basically everyone who has ever engaged in the fight game.

To me, his edges are enough to give him the vast majority against Duran (9/10), a solid majority against Hearns (7-7.5/10), and equal-ish performances against Hagler and Leonard (slight edges, in my mind, still to Floyd because of his amazing tactical game, but only like 5.5-6/10 or so). And none of them would ever want anything to do with Mayweather in a rematch. Once that dude has seen your style up close and personal, you're never coming close again.

Once again, this is talking about legit even-class fights, both sides in their prime.

[big_adventure]

Hearns, I'd have to disagree. He has a 15cm armspan advantage on Floyd and was notorious for his power, and these are the same advantages you listed for Hagler. It's possibly Floyd would adapt to him on the fly in some manner, but I'm at a loss to how. It'd be difficult for him to get in, so would lining up a pull-counter on someone of Hearns' build as he dominates the outside game.

True, but Hearns is neither as quick, nor as good a boxer as Hagler.

Saying "punked" might has been rough. The post just above I clarify my positions. Hearns would definitely be worse than Duran for Mayweather. Which is normal: Hearns was just better than Duran, and theoretically has the tools to at least slightly interfere with Mayweather's game. So to coalesce: I'd go with Mayweather over Duran 9/10, over Hearns 7-7.5/10, and edges around 5.5-6 over Hagler and Leonard.

Mileage, as has been stated, may vary.

[Little_Mac]

First: I stipulated that they's be fighting at equal weights in my analysis. I don't mean "Mayweather adds 16 lbs of fat and water to be equal" - I mean "if these guys legitimately fought at the same weight."

As far as underestimating Hearns, I'm really not - I watched a ton of both guys fight, and Hearns was great and by no means slow, but Floyd is arguably the fastest boxer ever. Leonard was not as quick or as fast. He was both, clearly, cmpared to most fighters, but less so than Mayweather. He also hit harder and had a visibly tougher head, given the number of times he was beaten and battered and kept on coming. I don't see Mayweather getting many KOs against any of these guys, but DEFINITELY not against Suger Ray.

Anyway, Leonard beat Hearns and then drew. Hearns "handling" of Leonard's quickness involved all of him just not winning.

I want to make clear that I'm not saying any of these guys are bad or slow. Mayweather is just a better tactician and better defender - titles he holds on basically everyone who has ever engaged in the fight game.

To me, his edges are enough to give him the vast majority against Duran (9/10), a solid majority against Hearns (7-7.5/10), and equal-ish performances against Hagler and Leonard (slight edges, in my mind, still to Floyd because of his amazing tactical game, but only like 5.5-6/10 or so). And none of them would ever want anything to do with Mayweather in a rematch. Once that dude has seen your style up close and personal, you're never coming close again.

Once again, this is talking about legit even-class fights, both sides in their prime.

You are missing the point, Big Adventure.

We are talking about them fighting at the same weight-class. The issue is THE weigh-in. Most fighters dehydrates themselves for the weigh-in and then gain weight rapidly for the fight. All I'm saying is that Floyd was fairly consistent with his weight in both cases. He came into the fighter near the same weight that he was in at the weigh-in.

If you want to state that the weight-in never happens and both fighters stays at same weight, that's fine. I was going to the more traditional approach when at fight time, both fighters are usually legitimately over the weight class that they are fighting in.

[big_adventure]

You are missing the point, Big Adventure.

We are talking about them fighting at the same weight-class. The issue is THE weigh-in. Most fighters dehydrates themselves for the weigh-in and then gain weight rapidly for the fight. All I'm saying is that Floyd was fairly consistent with his weight in both cases. He came into the fighter near the same weight that he was in at the weigh-in.

If you want to state that the weight-in never happens and both fighters stays at same weight, that's fine. I was going to the more traditional approach when at fight time, both fighters are usually legitimately over the weight class that they are fighting in.

I hear you, and know precisely what you mean, but if we do that, it's really hard to compare these guys. Floyd, at his prime, was flyweight to welterweight. Hagler was middleweight. If you just take prime Floyd and prime Marvelous (his legal first name, don't forget), Hagler wins. This whole premise was based on them being equal class fighters. And the difference of 5 to 8 pounds for one to the other wouldn't be an insurmountable deal - nothing like 12 to 20 would be.