# Fighters in history that would of beat Floyd Mayweather?



## SimplyTuck (Jun 4, 2013)

Up to junior middleweight, who would you pick over floyd.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Tommy Hearns just to be obvious


----------



## oibighead (May 23, 2013)

He could hold his own with anyone. Hearns has the best shot, but he wost most likely just hit air.


----------



## Nucking Futs (Jul 12, 2013)

Willie Limond


----------



## Twelvey (Jun 6, 2012)

Lightweight Duran vs lightweight Floyd.


----------



## SouthPaw (May 24, 2013)

Leonard is the only guy I favor against him. Aaron Pryor would be very interesting though.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

I believe Floyd can hold his own against anyone, as @oibighead said earlier. 
I said earlier in a thread..although Hearns will always be favourite against Mayweather, Hearns wasn't as smart as Floyd. Benitez also managed to stick in there, and Floyd is better than Benitez. 
I pick SRL and SRR. SRR KO'ing Mayweather is extremely naive and I question the opinion of anyone who thinks this.
SRL is even a difficult one and I'd need to analyse that more.

*EDIT: What the fuck was I thinking? Probably the most embarrassing post in my history.

Griffith, Hearns, SRL, SRR, Whitaker, Lomachenko, Duran, maybe Chavez all beats Mayweather.
I need more thought with LMR, that's a difficult one. I still think Mayweather beats Napoles.*


----------



## BogoisJaysSlave (Sep 15, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I believe Floyd can hold his own against anyone, as @oibighead said earlier.
> I said earlier in a thread..although Hearns will always be favourite against Mayweather, Hearns wasn't as smart as Floyd. Benitez also managed to stick in there, and Floyd is better than Benitez.
> I pick SRL and SRR. SRR KO'ing Mayweather is extremely naive and I question the opinion of anyone who thinks this.


Oh Wow giving Floyd credit, now if you would just get rid if the avi.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

SRL, SRR, Hearns, Griffith, Duran, Gavilan, Napoles, Whitaker etc


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> SRL, SRR, Hearns, Griffith, Duran, Gavilan, Napoles, Whitaker etc


...but why? Mayweather is better than just this great defensive fighter who can shut out Robert Guerrero's...people just judge him based on what they know he's achieved rather than the fighter he actually is.

Its weird because trainers and boxers all hold Mayweather at higher esteem than a lot of forum peeps do.


----------



## Pimp C (Jun 3, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> ...but why? Mayweather is better than just this great defensive fighter who can shut out Robert Guerrero's...people just judge him based on what they know he's achieved rather than the fighter he actually is.
> 
> Its weird because trainers and boxers all hold Mayweather at higher esteem than a lot of forum peeps do.


Not really posters on forums are more biased. Pro boxers and trainers know real talent when they see it and they all have respect for PBF's talent.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> ...but why? Mayweather is better than just this great defensive fighter who can shut out Robert Guerrero's...people just judge him based on what they know he's achieved rather than the fighter he actually is.
> 
> Its weird because trainers and boxers all hold Mayweather at higher esteem than a lot of forum peeps do.


I never said he was just an average defensive fighter. I just think all of those guys would beat him. truth be told I hold Mayweather very highly, just don't see anything in him that would see him beating the guys I listed.


----------



## JMP (Jun 3, 2013)

Luis Manuel Rodriguez had the style to beat him.


----------



## JMP (Jun 3, 2013)

I'd love to see Mayweather against Vernon Forrest at his peak.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

SRR is the only safe bet for me.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

People are really underestimating Floyd against the fab 4 but in reality he is more skill then all of them. Floyd lack the size but Floyd's exceptional skill/defense shuts everyone down.


----------



## oibighead (May 23, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> I never said he was just an average defensive fighter. I just think all of those guys would beat him. truth be told I hold Mayweather very highly, just don't see anything in him that would see him beating the guys I listed.


You put ect meaning you are just listing names from the last 30 odd years. You don't see anything in them that could beat floyd, most probably because you haven't really watched any of those fighters and just going on popular forum opinion

Obviously they all have a chance, but it's complete ignorance to run on names alone.


----------



## rossco (Jun 9, 2013)

If a past prime OscarDH runs Mayweather close then Sugar Ray Leonard beats him. Prime Duran would out work him. Hearns would beat him too. Duran, Leonard and Hearns would have obliterated the likes of Guerrero and Alvarez. Mayweather is one of the most talented defensive fighters of all time competing in an average era, Oscar aside he hasn't really fought a great offensive fighter. I dont think Mayweathers defence has really been tested by a great fighter in their prime or fighting at their best weight. Leonard, Hearns and Duran would give him all types of problems at any weight. Mayweather will retire with his 0 intact because there's no one around good enough to put gloves on him.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

I'd favor outright Duran, Hearns, Leonard, Robinson, Napoles, Gavilan, and maybe a few others. :conf LMR would be a difficult fight. That particular Cuban welterweight trio was monstrous.


----------



## Little-Red (Jun 6, 2013)

At 147, Hearns and Leonard were both fast enough to negate a lot of Floyd's defensive prowess. Tommy's jab would make Floyd's life a living hell. Ray would probably force a war, and that's a war Floyd can't win.


----------



## SimplyTuck (Jun 4, 2013)

Prime DLH maybe?


----------



## PivotPunch (Aug 1, 2012)

I don't think there's a safe bet I would favour SRR, Hearns and SRL but even they aren't safe bets I would just favour them, there are no safe bets against someone of Mayweather's level


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

oibighead said:


> You put ect meaning you are just listing names from the last 30 odd years. You don't see anything in them that could beat floyd, most probably because you haven't really watched any of those fighters and just going on popular forum opinion
> 
> Obviously they all have a chance, but it's complete ignorance to run on names alone.


what the fuck? because I didn't tell you why I think they would beat him means I haven't watched any of them and that I'm just going with the popular opinion? fuck off.. Hearns is self explanitory, I see Leonard's ability to win and his speed and power beating floyd, I see Griffith's size and jab beating Floyd, I see Napoles being just as slick as Floyd and outpointing him over 12. Duran and whitaker are self explanitory.

Fuck off if you really think I don't know what i'm talking about JUST because I didn't state my reasons. thats so fucking ignorant to think like that.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

I'm starting to think Napoles would lose to Mayweather.


----------



## oibighead (May 23, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> what the fuck? because I didn't tell you why I think they would beat him means I haven't watched any of them and that I'm just going with the popular opinion? fuck off.. Hearns is self explanitory, I see Leonard's ability to win and his speed and power beating floyd, I see Griffith's size and jab beating Floyd, I see Napoles being just as slick as Floyd and outpointing him over 12. Duran and whitaker are self explanitory.
> 
> Fuck off if you really think I don't know what i'm talking about JUST because I didn't state my reasons. thats so fucking ignorant to think like that.


Relax mate.

Fair enough, you made your points so agree or disagree I completley respect your opinion :good


----------



## Post Box (Jun 7, 2012)

Hearns, Leonard and Robinson are the only 3 I'm sure of


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Almost nobody at super feather.

Very few at lightweight/light welter.

Plenty at welter/light middle.


----------



## lurker (May 27, 2013)

Put floyd against a defense-first boxer for 12 rounds.
Like Sweat Pea and the gameplan is no-offensive-risk taken.

It'll be a snoozefest but Floyd might lose a controversial decision.


----------



## thistle1 (Jun 7, 2013)

loads of skilled proven Top fighters and No nonsense tough guys like Basilio would hunt him down.


----------



## MadcapMaxie (May 21, 2013)

Lester1583 said:


> *Almost nobody at super feather.*
> 
> Very few at lightweight/light welter.
> 
> Plenty at welter/light middle.


Sanchez for certain at Feather. He could probably make Super Feather or at a catchweight.

I'd give good accounts for Fenech and Nelson. No way could Mayweather shoulder roll and pot shot his way to victory against someone like Fenech, too tough, too relentless, too busy.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

MadcapMaxie said:


> Sanchez for certain at Feather. He could probably make Super Feather or at a catchweight.


I'm a big fan of Sanchez but Floyd is not very good fight stylistically for Chava who looked much better against come-forward fighters, MM.

I could envision it being competitive though.


----------



## Vysotsky (Jun 6, 2013)

Few guys who havent got much mention

O'Dowd
Canzoneri
Zivic
Walker
Armstrong
Britton
Steele
Kid Chocolate
Holman Williams
Ike Williams
Burley
Basilio
McCallum
JCC
Locche


----------



## Blanco (Aug 29, 2012)

At 154 is a bit too high for Floyd when comparing him to the past greats in that weight class, I would clearly pick Hearns,Norris,McCallum,Jackson and probably even the green Roy Jones who started his first 18 fights or so at or around 154.


----------



## Leftsmash (Oct 22, 2012)

Blanco said:


> At 154 is a bit too high for Floyd when comparing him to the past greats in that weight class, I would clearly pick Hearns,Norris,McCallum,Jackson and probably even the green Roy Jones who started his first 18 fights or so at or around 154.


Not knocking your other points but Jones was already at 160 by the time of his 12th pro fight and he was huge for that weight even then. I'm sure he weighed close to 180 against Hopkins.


----------



## McKay (Jun 6, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> ...but why? Mayweather is better than just this great defensive fighter who can shut out Robert Guerrero's...people just judge him based on what they know he's achieved rather than the fighter he actually is.
> 
> Its weird because trainers and boxers all hold Mayweather at higher esteem than a lot of forum peeps do.


I hear what you're saying, but none of the guys he mentioned are outrageous picks to beat Floyd. They are some of the very best fighters to ever grace the ring, just like Floyd is. I'd need to take the time to analyse each of them fully in relation to how they'd stack up against him, but if I was having a conversation with someone and they mentioned that they'd pick any of those guys against PBF I wouldn't be outraged in the slightest.


----------



## Blanco (Aug 29, 2012)

Leftsmash said:


> Not knocking your other points but Jones was already at 160 by the time of his 12th pro fight and he was huge for that weight even then. I'm sure he weighed close to 180 against Hopkins.


Gotcha, I always thought Roy had spent a bit more time at 154, he officially never fought at 154 after his 14th fight, just checked the boxrec.

How do you see a current JMW Floyd vs a 14 fight novice JMW Jones?


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

I would take Duran, Whitaker, Napoles etc, fighters who were of the highest order. Mayweather is something else though, he would have a chance of winning even against fighters of that ilk, he is the shit.


