Floyd Mayweather is in my top 3 of all time let the hate begin!

[joseph5620]

But if it was a 12 round fight it would be a totally different fight.

Very true and a lot of people fail to realize that.

[Johnwoo8686]

Canelo wasn't a two division champion at 23.

Benitez beat Cervantes clearly and nobody really thinks Palamino won. Even the judge that gave Palamino the fight said "The sun was in my eyes" when he was quizzed on his crazy score card.

Benitez is not only brought up when Hearns and Leonard are discussed. He's the youngest ever world champion (and he was a much more legit champ than Canelo who was gifted his first title), he has three clear wins over three hall of famers and was one of the best fighters of his generation which is considered one of the greatest in Boxing history. He's always talked about when people talk about the best defensive fighters ever and among the most naturally talented fighters ever. He's also one of the greatest Puerto Rican fighters ever and one of the greatest Latino fighters in general.

Canelo barely got by the much smaller, older Cotto what's he going to do with the Duran that showed up for title fights like the one we saw against Moore or Barkley and the one who gave Hagler hell? Against that 23 year old Canelo who was still very raw? He wrecks him.

Canelo is also the youngest light middleweight champion in history. He has several wins against guy who mot certainly will be in the hall of fame in Mosley and Cotto, and if he beats Golovkin in their rematch that will be another notch on his resume.

Duran got beat soundly by Hagler in my eyes, no one even talks about that really being a competitive fight.
We can agree to disagree on who would have won if Duran and Canelo fought or who has the better resume between Canelo and Benitez at the same age. In my opinion Canelo at 27 has the better resume than Benitiez had at the same age if we are counting win and losses.

We also have to remember Floyd was in his fifth weight class and past his prime when he fought Canelo while Leonard was in his prime and at his first weight class when he fought Duran and Benitez. If you can beat a younger, bigger, stronger champion in your fifth weight class that is quite an accomplishment.

[chrisJS]

Canelo is also the youngest light middleweight champion in history. He has several wins against guy who mot certainly will be in the hall of fame in Mosley and Cotto, and if he beats Golovkin in their rematch that will be another notch on his resume.

Duran got beat soundly by Hagler in my eyes, no one even talks about that really being a competitive fight.
We can agree to disagree on who would have won if Duran and Canelo fought or who has the better resume between Canelo and Benitez at the same age. In my opinion Canelo at 27 has the better resume than Benitiez had at the same age if we are counting win and losses.

We also have to remember Floyd was in his fifth weight class and past his prime when he fought Canelo while Leonard was in his prime and at his first weight class when he fought Duran and Benitez. If you can beat a younger, bigger, stronger champion in your fifth weight class that is quite an accomplishment.

Mosley was completely washed up and Cotto was clearly past his best. Those are just names not really special wins. Canelo was gifted the title and didn't even make weight when he won his title. I take that with a pinch of salt it also came against a bum.

Canelo by 23 was largely unproven. Benitez had defeated two hall of fame fighters and one was great and in his prime something Floyd, for example actually never did. If Canelo had retired after the Austin Trout fight he'd have never been considered for the hall of fame. Benitez was already a lock before he fought Leonard and considered one of the 3-4 best fighters in the entire sport and that's impressive when you consider the following were just about in their primes - Wilfredo Gomez, Roberto Duran, Alexis Arguello, Larry Holmes, Marvin Hagler etc;

[Johnwoo8686]

Mosley was completely washed up and Cotto was clearly past his best. Those are just names not really special wins. Canelo was gifted the title and didn't even make weight when he won his title. I take that with a pinch of salt it also came against a bum.

Canelo by 23 was largely unproven. Benitez had defeated two hall of fame fighters and one was great and in his prime something Floyd, for example actually never did. If Canelo had retired after the Austin Trout fight he'd have never been considered for the hall of fame. Benitez was already a lock before he fought Leonard and considered one of the 3-4 best fighters in the entire sport and that's impressive when you consider the following were just about in their primes - Wilfredo Gomez, Roberto Duran, Alexis Arguello, Larry Holmes, Marvin Hagler etc;

There is no way Benitez was a lock for hall of fame at 21 years old and there is no way you can say that for sure especially considering you aren't even eligible to enter the hall of fame until 5 years after your retirement.
And Benitez's resume before facing Leonard was nothing to write home about. You could argue his best win before facing Leonard was Cervantes whom he only got a split decision over and someone who wasn't exactly in his prime either.

[chrisJS]

There is no way Benitez was a lock for hall of fame at 21 years old and there is no way you can say that for sure especially considering you aren't even eligible to enter the hall of fame until 5 years after your retirement.
And Benitez's resume before facing Leonard was nothing to write home about. You could argue his best win before facing Leonard was Cervantes whom he only got a split decision over and someone who wasn't exactly in his prime either.

You know what I mean. A fighter can do enough at a point mid career where you say "Yes. He's a lock for the HOF". He defeated Carlos Palamino too which was an excellent win. The Cervantes win was great on a lot of levels. It was a clear win, the split verdict doesn't tarnish it. That's like saying Salvador Sanchez only got a split decision over Pat Cowdell. Crappy judging has been in Boxing forever. He was 17 and created history with a record that's not just divisional but the entire sport and Cervantes was in a great moment. He'd scored one of the best (some would say the best) wins of his career a few months before he lost to Benitez and even won his title back when Benitez moved up and reigned for a few more years.

[Laddie_Loc]

This was a top 15 I compiled Back in 2014:

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Harry Greb
4. Sam Langford
5. Joe Gans
6. Willie Pep
7. Benny Leonard
8. Ezzard Charles
9. Roberto Duran
10. Muhammad Ali
11. Bob Fitzsimmons
12. Mickey Walker
13. Archie Moore
14. Kid Gavilan
15. Barney Ross

I had set myself the challenge of making a top 100 list and had found it far too difficult.