----------



## bjl12 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> SRL, SRR, Hearns, Griffith, Duran, Gavilan, Napoles, Whitaker etc


Read a fucking article for once: Whitaker and Floyd sparred toward the end of Pernell's career/beginning of Floyd's. Word is, Floyd dominated. Although he says "it was good work for both of us". Yes, sparring isn't the same thing as the real deal. But being a youngster and outclassing a PFP star at that age (even if it's sparring), is pretty indicative Pernell wouldn't have fared well in a prime matchup


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

bjl12 said:


> Read a fucking article for once: Whitaker and Floyd sparred toward the end of Pernell's career/beginning of Floyd's. Word is, Floyd dominated. Although he says "it was good work for both of us". Yes, sparring isn't the same thing as the real deal. But being a youngster and outclassing a PFP star at that age (even if it's sparring), is pretty indicative Pernell wouldn't have fared well in a prime matchup


I'm not impressed if a young Floyd dominated a sparring session against an old Pernell. We all know that means jack shit in how a fight between them prime for prime would go. Maybe if it was prime for prime in sparring session I would get more out of it. From what I understand, Quarry handily schooled Foreman in sparring, yet I bet Quarry would get blown away in a real match between them.I also heard RJJr beat up SRL as a 17 y/o when SRL was prepping for Lalonde. You have to take these infamous sparring sessions with a grain of salt.


----------



## SimplyTuck (Jun 4, 2013)

Prime Mosley?


----------



## sugarshane_24 (Apr 20, 2013)

bjl12 said:


> Read a fucking article for once: Whitaker and Floyd sparred toward the end of Pernell's career/beginning of Floyd's. Word is, Floyd dominated. Although he says "it was good work for both of us". Yes, sparring isn't the same thing as the real deal. But being a youngster and outclassing a PFP star at that age (even if it's sparring), is pretty indicative Pernell wouldn't have fared well in a prime matchup


Mate, if we are going to take sparring seriously then Floyd would lose to Spadafora.

I agree with @tommygun711. It means jack shit.


----------



## tezel8764 (May 16, 2013)

SimplyTuck said:


> Prime Mosley?


Dude avoided Floyd early on. :lol:


----------



## SimplyTuck (Jun 4, 2013)

tezel8764 said:


> Dude avoided Floyd early on. :lol:


Over the hill version gave him quite a scare...


----------



## JeffJoiner (Jun 5, 2013)

Bet the farm: SRR, SRL, Hearns

Lots of possibilities, though all of them mentioned.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

sugarshane_24 said:


> Mate, if we are going to take sparring seriously then Floyd would lose to Spadafora.
> 
> I agree with @tommygun711. It means jack shit.


Or how about when errol spence jr beat up floyd and gave him a black eye in sparring? Going by @bjl12 logic, that means Errol would beat floyd in a real fight too :lol: 


tezel8764 said:


> Dude avoided Floyd early on. :lol:


I still think a younger version would have a good shot to stop floyd.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> SRR is the only safe bet for me.


Everyone knows who I'd pick so I'll just pretend your choice ends with a "L" and not an "R"

There's only one true Sugar Ray and we know it's not Robinson.:shitstir :shifty


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> SRR is the only safe bet for me.


Lol


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Lol


You're not genuinely surprised mate?
Are you?


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> You're not genuinely surprised mate?
> Are you?


Its genuinely funny to me thats all. Nobody else in history beats floyd? Riiiiiight.


----------



## bjl12 (Jun 5, 2013)

way to bump an old thread lards


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

bjl12 said:


> way to bump an old thread lards


Way to use retard logic and duck my reply.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Its genuinely funny to me thats all. Nobody else in history beats floyd? Riiiiiight.


Yea i don't know what i am talking about ever but yet i keep picking winners.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> Everyone knows who I'd pick so I'll just pretend your choice ends with a "L" and not an "R"
> 
> There's only one true Sugar Ray and we know it's not Robinson.:shitstir :shifty


I understand you like Ray I get it but i don't really value your opinion man. No offense.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> I understand you like Ray I get it but i don't really value your opinion man. No offense.


Wow. What a shitty thing to say. His opinion>yours, m8.


tliang1000 said:


> Yea i don't know what i am talking about ever but yet i keep picking winners.


Hardly has anything to do with historical boxing knowledge, there are alot of guys that would have a chance to take on floyd. SRR isnt the only one. Saying that is just a case of ignorance.

Also i dont know how good your prediction history is. Nor do i care.


----------



## TSOL (Dec 15, 2013)

I'm comfortable picking prime Leonard, Hearns, Chavez and Duran against him. Guys like prime DLH, Terry Norris, Meldrick Taylor, Julian Jackson would be good fights too.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Wow. What a shitty thing to say. His opinion>yours, m8.
> 
> Hardly has anything to do with historical boxing knowledge, there are alot of guys that would have a chance to take on floyd. SRR isnt the only one. Saying that is just a case of ignorance.
> 
> Also i dont know how good your prediction history is. Nor do i care.


Shitty thing to say? You two bozo are the main ones thinking you are better than others in the forum. Laugh at people's opinions. I have provide my reasons in all of my post while you two just call people flomos or nuthuggers. Yeah your bf's opinion > mines thats for sure.:rofl

I said safe bet bc i think SRR is too big and strong for Floyd and have the right style. 
Does SRL or Duran look like a safe bet to you?

Of course you don't care about my prediction history bc we don't see eye to eye on views but it speaks volumes. This is the second time you question my boxing knowledge but yet my stats is one of the best on the forums. Do that make any sense to you smart guy???

It is very hysterical to see someone with a 100 vcash and doesn't even bet real money picking fights talking down on me. Put your money where your mouth is and is a different ballpark. You my friend bet with your heart, your opinion and thats why you suck.


----------



## OttkeRuiz (Jun 5, 2013)

Frankie Lymon
General Patton
Norman Rockwell


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> I understand you like Ray I get it but i don't really value your opinion man. No offense.


I think you've got me mistaken with someone who gives a fuck whether you value his opinion.
No offense of course.


----------



## The Sweet Science (Jun 5, 2013)

Sugar Ray Leonard, Sugar Ray Robinson, Roberto Duran, & Tommy Hearns all come to mind. Well, I saw Tommy's name posted by someone else and I immediately agreed, but the others came to mind. I know a lot of people are going to argue about my Duran choice, but that's fine. I stand by it. Duran had a very elusive attack and would outwork Floyd by hitting him EVERYWHERE. But, to be fair to Floyd, Duran is the only guy on my list that is actually the same size as Floyd. Leonard and Robinson's best weight was 147 lbs. and Hearns' was 154 lbs., in my opinion. Floyd's best weight was 130 or 135.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Wow. What a shitty thing to say. His opinion>yours, m8.
> 
> Hardly has anything to do with historical boxing knowledge, there are alot of guys that would have a chance to take on floyd. SRR isnt the only one. Saying that is just a case of ignorance.
> 
> Also i dont know how good your prediction history is. Nor do i care.


Thanks Tommy.
And take my advice mate.Don't go there with this kid.
Even SRR would be lucky to get an SD.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> Thanks Tommy.
> And take my advice mate.Don't go there with this kid.
> Even SRR would be lucky to get an SD.


You two can go back having phone sex in the private messages. go lick each other wounds and comeback with something worth a shit.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Shitty thing to say? You two bozo are the main ones thinking you are better than others in the forum. Laugh at people's opinions. I have provide my reasons in all of my post while you two just call people flomos or nuthuggers. Yeah your bf's opinion > mines thats for sure.:rofl
> 
> I said safe bet bc i think SRR is too big and strong for Floyd and have the right style.
> Does SRL or Duran look like a safe bet to you?
> ...


Tldr

Oh vcash what a great argument lol


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Wow. What a shitty thing to say. His opinion>yours, m8.
> 
> Hardly has anything to do with historical boxing knowledge, there are alot of guys that would have a chance to take on floyd. SRR isnt the only one. Saying that is just a case of ignorance.
> 
> Also i dont know how good your prediction history is. Nor do i care.


And the "picking winners" is the same sort of post Vladimir23 used to post with his "FACTS" about Lennox and Vitali.

As a great movie and If the free-traders cannot understand how one nation can grow rich at the expense of another, we need not wonder, since these same gentlemen also refuse to understand how within one country one class can enrich itself at the expense of another.the later,two songs said;
"What we've got here is failure... to communicate.Some men (although that doesn't apply for sure here and could mean 'kids'),you just can't reach."


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> You two can go back having phone sex in the private messages. go lick each other wounds and comeback with something worth a shit.


Define "worth a shit" please?


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Also @tliang1000 how the fuck would you know if i bet real money on boxing or not?

You wouldn't. What a shitty way to justify your views. Instead of talking boxing you wanna talk bout vcash which can go to shit easily with 1 bet. Virtual cash dont mean much m8.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> And the "picking winners" is the same sort of post Vladimir23 used to post with his "FACTS" about Lennox and Vitali.
> 
> As a great movie and If the free-traders cannot understand how one nation can grow rich at the expense of another, we need not wonder, since these same gentlemen also refuse to understand how within one country one class can enrich itself at the expense of another.the later,two songs said;
> "What we've got here is failure... to communicate.Some men (although that doesn't apply for sure here and could mean 'kids'),you just can't reach."


You are the dumbass that can't be reach. You already loss idk why you still want to fight a losing battle trying to say that i don't know boxing. You won't win trust me.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Also @*tliang1000* how the fuck would you know if i bet real money on boxing or not?
> 
> You wouldn't. What a shitty way to justify your views. Instead of talking boxing you wanna talk bout vcash which can go to shit easily with 1 bet. Virtual cash dont mean much m8.


Provide proof then. I got mine ready to go.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Shitty thing to say? You two bozo are the main ones thinking you are better than others in the forum. Laugh at people's opinions. I have provide my reasons in all of my post while you two just call people flomos or nuthuggers. Yeah your bf's opinion > mines thats for sure.:rofl
> 
> I said safe bet bc i think SRR is too big and strong for Floyd and have the right style.
> Does SRL or Duran look like a safe bet to you?
> ...


Let's just deal with a couple of points there boy.
"Flomos or nuthuggers"???
Well I'm a Floyd fan and by my own admission,am a nuthugger of several fighters.
And I'm proud of it.
I certainly don't think I'm better than any poster at all on this forum.(Except you of course)

You see.One post you write,and it is littered with lies and inconsistencies and I left several issues unaddressed.
You go back to picking your winners.Best of luck.I scored 927 on one of those power measuring punching machines.So na na,na,na na nah.

God,you really do post like a fucking 13 year old sometimes.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Provide proof then. I got mine ready to go.


I dont have proof readily available. Do you want me to post the betting stub of rudduck-tyson from 91?? Im not gonna go digging in my basement for that, i dont even know if i have that anymore.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Tldr
> 
> Oh vcash what a great argument lol


You should know that i bet REAL money by now. As good as I am why wouldn't i bet real money.
Lets see yours bc you about to see mine. keep digging your own grave ya idiot.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> I dont have proof readily available. Do you want me to post the betting stub of rudduck-tyson from 91?? Im not gonna go digging in my basement for that, i dont even know if i have that anymore.


If i had money to bet if you have proof i would have bet on no for you. thats how predictable you are.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> You are the dumbass that can't be reach. You already loss idk why you still want to fight a losing battle trying to say that i don't know boxing. You won't win trust me.


I stand by my comment that you can 't be reached and are incapable of entering a debate with an open mind.

Prove me wrong.And the fact you go on about the "winners" you always pick shows how childish you are in these discussions.
You saying that me and Tommy are the two biggest bozos on the forum is really quite a compliment when you look at it properly.

Thank you.:good


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)




----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> If i had money to bet if you have proof i would have bet on no for you. thats how predictable you are.


cool. you probably weren't even watching boxing when rudduck-tyson went down; that's how knowledgeable you are.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> I stand by my comment that you can 't be reached and are incapable of entering a debate with an open mind.
> 
> Prove me wrong.And the fact you go on about the "winners" you always pick shows how childish you are in these discussions.
> You saying that me and Tommy are the two biggest bozos on the forum is really quite a compliment when you look at it properly.
> ...


You two are main ones trying to laugh at my opinions all the time and when i put you bitches in your place, i'm childish OKAY!


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> You two are main ones trying to laugh at my opinions all the time and when i put you bitches in your place, i'm childish OKAY!


Lol. Read this in your little sisters voice.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> You two are main ones trying to laugh at my opinions all the time and when i put you bitches in your place, i'm childish OKAY!


Yeah.That was amazing how you caught me making a reasonable reply to your post knowing all along I was trying to take the piss and pulled of a masterstroke by insulting me in your reply .
You really read that the way Floyd reads opponent's punches.
You then went on to say something about me saying "you don't know boxing" when I said nothing of the sort.
Yeah,you really owned my ass on this thread.Absolute genius.

Very touchy and defensive though.I made a reasonable reply to your post and you've failed miserably with your lies and inconsistencies to attack me (and Tommy) for no reason.

Yep.You showed me real good.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Lol. Read this in your little sisters voice.


Running now AS PREDICTED.
I win in boxing, MMA, Basketball, and now baseball. I turned two hundred into 2400 in 2 days and you want to question my judgement? That's real smart. And FYI, there are a ton of posters i really respect on here and i have never bashed ever. I only retaliate and debate. So go and continue to hold a grudge on me and wonder why i said i don't value your opinions bc i don't need an lessor poster telling me what i should believe. :deal


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Running now AS PREDICTED.
> I win in boxing, MMA, Basketball, and now baseball. I turned two hundred into 2400 in 2 days and you want to question my judgement? That's real smart. And FYI, there are a ton of posters i really respect on here and i have never bashed ever. I only retaliate and debate. So go and continue to hold a grudge on me and wonder why i said i don't value your opinions bc i don't need an lessor poster telling me what i should believe. :deal


Running from what? I dont wanna invest too much time into a reply if you arent going to do the same. The last time i invested into a huge reply (regarding floyd vs leonard, your flomo habits) you didnt reply. So you are the one "running" really.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> Yeah.That was amazing how you caught me making a reasonable reply to your post knowing all along I was trying to take the piss and pulled of a masterstroke by insulting me in your reply .
> You really read that the way Floyd reads opponent's punches.
> You then went on to say something about me saying "you don't know boxing" when I said nothing of the sort.
> Yeah,you really owned my ass on this thread.Absolute genius.
> ...


You must have long term memory loss. You think i have just met you or what? I know what you think of me. we got pages upon pages of trash talk. You got to be a fool if you really believe that i don't know what i'm talking about, along with tommy. I do know that you mofo holds a grudge on me like little bitches. That's a fact.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Running now AS PREDICTED.
> I win in boxing, MMA, Basketball, and now baseball. I turned two hundred into 2400 in 2 days and you want to question my judgement? That's real smart. And FYI, there are a ton of posters i really respect on here and i have never bashed ever. I only retaliate and debate. So go and continue to hold a grudge on me and wonder why i said i don't value your opinions bc i don't need an lessor poster telling me what i should believe. :deal


Great point and well said.:deal

I don't need an lessor poster telling me what I should believe either.Wat to gon budy.
Great post dude.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Running from what? I dont wanna invest too much time into a reply if you arent going to do the same. The last time i invested into a huge reply (regarding floyd vs leonard, your flomo habits) you didnt reply. So you are the one "running" really.


You can have the last word since you need to feel better.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> Great point and well said.:deal
> 
> I don't need an lessor poster telling me what I should believe either.Wat to gon budy.
> Great post dude.


Talk is cheap


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> You must have long term memory loss. You think i have just met you or what? I know what you think of me. we got pages upon pages of trash talk. You got to be a fool if you really believe that i don't know what i'm talking about, along with tommy. I do know that you mofo holds a grudge on me like little bitches. That's a fact.


Sorry,but "I do know that you mofo holds a grudge on me like little bitches"????
I only wish I had the time and was the right age for "mofo holds a grudge like little bitches"

When you grow up to be a big boy you'll see that you don't have the same time or inclination to hold grudges over the internet with people you know are unwilling to consider anything other than what they think.
You've just went on about grudges when you're the one holding them.All I did was ask Tommy if he was surprised at your choice.
Oh, to be 14 again with my whole life ahead of me.

I'm sorry if it insults you that I don't hold a grudge against you.I truly never meant anything by it.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> You can have the last word since you need to feel better.


Ok


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Talk is cheap


Really? You learn something new every day.
I'm off to bed shortly.Feel quite guilty now for not holding this grudge you keep going on about.:sad5


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> Sorry,but "I do know that you mofo holds a grudge on me like little bitches"????
> I only wish I had the time and was the right age for "mofo holds a grudge like little bitches"
> 
> When you grow up to be a big boy you'll see that you don't have the same time or inclination to hold grudges over the internet with people you know are unwilling to consider anything other than what they think.
> ...


Man whatever. You are always right and i'm always wrong apparently :deal


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Man whatever. You are always right and i'm always wrong apparently :deal


You really think so?
Thanks.Sometimes you can go from nasty to a very affable young chap in a second.
That means a lot tiang.It really does.:good


----------



## bjl12 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Way to use retard logic and duck my reply.


Eh you have a good point. One of my dumber comments. Prime-for-prime I think Floyd/Pernell would be awfully boring (due to their horrendously low combined output), but each of them would land clean shots. I'd probably take Pernell in a close decision, but Floyd would have a chance for sure. Pernell was a master of defense in a very different way than Floyd. Floyd kind of adjusts and adapts what he does to fit in with what his opponent is weakest at (Canelo = moving forward, Mosley = fighting backward, etc.). Pernell was also undefeated versus *much* better competition. Pernell UD

What I should of said in my original post is that a good/competitive spar between a pfp stud (Pernell, Floyd) and a promising olympian (Floyd, Errol) probably suggests the olympian might have a real career as a pro, perhaps even a damn good one. Time will tell though

And, yes, I was sucked into the "high" after Floyd dominated Canelo. It's pretty normal and natural to happen. Don't know why you dug this shit up from almost 1 year ago though :uwot


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

bjl12 said:


> Eh you have a good point. One of my dumber comments. Prime-for-prime I think Floyd/Pernell would be awfully boring *(due to their horrendously low combined output)*, but each of them would land clean shots. I'd probably take Pernell in a close decision, but Floyd would have a chance for sure. Pernell was a master of defense in a very different way than Floyd. Floyd kind of adjusts and adapts what he does to fit in with what his opponent is weakest at (Canelo = moving forward, Mosley = fighting backward, etc.). Pernell was also undefeated versus *much* better competition. Pernell UD
> 
> What I should of said in my original post is that a good/competitive spar between a pfp stud (Pernell, Floyd) and a promising olympian (Floyd, Errol) probably suggests the olympian might have a real career as a pro, perhaps even a damn good one. Time will tell though
> 
> And, yes, I was sucked into the "high" after Floyd dominated Canelo. It's pretty normal and natural to happen. Don't know why you dug this shit up from almost 1 year ago though :uwot


Pernell Whitaker had a high work-rate in pretty much all of his fights.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

bjl12 said:


> Eh you have a good point. One of my dumber comments. Prime-for-prime I think Floyd/Pernell would be awfully boring (due to their horrendously low combined output), but each of them would land clean shots. I'd probably take Pernell in a close decision, but Floyd would have a chance for sure. Pernell was a master of defense in a very different way than Floyd. Floyd kind of adjusts and adapts what he does to fit in with what his opponent is weakest at (Canelo = moving forward, Mosley = fighting backward, etc.). Pernell was also undefeated versus *much* better competition. Pernell UD


I can agree with that. It would be a chess match, what you call boring would be someone else's cup of tea. I think whitaker's noticable advantage in his southpaw stance and his combination punching may win him the fight on the cards.

Also whitaker had a high output. Much higher than floyd's.



bjl12 said:


> And, yes, I was sucked into the "high" after Floyd dominated Canelo. It's pretty normal and natural to happen. Don't know why you dug this shit up from almost 1 year ago though :uwot


I didnt dig it up sugar shane 24 did. Fair play though. I was a little harsh.


----------



## IsaL (Jun 5, 2013)

Considering he has struggled against a fighter like Castillo, and he has struggled against Maidana, and he also had a tough time against Cotto and whether you like to admit or not Oscar De LaHoya gave him huge fits and a case can be argued and justified ODLH as the vector, and lets be completely honest about something, fighters like Maidana and Castillo would be lucky to be contenders in the fab four's era, robinson's era, i mean the top of the crop were fighters like Duran, Leonard, Hagler even though we know that mayweather wouldn't fight him, and that's not a knock on floyd, he doesn,t step up to 160, he thinks he's too small for that division, Duran didn't give a f****. Mayweather is today's GREAT fighter. He is undoubtedly one of the most if not the MOST skilled fighter today, and he should go down as a great fighter, but his level of competition is weak. not his fault really to some degree. But the times we saw him tested it was against level B fighters or in Oscar's case a shot elite fighter. 

Fighters like Duran, Oscar DLH, Leonard, Robinson, Hearns, Benitez, and many more should get the benefit of the doubt against a Fighter of Floyd''s status. They may have struggled against a fighter or two, but they proved their greatness by beating the best, not all the time, but enough times, and more times than Floyd will ever do. At this stage of Floyd's career, he isn,t interested in Legacy anymore, he is cashing out and making loads of money showcasing against B level fighters. Most of Floyd's legacy is in the lower weights when he cleaned out LW. Today he continues to add because of his dominance, but its against fighters removed from their best days or against the Maidana's.