I managed to sort about 40 names out but was never satisfied with certain positions. So basically I whittled 100 down to 40 down to 15. And this 15 I still wasn't entirely happy about.

A genuine top 100 list is extremely difficult.

[Johnwoo8686]

You know what I mean. A fighter can do enough at a point mid career where you say "Yes. He's a lock for the HOF". He defeated Carlos Palamino too which was an excellent win. The Cervantes win was great on a lot of levels. It was a clear win, the split verdict doesn't tarnish it. That's like saying Salvador Sanchez only got a split decision over Pat Cowdell. Crappy judging has been in Boxing forever. He was 17 and created history with a record that's not just divisional but the entire sport and Cervantes was in a great moment. He'd scored one of the best (some would say the best) wins of his career a few months before he lost to Benitez and even won his title back when Benitez moved up and reigned for a few more years.

You give Cervantes credit for winning his title back after losing to Benitez but seem to forget that Canelo, Cotto, and Pacquiao all became champs again after losing to Floyd. If we are going to give credit to Benitez for pulling off split decisions over pat prime fighters then we can do the same for Mayweather.
And Canelo will most likely be in the hall of fame when he retires.

[chrisJS]

You give Cervantes credit for winning his title back after losing to Benitez but seem to forget that Canelo, Cotto, and Pacquiao all became champs again after losing to Floyd. If we are going to give credit to Benitez for pulling off split decisions over pat prime fighters then we can do the same for Mayweather.
And Canelo will most likely be in the hall of fame when he retires.

My original point is that just because Benitez was 21 doesn't mean he was inferior to Canelo by 23. It's clear he'd accomplished more and had defeated elite fighters including two hall of famers one of which was great. Benitez at 21 had proven a lot more than Canelo by 23 and that's a fact.

Split decision talk is irrelevant. Those are horrible scorecards those fights weren't either way type fights.

Cervantes wasn't past his prime because as I said he had been active and on a big winning streak in addition to having perhaps his best win a few months prior.

It's much easier to win world titles nowadays especially if you have a name and a big promoter. Adrien Broner is a 4 division champion. I pointed out a few posts ago De La Hoya would have had a hard time winning one single title in the 70s and 80s. Now with 4 organizations having 5 belts and cherry picking and way more stripping it's easy to pick them up. Even after Cervantes got his title back it took a hall of famer to beat him (Pryor) when he was really old and he was the clear true champion at that weight (he beat the other champion (Mamby).

Anyway original point is Benitez had accomplished far more entering the ring vs. Leonard than what Canelo had by 2013. In fact I'd say Benitez by 1979 had a better career than Canelo has had now. If we are talking Benitez by 23? Well, Canelo will never accomplish as much and simply looking at the fights he's just not anywhere near as good. On top of that I haven't even had to mention the catch-weight talk.

Floyd fans like to build up everything on his resume and that often means talking down other generations and great fighters. Mayweather fought two all-time great fighters his whole career - Marquez and Pacquaio. Marquez was dramatically undersized at that point having to move up two divisions after having just moved up two divisions in a year yet Floyd fans paint that as the best version of Marquez (they were 28 lbs and 5 weight classes apart 2 years prior and 17 lbs and 3 weight classes a year prior). Pacquaio obviously was far past his prime and had been brutally KO'd and looked like a shell of his former self. Mosley and De La Hoya IMO are very good but not great and obviously both of those guys were about a decade past their best and both coming off major inactive periods in their careers.

[Thunderous1]

zero great wins sign me up! lipinets is a champ in the 80 champ era. that don't mean sh-it. name me the great wins he has NOW! he was the old man cherry picking fraud. hes like ***** for boxing fans. they don't care about substance, they just follow his dumbazz and they lose all their dignity

Again , this dumbass can never make a post without bringing up *****. You’re clearly a mentally deranged individual. Seek help

[robertzimmerman]

Johnwoo8686,

If Ray had fought in the 12 round era he would have lost the first fight to Hearns. He was losing that fight until he got a stoppage in the 13th or 14th round.

There's absolutely no way of knowing that. He could have switched tactics earlier, or even prepared differently with a different game plan etc.

If you claim someone like Canelo was too young when he faced Floyd you also have to remember Benitez was even younger when he faced Leonard than Canelo was when he faced Floyd.

It's not his age, it was his lack of big fight experience. Also, the unecessary C-W takes the shine off of the win.

Duran was considered an all time great light weight. NO one considers him an all time great welterweight and even then he still whooped Leonard's ass at Leonard's supposed best weight class. Most pound for pound all time great lists place Pacquiao and De La Hoya above Duran and Hearns. So wins over those guys likely eclipse wins over Duran and Hearns. Before you say those guys were past it you must remember that they were still reigning and defending champions when they faced Floyd who was no spring chicken himself either.

What absolute nonsense.

This just tells me that you're not knowledgeable of that era.

No, he didn't whoop Ray's ass. You can't have seen the fight.

I've never seen anybody rank Oscar higher than Hearns.

How the hell does wins over Oscar and Manny eclipse Ray's win over Hearns??

Ha! That statement is an absolute joke.

Sure, Floyd gets all the credit in the world for his great longevity. Yes, I agree he was old himself when he fought Manny. But there's no comparison between the version of Manny that Floyd fought, and the version of Hearns that Ray fought. Ray's win was much bigger.

His win over Oscar was great, but that also doesn't compare to Ray's wins over ATG's who were at their peak.