----------



## Jim Kelly (Jul 12, 2012)

IsaL said:


> Considering he has struggled against a fighter like Castillo, and he has struggled against Maidana, and he also had a tough time against Cotto and whether you like to admit or not Oscar De LaHoya gave him huge fits and a case can be argued and justified ODLH as the vector, and lets be completely honest about something, fighters like Maidana and Castillo would be lucky to be contenders in the fab four's era, robinson's era, i mean the top of the crop were fighters like Duran, Leonard, Hagler even though we know that mayweather wouldn't fight him, and that's not a knock on floyd, he doesn,t step up to 160, he thinks he's too small for that division, Duran didn't give a f****. Mayweather is today's GREAT fighter. He is undoubtedly one of the most if not the MOST skilled fighter today, and he should go down as a great fighter, but his level of competition is weak. not his fault really to some degree. But the times we saw him tested it was against level B fighters or in Oscar's case a shot elite fighter.
> 
> Fighters like Duran, Oscar DLH, Leonard, Robinson, Hearns, Benitez, and many more should get the benefit of the doubt against a Fighter of Floyd''s status. They may have struggled against a fighter or two, but they proved their greatness by beating the best, not all the time, but enough times, and more times than Floyd will ever do. At this stage of Floyd's career, he isn,t interested in Legacy anymore, he is cashing out and making loads of money showcasing against B level fighters. Most of Floyd's legacy is in the lower weights when he cleaned out LW. Today he continues to add because of his dominance, but its against fighters removed from their best days or against the Maidana's.


hear hear to that.
Floyd could have proven his true worth if he would have faced paul williams, Margarito and Sugar shane back then..


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

IsaL said:


> Considering he has struggled against a fighter like Castillo, and he has struggled against Maidana, and he also had a tough time against Cotto and whether you like to admit or not Oscar De LaHoya gave him huge fits and a case can be argued and justified ODLH as the vector, and lets be completely honest about something, fighters like Maidana and Castillo would be lucky to be contenders in the fab four's era, robinson's era, i mean the top of the crop were fighters like Duran, Leonard, Hagler even though we know that mayweather wouldn't fight him, and that's not a knock on floyd, he doesn,t step up to 160, he thinks he's too small for that division, Duran didn't give a f****. Mayweather is today's GREAT fighter. He is undoubtedly one of the most if not the MOST skilled fighter today, and he should go down as a great fighter, but his level of competition is weak. not his fault really to some degree. But the times we saw him tested it was against level B fighters or in Oscar's case a shot elite fighter.
> 
> Fighters like Duran, Oscar DLH, Leonard, Robinson, Hearns, Benitez, and many more should get the benefit of the doubt against a Fighter of Floyd''s status. They may have struggled against a fighter or two, but they proved their greatness by beating the best, not all the time, but enough times, and more times than Floyd will ever do. At this stage of Floyd's career, he isn,t interested in Legacy anymore, he is cashing out and making loads of money showcasing against B level fighters. Most of Floyd's legacy is in the lower weights when he cleaned out LW. Today he continues to add because of his dominance, but its against fighters removed from their best days or against the Maidana's.


The fab4 have struggle much more with B level fighters than Floyd. Not to mention that Floyd is greatly affected by his undefeated record. A big change in his style is bc of the burden of that O. His long reign against top level guys is very tough to achieve. When the whole world is going for you to lose and everyone of his opponent is dying to take his O and become a instant legend that take major will power. *There is nothing more dangerous of an opponent who is hungry.*


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Jim Kelly said:


> hear hear to that.
> Floyd could have proven his true worth if he would have faced paul williams, Margarito and Sugar shane back then..


To be fair i think sugar shane ducked him in the early 2000s but i agree.


IsaL said:


> Considering he has struggled against a fighter like Castillo, and he has struggled against Maidana, and he also had a tough time against Cotto and whether you like to admit or not Oscar De LaHoya gave him huge fits and a case can be argued and justified ODLH as the vector, and lets be completely honest about something, fighters like Maidana and Castillo would be lucky to be contenders in the fab four's era, robinson's era, i mean the top of the crop were fighters like Duran, Leonard, Hagler even though we know that mayweather wouldn't fight him, and that's not a knock on floyd, he doesn,t step up to 160, he thinks he's too small for that division, Duran didn't give a f****. Mayweather is today's GREAT fighter. He is undoubtedly one of the most if not the MOST skilled fighter today, and he should go down as a great fighter, but his level of competition is weak. not his fault really to some degree. But the times we saw him tested it was against level B fighters or in Oscar's case a shot elite fighter.
> 
> Fighters like Duran, Oscar DLH, Leonard, Robinson, Hearns, Benitez, and many more should get the benefit of the doubt against a Fighter of Floyd''s status. They may have struggled against a fighter or two, but they proved their greatness by beating the best, not all the time, but enough times, and more times than Floyd will ever do. At this stage of Floyd's career, he isn,t interested in Legacy anymore, he is cashing out and making loads of money showcasing against B level fighters. Most of Floyd's legacy is in the lower weights when he cleaned out LW. Today he continues to add because of his dominance, but its against fighters removed from their best days or against the Maidana's.


Great post, my main gripes against floyd consist of alot of stuff like this.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> To be fair i think sugar shane ducked him in the early 2000s but i agree.
> 
> Great post, my main gripes against floyd consist of alot of stuff like this.


kostya, hamed, oscar, shane, casamayor all ducked Floyd. @IsaL, Floyd was willing to jump two weight classes to fight oscar and shane when they were in prime. Floyd "struggled" with Castillo bc he was injured. He won 8-4 against Oscar using heavier gloves, small ring and big weight difference. Don't be fooled by the SD that match was 8-4, 9-3 if you favor floyd.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

@*IsaL*,

He "struggled" with Maidana but schools Canelo. Boxing fans are typically flaky and judge too quickly from their last performance. If canelo fought Maidana, he would've ko him just something to think about. And judging Floyd at 37 compare to the fab 4 is even more backwards bc half of the fab four fell apart in early 30s.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Oh great, tliang is spouting absolute shit again in defense of lil Floyd :lol:


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> And judging Floyd at 37 compare to the fab 4 is even more backwards bc half of the fab four fell apart in early 30s.


thats because they fought harder opposition than Floyd did.



tliang1000 said:


> kostya, hamed, oscar, shane, casamayor all ducked Floyd. @IsaL, Floyd was willing to jump two weight classes to fight oscar and shane when they were in prime. Floyd "struggled" with Castillo bc he was injured. He won 8-4 against Oscar using heavier gloves, small ring and big weight difference. Don't be fooled by the SD that match was 8-4, 9-3 if you favor floyd.


That may be a little excessive, but yeah some of those guys ducked him. definitely shane.. which I find odd because if Shane had fought him around that time, he would've had a good chance to stop him IMO.

and of course everyone accepts that the DLH fight was a clear enough victory for floyd.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Oh great, tliang is spouting absolute shit again in defense of lil Floyd :lol:


Oh great. the third musketeer. Sup.

What absolute shit? i didn't dig up this old ass thread. Your buddy did btw but of course you won't acknowledge that


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Oh great. the third musketeer. Sup.
> 
> What absolute shit? i didn't dig up this old ass thread. Your buddy did btw but of course you won't acknowledge that


I'm not making any accusations of anyone digging anything up, just pointing out you're talking shit about Floyd VS the Fab 4 like you used to despite being completely ignorant.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> thats because they fought harder opposition than Floyd did.
> 
> That may be a little excessive, but yeah some of those guys ducked him. definitely shane.. which I find odd because if Shane had fought him around that time, he would've had a good chance to stop him IMO.
> 
> and of course everyone accepts that the DLH fight was a clear enough victory for floyd.


Hagler fought tougher opp than Floyd? Hearns did too? They are both massive dudes whose best wins are against little guys.

SRL and Duran have a stand and Duran being the smallest of the four got the beating from all of them. no surprise there. Floyd isn't even allowed to fight someone his size. He played the Duran role and won.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I'm not making any accusations of anyone digging anything up, just pointing out you're talking shit about Floyd VS the Fab 4 like you used to despite being completely ignorant.


We've been through this argument. You may think he doesn't belong but there are plenty who does. You will just need to get over that.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

And to top it off everyone of the fab 4 are naturally bigger than Floyd. So is retarded to say that Floyd can't hang with the fab 4 when he is comparing dudes that ended up in Middleweight and LHW. Some of you just doesn't display much thought process.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Hagler fought tougher opp than Floyd? Hearns did too? They are both massive dudes whose best wins are against little guys.


Yes i feel they both fought better opposition. At least all 4 of them took on all challenges - there will forever be a cloud over Floyd's career for never stepping up and fighting Pac, fighting the toughest opponent of his career, like the fab 4 did.

Hagler has alot of top level wins against the likes of Hamsho, Obel, Mugabi, Roldan, Antuofermo, Lee, and Scypion. These are all middleweights. Hearns is also a great win, as he was a servicable middleweight.

Hearns stepped up to LHW to face the likes of Virgil Hill, and he fought undefeated Shuler as well. So it's not like Hagler and Hearns just fought smaller guys. No, it's a testament to Leonard and Duran's greatness that they moved up and fought these monsters.


> SRL and Duran have a stand and Duran being the smallest of the four got the beating from all of them. no surprise there. Floyd isn't even allowed to fight someone his size. He played the Duran role and won.


He played the Duran role and won? No in order to play the Duran role you have to fight all challengers. did he move up to middleweight yet and fight someone equivalent to a Barkley?


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Yes i feel they both fought better opposition. At least all 4 of them took on all challenges - there will forever be a cloud over Floyd's career for never stepping up and fighting Pac, fighting the toughest opponent of his career, like the fab 4 did.
> 
> Hagler has alot of top level wins against the likes of Hamsho, Obel, Mugabi, Roldan, Antuofermo, Lee, and Scypion. These are all middleweights. Hearns is also a great win, as he was a servicable middleweight.
> 
> ...


Those guys were Hagler and Hearns' size whoop de do?
Floyd moved up fight rivals from his weight class to the next weight class and the next and got both divisions right now basically locked down. Canelo is prolly the best 154, and Garcia doesn't want none of Floyd. Thats dominance.


----------



## sugarshane_24 (Apr 20, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> I can agree with that. It would be a chess match, what you call boring would be someone else's cup of tea. I think whitaker's noticable advantage in his southpaw stance and his combination punching may win him the fight on the cards.
> 
> Also whitaker had a high output. Much higher than floyd's.
> 
> I didnt dig it up sugar shane 24 did. Fair play though. I was a little harsh.


:lol: wait, i didn't dug anything. i don't even know how that came up.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Hearns who fought a dude smaller in SRL and got his ass koed. Floyd fought someone smaller in JMM and shut him out and every calling unfair that he was too big. Years later he is 149 at age 36 against 170+ canelo and is still not good enough. Which btw Canelo is the number 1 guy in 154 right now. get out of the past tommy. Those dudes u admired... there are still dudes doing the same thing.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Those guys were Hagler and Hearns' size whoop de do?


Well you tried to discredit hearns and hagler by saying they only fought smaller guys which is simply not true. Haglers best win imo is over underrated undefeated puncher in Mugabi who was a big middleweight.



tliang1000 said:


> Canelo is prolly the best 154, and Garcia doesn't want none of Floyd. Thats dominance.


Im not even arguing that hes dominant. What does that have to do with my earlier points? Floyd is obviously the best of this era but because his era is weaker than fab 4 era (obviously) he cant be ranked as highly as them. He just cant.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Lol at trying to use marquez vs floyd as an analogy for leonard vs hearns. Not even close.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Well you tried to discredit hearns and hagler by saying they only fought smaller guys which is simply not true. Haglers best win imo is over underrated undefeated puncher in Mugabi who was a big middleweight.
> 
> Im not even arguing that hes dominant. What does that have to do with my earlier points? Floyd is obviously the best of this era but because his era is weaker than fab 4 era (obviously) he cant be ranked as highly as them. He just cant.


Weaker says who? And lets just say it is weaker, is Floyd fighting no achievement bums? Last time i checked he fought dudes who were multi-division champs, p4p guys and guys coming off sensational wins. How are they weak?


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Mugabi was half an inch shorter than Hagler and 2lbs heavier when they fought and he was a BIG MW? Try 17lbs that Floyd had to deal with. Again... WHOOPDEDO. So great to keep fighting mandatory same size dudes.

You got one dethroning Champs from a higher weight vs a guy on the top fighting dudes coming up his size.:huh


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Weaker says who? And lets just say it is weaker, is Floyd fighting no achievement bums? Last time i checked he fought dudes who were multi-division champs, p4p guys and guys coming off sensational wins. How are they weak?


Almost everybody agrees the fab 4 era was stronger, and had a lot more depth. Lets say the fab 3 (plus benitez) are equivilant to leonard in skill. There is nobody out in the world that is at floyds level in skill. The only one that is even in the conversation (as a fighter, not skill wise) is pacquiao and floyd didnt fight him.

For the era floyds resume is good. He fought almost everyone he could barring pac williams and prime cotto. But the era itself isnt that strong compared to the fab 4 era.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

and sorry to burst your bubbles Tommy and friends. Newsflash.... people already place Floyd higher than the FAB 4. Top3 ATG


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> and sorry to burst your bubbles Tommy and friends. Newsflash.... people already place Floyd higher than the FAB 4. Top3 ATG


Top 3 atg is just flat out retarded.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Almost everybody agrees the fab 4 era was stronger, and had a lot more depth. Lets say the fab 3 (plus benitez) are equivilant to leonard in skill. There is nobody out in the world that is at floyds level in skill. The only one that is even in the conversation (as a fighter, not skill wise) is pacquiao and floyd didnt fight him.
> 
> For the era floyds resume is good. He fought almost everyone he could barring pac williams and prime cotto. But the era itself isnt that strong compared to the fab 4 era.


Quit assuming shit and answer the questions. Is Floyd fighting no amateur background bums? Is he not fighting the multi division champs? is he not fighting p4p dudes.
AGAIN. Even if it is a "weaker era", don't act like Floyd fought the bums of the era. He fought the best.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Top 3 atg is just flat out retarded.


How so?
He got the skills
He got the resume
He got the stats
He got the achievements
He got the longevity
He is still undefeated for damn near 20 years
He is an icon to young boxers

How many checkboxes did the fab4 have of what i listed above that surpasses Floyd????? 1? 2?


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Quit assuming shit and answer the questions. Is Floyd fighting no amateur background bums? Is he not fighting the multi division champs? is he not fighting p4p dudes.
> AGAIN. Even if it is a "weaker era", don't act like Floyd fought the bums of the era. He fought the best.


Im not fucking disagreeing with you if you read my post i already said floyd fought the best he could except HE DIDNT FIGHT PACQUIAO WHICH IS A BIG DEAL. But thats what im saying. So stop running in circles and back tracking. The difference is that floyds era just does not stack up to the fab 4 era. The same way Rocky Marciano's era doesnt stack up to Ali's era. Bottom line. Everybody except you agrees with that.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Im not fucking disagreeing with you if you read my post i already said floyd fought the best he could except HE DIDNT FIGHT PACQUIAO WHICH IS A BIG DEAL. But thats what im saying. So stop running in circles and back tracking. The difference is that floyds era just does not stack up to the fab 4 era. The same way Rocky Marciano's era doesnt stack up to Ali's era. Bottom line. Everybody except you agrees with that.


Pac walked away twice. I thought you followed boxing. 1) drug test, 2) 60-40. Who walked?

I already give you the "weaker era" talk but Floyd has fought every bit and more than Hagler, Hearns, and Duran. Only guy i have over Floyd in resume is SRL. Duran got his ass whooped by hearns, hagler and SRL.

The dudes that the fab4 has fought he has fought. Guys who WORTH a shit.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Pac walked away twice. I thought you followed boxing. 1) drug test, 2) 60-40. Who walked?


They both ducked it. I hold them both responsible. Both of their legacies suffer from it. Im maybe not as sharp on the politics & the timelines as you are, being that im neither a pac or floyd fan, but i dont see it as a 1 way street at all.

The fab 4 all ended up fighting eachother anyway, so bs politics is just a shitty excuse. Pac and floyd shouldve fought a long time ago. The one fighter that was in floyd's caliber and floyd didnt fight him.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> They both ducked it. I hold them both responsible. Both of their legacies suffer from it. Im maybe not as sharp on the politics & the timelines as you are, being that im neither a pac or floyd fan, but i dont see it as a 1 way street at all.
> 
> The fab 4 all ended up fighting eachother anyway, so bs politics is just a shitty excuse. Pac and floyd shouldve fought a long time ago. The one fighter that was in floyd's caliber and floyd didnt fight him.


JMM = Pac's caliber.
How is Hager whooping up on Duran worth more shits than Floyd whooping up on JMM?
Or Hearns KOing Duran who is 5 inches shorter and way smaller worth more wow points of what Floyd beating up on JMM?

Same as Hagler beating 25-0 Mugabi who was 2lbs heavier than Hagler equals an outstanding when Floyd beating someone 12 years younger 44-0 in prime undefeated kid in canelo?

Should be the other way around. That should be obvious.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> JMM = Pac's caliber.
> How is Hager whooping up on Duran worth more shits than Floyd whooping up on JMM?
> Or Hearns KOing Duran who is 5 inches shorter and way smaller worth more wow points of what Floyd beating up on JMM?
> 
> ...


I dont give too much credit to hagler for beating duran. Except that duran was better than JMM.

What hearns did was impressive though because nobody else in history was able to do that. Matter of fact i wouldnt really pick anybody at all besides hearns to KO duran like that. And duran would go on to acomplish more. Mugabi to me is a better win than canelo, since mugabi was a true killer. Canelo was hyped up a bit by GB.

Id love to keep debating but im gonna go to bed..long day tomorrow.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> I dont give too much credit to hagler for beating duran. Except that duran was better than JMM.
> 
> What hearns did was impressive though because nobody else in history was able to do that. Matter of fact i wouldnt really pick anybody at all besides hearns to KO duran like that. And duran would go on to acomplish more. Mugabi to me is a better win than canelo, since mugabi was a true killer. Canelo was hyped up a bit by GB.
> 
> Id love to keep debating but im gonna go to bed..long day tomorrow.


cool go to bed. 
But I don't agree with nothing you've just said.


----------



## Theron (May 17, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> and sorry to burst your bubbles Tommy and friends. Newsflash.... people already place Floyd higher than the FAB 4. Top3 ATG


Who has Floyd Top 3.

What's your top 5 list look like


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I believe Floyd can hold his own against anyone, as @oibighead said earlier.
> I said earlier in a thread..although Hearns will always be favourite against Mayweather, Hearns wasn't as smart as Floyd. Benitez also managed to stick in there, and Floyd is better than Benitez.
> I pick SRL and SRR. SRR KO'ing Mayweather is extremely naive and I question the opinion of anyone who thinks this.
> SRL is even a difficult one and I'd need to analyse that more.
> ...


Hearns had a busted right hand against Benitez.

and LMR requires no thinking; terrible matchup for Floyd.

Your post is also nowhere near the worst post ever. Theres a complete spastic who said Hearns 'would just hit air'.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

People who say 'Flea is a Floyd hater' need to read my posts which backed him up. I've actually made cases for him being able to defeat one of very favourite fighters, ALEXIS FUCKING ARGUELLO and lightweight hatchet man IKE FUCKING WILLIAMS.

Sorry I don't think Floyd is an undefeatable uber-boxer.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

bjl12 said:


> Eh you have a good point. One of my dumber comments. Prime-for-prime I think Floyd/Pernell would be awfully boring (due to their horrendously low combined output), but each of them would land clean shots. I'd probably take Pernell in a close decision, but Floyd would have a chance for sure. Pernell was a master of defense in a very different way than Floyd. Floyd kind of adjusts and adapts what he does to fit in with what his opponent is weakest at (Canelo = moving forward, Mosley = fighting backward, etc.). Pernell was also undefeated versus *much* better competition. Pernell UD
> 
> What I should of said in my original post is that a good/competitive spar between a pfp stud (Pernell, Floyd) and a promising olympian (Floyd, Errol) probably suggests the olympian might have a real career as a pro, perhaps even a damn good one. Time will tell though
> 
> And, yes, I was sucked into the "high" after Floyd dominated Canelo. It's pretty normal and natural to happen. Don't know why you dug this shit up from almost 1 year ago though :uwot


Whitaker did not have a low output. Not at all.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Theron said:


> Who has Floyd Top 3.
> 
> What's your top 5 list look like


SRR
Floyd
Joe Louis
SRL
Ali

To be quite honest. I am not very impressed with many classic fighters pre-70s. Most of them have awful form and punches wide and just slugging it out. I see more skill in today's boxers than the past. Of course there are the exceptional few.


----------



## Stone Rose (Jul 15, 2013)

Junior Witter


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> SRR
> Floyd
> Joe Louis
> SRL
> ...


You have clearly not watched much boxing pre-70s.

To dissect your ignorant statement would take a lifetime. There are not 'few exceptions'.

I could find as many wide punching fighters at the top level of boxing today as you could find from any given era.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> You have clearly not watched much boxing pre-70s.
> 
> To dissect your ignorant statement would take a lifetime. There are not 'few exceptions'.
> 
> I could find as many wide punching fighters at the top level of boxing today as you could find from any given era.


How is it an ignorant statement when i have a pair of eyes, youtube????
Do i not see slugging? Do I not see bunch of white boxers kept getting beatdown? Most of them have shit defense and no footwork. Just lean on each other and slug. 
Provide the footage and we'll see how much skill/athleticism.

As for any given era... that's my line.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Nothing more technical than this


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Provide the footage and we'll see how much skill/athleticism.
> 
> As for any given era... that's my line.


Like you would admit it anyway. I've given you an example above.

Here is another. From 1959. Neither of these even fought for a world title the division was so stacked, although Benton did beat two future world champs...oh, and went on to train Sweet Pea, Holyfield, and others


----------



## Stone Rose (Jul 15, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> People who say 'Flea is a Floyd hater' need to read my posts which backed him up. I've actually made cases for him being able to defeat one of very favourite fighters, ALEXIS FUCKING ARGUELLO and lightweight hatchet man IKE FUCKING WILLIAMS.
> 
> Sorry I don't think Floyd is an undefeatable uber-boxer.


Agree with this. Floyd is special. He is not however some unique, unbeatable machine. I think a lot of the fighters mentioned here would find him very beatable.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Nothing more technical than this


I see a lot of loading up on one shot and clinch. Snaps a couple of jabs. Nothing i haven't seen before.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> I see a lot of loading up on one shot and clinch. Snaps a couple of jabs. Nothing i haven't seen before.


Oh, dear God.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Like you would admit it anyway. I've given you an example above.
> 
> Here is another. From 1959. Neither of these even fought for a world title the division was so stacked, although Benton did beat two future world champs...oh, and went on to train Sweet Pea, Holyfield, and others


Again a lot of i'm gonna hit you with all my strength punches. Yes i see some slickness bobbing and weaving away from the lessor wilder boxer. And then it goes into a clinch and slug fest.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Again a lot of i'm gonna hit you with all my strength punches. Yes i see some slickness bobbing and weaving away from the lessor wilder boxer. And then it goes into a clinch and slug fest.


You are a complete retard and I can only hope you contract a terminal illness.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Oh, dear God.


Oh i guess i should drop my jaw to the floor by the unseen style...:rolleyes


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> You are a complete retard and I can only hope you contract a terminal illness.


Likewise asshole


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Floyd is so beatable that if he fights someone his own size it is considered cherrypicking. Sounds very beatable alright. 
So beatable that he haven't lost in close to 20 years. I guess when you lack of power to ko dudes who outweighs you by 15lbs then you are very beatable.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Oh i guess i should drop my jaw to the floor by the unseen style...:rolleyes


It's clear to see you have the hour or so of footage I provided a good look...considering you replied ten minutes later.

There is certainly no clinching or slugging in the modern game. Floyd Mayweather certainly wouldn't have a competitive fight with a fighter of that ilk.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Floyd is so beatable that if he fights someone his own size it is considered cherrypicking. Sounds very beatable alright.
> So beatable that he haven't lost in close to 20 years. I guess when you lack of power to ko dudes who outweighs you by 15lbs then you are very beatable.


Fighting less than 50 times in nearly 20 years isn't impressive. Ray Robinson fought that many times in his first year as a pro' pretty much.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> It's clear to see you have the hour or so of footage I provided a good look...considering you replied ten minutes later.
> 
> *There is certainly no clinching or slugging in the modern game*. Floyd Mayweather certainly wouldn't have a competitive fight with a fighter of that ilk.


This ain't my first rodeo. I have googled all the top greats from the past ya dummy.

That type of talk is my line.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Fighting less than 50 times in nearly 20 years isn't impressive. Ray Robinson fought that many times in his first year as a pro' pretty much.


What about Floyd's amateur career? They don't count? 50 times against solid opposition progressing to elite level for 21 championship fights.. SRR fought a lot of cans. They might as well be sparring partners. But of course you don't see or understand that.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Man this is too easy.
And i find it funny as if i am trying to hype Floyd up or something. He is that damn good. 
If I am bias, i would not be winning at gambling PERIOD. How can one bet with their heart and be up he sportsbooks seriously.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> What about Floyd's amateur career? They don't count? 50 times against solid opposition progressing to elite level for 21 championship fights.. SRR fought a lot of cans. They might as well be sparring partners. But of course you don't see or understand that.


What about Ray Robinson's amateur career?

And what about the numerous ranked fighters he beat? He has more ranked wins than Floyd has fights.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> I have googled all the top greats from the past


You are hilarious! Do you even realise what a laughing stock you are? Virgin.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> You are hilarious! Do you even realise what a laughing stock you are? Virgin.


Yeah ok keyboard warriors is laughing at me while i'm am the best handicapper on this site. I never know what the fuck i'm talking about, i've been just really lucky to keep picking winners. Makes a lot of sense buddy.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Yeah ok keyboard warriors is laughing at me while i'm am the best handicapper on this site. I never know what the fuck i'm talking about, i've been just really lucky to keep picking winners. Makes a lot of sense buddy.


You picking up Vcash is nowhere near as impressive as me being PAID for my opinion on the history of boxing. Vcash does not equal knowledge of the history of boxing.

You've provided a top 5; provide a top 20. Also, please tell me who the greatest fighter is in each weight class?

To everyone else, I'm not gloating, just stooping to this pricks level to show him how stupid he is.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

I can influence people to take a certain bet. I can sway people to think a fighter is good or not bc of my track record and my ability to see ability and talent. I go into detail of why someone is better. If i want to hype dirrell up, he will be taken seriously. You, pity, tommy? Who you gonna sway? Stubborn as shit. close minded. Just throw some classic shit in there to pose like you know more? You don't impress me buddy.


----------



## Theron (May 17, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> SRR
> Floyd
> Joe Louis
> SRL
> ...


Thats a very casual fan looking top 5.

And second statement, just. Ugh, that arguemnts been played out too much and you know its really not true. But if thats what you want to believe then...

Well eh your the one missing out so


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> You picking up Vcash is nowhere near as impressive as me being PAID for my opinion on the history of boxing. Vcash does not equal knowledge of the history of boxing.
> 
> You've provided a top 5; provide a top 20. Also, please tell me who the greatest fighter is in each weight class?
> 
> To everyone else, I'm not gloating, just stooping to this pricks level to show him how stupid he is.


anyone can do research, still doesn't prove u actually know what true skill is. I'm not here to try to say i know everything about boxing. I never say i know everything about boxing. I'm here to tell you that i can spot talent and skill better than you. I can pick winners better than you.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Theron said:


> Thats a very casual fan looking top 5.
> 
> And second statement, just. Ugh, that arguemnts been played out too much and you know its really not true. But if thats what you want to believe then...
> 
> Well eh your the one missing out so


Put it this way. I have seen a lot of site list willie pep as top 5 ATG and that is LMAO bc he is not that good. If he is truely top 5, you might as well put Floyd in 2.

And i dont mean to offend but back then with those slow white boxers with no sense of defense and barely any body movement. Cans after cans.

It is how it is and is not hard to figure why SRR, Joe Louis, Henry Armstrong dominated.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

If anyone feel like that i'm missing out some gem of boxing, link it to me and i'll breakdown the good and the bad. I want to see what the hype is about.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Put it this way. I have seen a lot of site list willie pep as top 5 ATG and that is LMAO bc he is not that good. If he is truely top 5, you might as well put Floyd in 2.
> 
> And i dont mean to offend but back then with those slow white boxers with no sense of defense and barely any body movement. Cans after cans.
> 
> It is how it is and is not hard to figure why SRR, Joe Louis, Henry Armstrong dominated.


Ray Robinson and Henry Armstrong got absolutely battered by crude white guys. That is FACT.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> If anyone feel like that i'm missing out some gem of boxing, link it to me and i'll breakdown the good and the bad. I want to see what the hype is about.


You don't break it down. You look for ten seconds and post the first thing you don't like.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

I really look forward to @tliang1000 explaining why Robinson and Armstrong both lost to white sluggers.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Tliang is looking through boxrec for Ray and Hank's losses, searching for pics and trying to figure out which white guys I'm talking about.


----------



## Theron (May 17, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Put it this way. I have seen a lot of site list willie pep as top 5 ATG and that is LMAO bc he is not that good. If he is truely top 5, you might as well put Floyd in 2.
> 
> And i dont mean to offend but back then with those slow white boxers with no sense of defense and barely any body movement. Cans after cans.
> 
> It is how it is and is not hard to figure why SRR, Joe Louis, Henry Armstrong dominated.


Your posts are pretty cringe worthy tbh man. You seem like an egomaniac from how you talk about yourself on here.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Browsing the thread, but still no reply from @tliang1000


----------



## Theron (May 17, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Tliang is looking through boxrec for Ray and Hank's losses, searching for pics and trying to figure out which white guys I'm talking about.


:lol:


----------



## DobyZhee (May 19, 2013)

A lot..

Floyd is the Larry Holmes of his division


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

I would like to add Morales, I can see him beating Floyd
And atm I think Porter would be the one who has the most chance of beating him tbh


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Flea Man said:


> Whitaker did not have a low output. Not at all.


How the fuck is it that this wild misconception has come to be treated as fact? Did we lose all the film on him? This whole 'Whitaker as a purely defensive specialist' sort of grinds my gears given how complete he actually was. Not a lot of people seem to be aware that had he made it his office a little more often, he'd also be amongst the greatest in-fighters of all-time. I consider him to be anyway, personally.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Hearns had a busted right hand against Benitez.
> 
> and LMR requires no thinking; terrible matchup for Floyd.
> 
> Your post is also nowhere near the worst post ever. Theres a complete spastic who said Hearns 'would just hit air'.


Hearns would brutalise Floyd. At the time I think I had bought into the idea that Floyds skill was in his adaptability. Over time I realised even his offence was overrated to shit. Nevertheless, something still has to be said about his adaptability in general which is why LMR-Floyd shouldn't have just been a quick decision from my part but I'd say - LMR very accurate on the outside taking full advantage as the rangy fighter - something that Floyd doesn't like, great at controlling distance and staying well out of punching range and being the ring general to make them fight his fight - Floyd's style doesn't really adequately close gaps against someone like LMR, LMR's speed and accuracy of body punches advantageous for point-scoring. He just wouldn't run out of energy either, something that Mayweather was able to capitalise against Maidana. LMR straight up is easily one of the most skilled I've seen.

I was pimped by Floyd's matchmaking. 
I think it's because I expected Floyd's opponents in the past to provide more fight, so I started to fall for this idea that 'maybe it just doesn't happen to Floyd'.

Floyd is 44-1-1.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Hearns would brutalise Floyd. At the time I think I had bought into the idea that Floyds skill was in his adaptability. Over time I realised even his offence was overrated to shit. Nevertheless, something still has to be said about his adaptability in general which is why LMR-Floyd shouldn't have just been a quick decision from my part but I'd say - LMR very accurate on the outside taking full advantage as the rangy fighter - something that Floyd doesn't like, great at controlling distance and staying well out of punching range and being the ring general to make them fight his fight - Floyd's style doesn't really adequately close gaps against someone like LMR, LMR's speed and accuracy of body punches advantageous for point-scoring. He just wouldn't run out of energy either, something that Mayweather was able to capitalise against Maidana. LMR straight up is easily one of the most skilled I've seen.
> 
> I was pimped by Floyd's matchmaking.
> I think it's because I expected Floyd's opponents in the past to provide more fight, so I started to fall for this idea that 'maybe it just doesn't happen to Floyd'.
> ...


Well yeah, LMR has a great jab and movement, as well as being an incredible inside fighter and one of the best to switch from body to head and vice versa.

Floyd is a bit quicker than him, but LMR has the harder single punch (right hand) as well as displaying his talent against more skilled fighters.

LMR has one of the most STACKED resume's of the last 50 years.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> How the fuck is it that this wild misconception has come to be treated as fact? Did we lose all the film on him? This whole 'Whitaker as a purely defensive specialist' sort of grinds my gears given how complete he actually was. Not a lot of people seem to be aware that had he made it his office a little more often, he'd also be amongst the greatest in-fighters of all-time. I consider him to be anyway, personally.


Incredible in-fighter, high output with the jab (Floyd would be fucked) as well as making up for his lack of pure power (generally, the durable Nazario might say otherwise) by being a nasty, spiteful bastard.

Basically the only people who say otherwise have no clue about Pea and are just guessing/going off an oft-repeated erroneous statement.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Well yeah, LMR has a great jab and movement, as well as being an incredible inside fighter and one of the best to switch from body to head and vice versa.
> 
> Floyd is a bit quicker than him, but LMR has the harder single punch (right hand) as well as displaying his talent against more skilled fighters.
> 
> LMR has one of the most STACKED resume's of the last 50 years.


A lovely era. Yeah LMR's lateral movement is a lesson to mankind.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> A lovely era. Yeah LMR's lateral movement is a lesson to mankind.


Incredible era. Especially between 147-160.

I would say that the 60s is the greatest era out of the 60s, 70s and 80s personally. Off the top of my head anyway.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> A lovely era. Yeah LMR's lateral movement is a lesson to mankind.


Cuban boxers are so amazing. No fetish but my god with Chocolate, Gavilan, Mantequilla, LMR, Chacal ?!

(sun)


----------



## chibelle (Jun 5, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> SRR
> Floyd
> Joe Louis
> SRL
> ...


I don't think you have fully think through the concept of all time great. While you can think past fighters are inferior, out right dismissing them purely based on era shows superficial reasoning. I myself would favor modern athletes to past greats but that does not mean out right dismissing them from ATG lists. Have you considered schedules, finance, rules, training regimens, advances in diet and medical advances? These are important factors that is significantly different from generation to generation. Comparing era to era atheletes is more than who was the fastest or more technically equipped fighter. For example, Floyd is known to have brittle hands and very sparse fighting schedule.

Can he have the same career in the 40s-50s, fighting FIFTEEN rounds, 4-6 times a year with no help of modern science to alleviate the pain and heal his hands? I would say Floyd's career would be extremely short, especially if only faces "brawlers" (in your words) like Maidana 2-3 times and more technical athletic fighters 2-3 times for the rest of the year. So the argument of "20 years of undefeated dominance" must be put in perspective. You are fixated in technique and form, a heavy bias orthodox aesthetics. It is very superficial.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

chibelle said:


> I don't think you have fully think through the concept of all time great. While you can think past fighters are inferior, out right dismissing them purely based on era shows superficial reasoning. I myself would favor modern athletes to past greats but that does not mean out right dismissing them from ATG lists. Have you considered schedules, finance, rules, training regimens, advances in diet and medical advances? These are important factors that is significantly different from generation to generation. Comparing era to era atheletes is more than who was the fastest or more technically equipped fighter. For example, Floyd is known to have brittle hands and very sparse fighting schedule.
> 
> Can he have the same career in the 40s-50s, fighting FIFTEEN rounds, 4-6 times a year with no help of modern science to alleviate the pain and heal his hands? I would say Floyd's career would be extremely short, especially if only faces "brawlers" (in your words) like Maidana 2-3 times and more technical athletic fighters 2-3 times for the rest of the year. So the argument of "20 years of undefeated dominance" must be put in perspective. You are fixated in technique and form, a heavy bias orthodox aesthetics. It is very superficial.


This is a superb post.

But tliang1000 won't pay attention to it. He's too busy playing covers of 'Smells Like Teen Spirit' and beating up army men.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Incredible era. Especially between 147-160.
> 
> I would say that the 60s is the greatest era out of the 60s, 70s and 80s personally. Off the top of my head anyway.


Yeah, it's tough to say, probably the decade of 65-75' but that's cheating as it crosses over to both :lol:



Hands of Iron said:


> Cuban boxers are so amazing. No fetish but my god with Chocolate, Gavilan, Mantequilla, LMR, Chacal ?!
> 
> (sun)


Those dudes are straight up G's. My real question is where the hell was LMR in the amateurs? He's one guy that would have been a Great in the different scoring systems. Nowadays we have Chacal coming in with all these golds but I'm sure LMR would have won at least a few.

By Chocolate I hope I am right in assuming you meant Peter Quillin :amir



chibelle said:


> I don't think you have fully think through the concept of all time great. While you can think past fighters are inferior, out right dismissing them purely based on era shows superficial reasoning. I myself would favor modern athletes to past greats but that does not mean out right dismissing them from ATG lists. Have you considered schedules, finance, rules, training regimens, advances in diet and medical advances? These are important factors that is significantly different from generation to generation. Comparing era to era atheletes is more than who was the fastest or more technically equipped fighter. For example, Floyd is known to have brittle hands and very sparse fighting schedule.
> 
> Can he have the same career in the 40s-50s, fighting FIFTEEN rounds, 4-6 times a year with no help of modern science to alleviate the pain and heal his hands? I would say Floyd's career would be extremely short, especially if only faces "brawlers" (in your words) like Maidana 2-3 times and more technical athletic fighters 2-3 times for the rest of the year. So the argument of "20 years of undefeated dominance" must be put in perspective. You are fixated in technique and form, a heavy bias orthodox aesthetics. It is very superficial.


Yeah this completely. I've mentioned the like before to Tiliang but he to this day feels that Cotto is more of a killer than Sandy Saddler as well as a host of other farfetched opinions. People would fight eachother even if they hadn't recovered. Hell, even more than 6 times. They'd all be fighting the best too. Just like in the ams today where losses are very common.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Hank couldn't even beat some cans early on lolz



LTKO


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

turbotime said:


> Hank couldn't even beat some cans early on lolz
> 
> LTKO


:lol: :deal


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> :lol: :deal


***** glass :yep


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

People shitting on Castillo in this thread though. Guy was a G and would've been competitive in all the LW eras


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

I never really paid attention to gloves until now, but surely back then it was even harder to compete as fighters had less padded gloves and they'd more likely be shaven and this will go unnoticed. Repeated punches from these just damages longevity even further.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

turbotime said:


> People shitting on Castillo in this thread though. Guy was a G and would've been competitive in all the LW eras


I don't agree that he'd even make lightweight in all the era's.

He was very good, but he was no Carlos Ortiz.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> I don't agree that he'd even make lightweight in all the era's.
> 
> He was very good, but he was no Carlos Ortiz.


Not many are top 10 lightweights.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

turbotime said:


> Not many are top 10 lightweights.


Stylistically similar. But Ortiz was a better boxer.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Stylistically similar. But Ortiz was a better boxer.


Ortiz is fucking great to watch as is Castillo. Very tough, and their moves were so smooth.

Look at that feint

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1MEz4YpZxA#t=28m00s


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

turbotime said:


> Ortiz is fucking great to watch as is Castillo. Very tough, and their moves were so smooth.
> 
> Look at that feint
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1MEz4YpZxA#t=28m00s


Beautiful!

I've said a few times that in terms of quality JLC is the best opponent of Floyd's career.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Beautiful!
> 
> I've said a few times that in terms of quality JLC is the best opponent of Floyd's career.


Agree, considering the time Floyd fought him, etc. He did kick a hornets nest as JLC was quite unknown at that point, and still is.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

The last 5 pages are really embarrasing stuff from tilang.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

In fairness to Floyd, although longevity from fighting 50 people in 20 years isn't as good as 50 people in 5 years, it still does benefit his longevity to do so over 20 years considers that's like quarter of someones life time to remain devoted to boxing, considerably when you already have great financial resources.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> In fairness to Floyd, although longevity from fighting 50 people in 20 years isn't as good as 50 people in 5 years, it still does benefit his longevity to do so over 20 years considers that's like quarter of someones life time to remain devoted to boxing, considerably when you already have great financial resources.


I agree. It just doesn't compare to the fighters he is often said to be greater than, especiall when they beat better opponents.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> I agree. It just doesn't compare to the fighters he is often said to be greater than, especiall when they beat better opponents.


I wonder when they started clamping down glove issues properly. Two different eras...

















What do you make of the gloves compared to today? Especially that Saddler-Pep pic looks like gloves were less padded. Griffith-Paret...what gloves were they?

I say this because Mayweather threw a fit because Maidana was wearing some legal gloves, the same gloves that Cotto used against Mayweather...Mayweather forced Maidana to wear Grant gloves, the more padded ones.

This has a legit effect on longevity.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> I wonder when they started clamping down glove issues properly. Two different eras...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I much prefer smaller gloves from a sporting standpoint.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> The last 5 pages are really embarrasing stuff from tilang.


Yea it was almost as embarrassing when i exposed you as a loser picking bum and that you can't back anything up that you spew out.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Theron said:


> Thats a very casual fan looking top 5.
> 
> And second statement, just. Ugh, that arguemnts been played out too much and you know its really not true. But if thats what you want to believe then...
> 
> Well eh your the one missing out so


Oh yeah... i'm a very much a casual fan of boxing. A "casual fan" who bet hundreds on fighters i don't know anything about.

If you gonna try to insult me, put some thought into it.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Oh yeah... i'm a very much a casual fan of boxing. A "casual fan" who bet hundreds on fighters i don't know anything about.
> 
> If you gonna try to insult me, put some thought into it.


Not replying to me owning you on 'white sluggers'?


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> You don't break it down. You look for ten seconds and post the first thing you don't like.


When I research for fights i never watched the whole fight. Usually i check skim the guys early, mid, and late. But what do i know right??? I can't tell who is good to save my life.

I like keep hearing about how i don't know what i'm talking about in analyzing fighters but yet i'm the best handicapper on this site. Makes A LOT of sense.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Yea it was almost as embarrassing when i exposed you as a loser picking bum and that you can't back anything up that you spew out.


Name some of the losers i picked


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Not replying to me owning you on 'white sluggers'?


I've said what i needed to say already. Most white boxers doesn't fight better than Blacks. Sure you can find wins from them but i'm talking about the majority but you won't comprehend that so WHY BOTHER? Seriously are you that dumb or you pretend to be?


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Name some of the losers i picked


Why don't you tell me? Where is your prove?


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Why don't you tell me? Where is your prove?


Yeah ok then. Quit talkin out your ass.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> I've said what i needed to say already. Most white boxers doesn't fight better than Blacks. Sure you can find wins from them but i'm talking about the majority but you won't comprehend that so WHY BOTHER? Seriously are you that dumb or you pretend to be?


You said the whites weren't good and gave SRR and Armstrong as your proof.

I directly dismissed your theory. That is why you need to address it.

The fact is you don't know what I'm referring to. If you admit that, then I'll help to educate you.

If you don't, you will be the biggest joke any boxing forum has ever had. So just admit you are not clued up. Make it easier on yourself.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Yeah ok then. Quit talkin out your ass.


Ok what? You dodging again? I say why don't you tell me. I know you picked losers. just look at your vcash. Thats the only thing i can go by unless you gamble with real money which you confessed that you don't.

Put your money where your mouth is and is a different ballpark. When the faves is unaffordable and you have to look else where in 50/50 territory to make money. Try to win on totals and fight outcomes.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> You said the whites weren't good and gave SRR and Armstrong as your proof.
> 
> I directly dismissed your theory. That is why you need to address it.
> 
> ...


Yeah i'm the biggest joke while i pick the most winners, the outcome, and fight totals. What a fucking joke i am.

I said they fought a lot of shitty white boxers, it is that a false statement? You want to run down how many whites SRR beat vs how many whites beat him?
Again, you knew what i meant but you just play dumb.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Yeah i'm the biggest joke while i pick the most winners, the outcome, and fight totals. What a fucking joke i am.
> 
> I said they fought a lot of shitty white boxers, it is that a false statement? You want to run down how many whites SRR beat vs how many whites beat him?
> Again, you knew what i meant but you just play dumb.


You are a hypocrite. You will never learn. No one cares for your opinion so why do you post here? Keep playing covers with your shitty band.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> You are a hypocrite. You will never learn. No one cares for your opinion so why do you post here? Keep playing covers with your shitty band.


Like i care for yours? Someone who don't agree with you and banned them. Someone who don't agree with you and you wish death upon them. You are very much a low life.

And btw you got owned. SRR > white boxers. Not the other way around.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Ok what? You dodging again? I say why don't you tell me. I know you picked losers. just look at your vcash. Thats the only thing i can go by unless you gamble with real money which you confessed that you don't.
> 
> Put your money where your mouth is and is a different ballpark. When the faves is unaffordable and you have to look else where in 50/50 territory to make money. Try to win on totals and fight outcomes.


I never dodged you its more of a matter of your inability to back up your words and post which losers i picked. Vcash is something i dont take very seriously and i bet the vcash very rarely. If it makes you any happier i can start being more active with the vcash

If vcash is your only argument then thats too bad. Theres alot of knowledgable guys on here with no vcash. Its not really a good indicator.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Like i care for yours? Someone who don't agree with you and banned them. Someone who don't agree with you and you wish death upon them. You are very much a low life.
> 
> And btw you got owned. SRR > white boxers. Not the other way around.


I got owned? Tell me about the white sluggers that are so bad that beat SRR and Armstrong?

Armstrong especially.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> I never dodged you its more of a matter of your inability to back up your words and post which losers i picked. Vcash is something i dont take very seriously and i bet the vcash very rarely. If it makes you any happier i can start being more active with the vcash
> 
> If vcash is your only argument then thats too bad. Theres alot of knowledgable guys on here with no vcash. Its not really a good indicator.


how about you be more active with real cash. BC you keep throwing out as if i value vcash more than REAL cash. I've shown what damage i do to sportsbooks numerous of times so don't give me that tliang only cares about vcash bs. Prove it where it matters then.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> I got owned? Tell me about the white sluggers that are so bad that beat SRR and Armstrong?
> 
> Armstrong especially.


Yeah you got owned. Banning someone who you don't see eye to eye is a false statement? Wishing people death is false too?
SRR > white boxers is false?
Run it down and prove me wrong tough guy. You suppose to be the expert here.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> how about you be more active with real cash. BC you keep throwing out as if i value vcash more than REAL cash. I've shown what damage i do to sportsbooks numerous of times so don't give me that tliang only cares about vcash bs. Prove it where it matters then.


I havent bet on boxing outside of ruddock-tyson and leonard-hearns 2. The latter is an example why, because boxing is too corrupt and unpredictable. Too easy to blow your money because of a BS decision or a premature stoppage


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> I havent bet on boxing outside of ruddock-tyson and leonard-hearns 2. The latter is an example why, because boxing is too corrupt and unpredictable. Too easy to blow your money because of a BS decision or a prrmature stoppage


Boxing is *too corrupt and unpredictable* and i'm still winning at 85% of recent. Whats that say about me then?


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Boxing is *too corrupt and unpredictable* and i'm still winning at 85% of recent. Whats that say about me then?


I don't really care, m8. Its your money and everybody runs out of luck eventually. Id rather not take the chance. You would. Whatever.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Yeah you got owned. Banning someone who you don't see eye to eye is a false statement? Wishing people death is false too?
> SRR > white boxers is false?
> Run it down and prove me wrong tough guy. You suppose to be the expert here.


Everyone knows I have the answers.

We want to see if YOU and your google searches have the answers. I am posing questions to you, to see if you can back up your broad and ignorant statements about the history of boxing.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> I don't really care, m8. Its your money and everybody runs out of luck eventually. Id rather not take the chance. You would. Whatever.


actually i've gambling on boxing for 10 years now and bump my 70 percent winning percentile to 85% now. It have nothing to do with luck.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Everyone knows I have the answers.
> 
> We want to see if YOU and your google searches have the answers. I am posing questions to you, to see if you can back up your broad and ignorant statements about the history of boxing.


Everyone can conduct research. I have already said it. I never claim to be a boxing historian. It is your job to prove to me otherwise. I've already said if there is a classic gem then send it to me. I'll give my honest assessment as i always do.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Everyone can conduct research. I have already said it. I never claim to be a boxing historian. It is your job to prove to me otherwise. I've already said if there is a classic gem then send it to me. I'll give my honest assessment as i always do.


So you're not a historian but you make claims about the history of boxing that you are sure of?

Sounds legit.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> So you're not a historian but you make claims about the history of boxing that you are sure of?
> 
> Sounds legit.


Yeah hes no historian but floyd is a top 3 ATG.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> So you're not a historian but you make claims about the history of boxing that you are sure of?
> 
> Sounds legit.


About SRR > white boxers. what is his win/loss ratio against them and what stage of his career. Why don't you correct me if i'm wrong mr. expert.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Yeah hes no historian but floyd is a top 3 ATG.


Did you not see my post where i said i've researched the top20 fighters to see what they are about? The big names in boxing history, i've have conduct research. You are playing dumb again, or you didn't see. It is not enough to speak upon the ATG list or do i need to see every damn boxers ever like you "obviously have"?


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Oh great, tliang is spouting absolute shit again in defense of lil Floyd :lol:


He said some lovely things about me last night,so I was hoping the "debate" would have petered out.
Tiang is just one of these guys(and he's not alone) who is completely unwilling to open his mind to any other possibility outside of the one he believes in.
That's why I told Tommy not to bother.
And Tiang,I know you've got it in your head that I have some grudge against you,but I'm afraid that's not the case.
But if you keep making your points by banging on about "I pick winners" then you come across as intolerably childish.I may be wrong but I thought I saw you saying you can influence odds.If that's true then I'm guessing your minimum stake is usually high six figures?
And I know you're not bothered about my opinion but unlikely as it is,you might just see I'm giving you positive advice here.
@Bogotazo ; You get my PM?


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Did you not see my post where i said i've researched the top20 fighters to see what they are about? The big names in boxing history, i've have conduct research. You are playing dumb again, or you didn't see. It is not enough to speak upon the ATG list or do i need to see every damn boxers ever like you "obviously have"?


You are so stupid it's unreal!

Again; Henry Armstrong. Tell me the famous white fighter that beat him up. Or name one of the white boxers thst beat him in his prime.

Ray won more than he lost against whites but he lost a fair few as well, some in his prime.

You cannot research 'the top 20 boxers'. What you know, is 20 famous boxers.

So you ranking Floyd so highly is actually 'Floyd Mayweather is the third most famous boxer'.

In your opinion.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> You are so stupid it's unreal!
> 
> Again; Henry Armstrong. Tell me the famous white fighter that beat him up. Or name one of the white boxers thst beat him in his prime.
> 
> ...


Again isn't the classic your field. I don't know about you but i'm at work. That is more important than your trolling ass. SRR lost to Jake and beat him back way more if thats what you are talking about "in his prime".

Yeah... I JUST KNOW 20 famous boxers. Just 20.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> He said some lovely things about me last night,so I was hoping the "debate" would have petered out.
> Tiang is just one of these guys(and he's not alone) who is completely unwilling to open his mind to any other possibility outside of the one he believes in.
> That's why I told Tommy not to bother.
> And Tiang,I know you've got it in your head that I have some grudge against you,but I'm afraid that's not the case.
> ...


Unable to tolerate people's opinion is not I just so you know. LMAO what a joke. I'm playing defense but i'm the close minded one LOLOLOL


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> He said some lovely things about me last night,so I was hoping the "debate" would have petered out.
> Tiang is just one of these guys(and he's not alone) who is completely unwilling to open his mind to any other possibility outside of the one he believes in.
> That's why I told Tommy not to bother.
> And Tiang,I know you've got it in your head that I have some grudge against you,but I'm afraid that's not the case.
> ...


Yep yep. Will get to both shortly.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Unable to tolerate people's opinion is not I just so you know. LMAO what a joke. I'm playing defense but i'm the close minded one LOLOLOL


Let's pretend we're both adults and have a civil,measured chat over this.

Can you elaborate on what you mean when you say "Unable to tolerate people's opinion is not I just so you know" please?
I know you're laughing your ass off but I've exposed you as a liar earlier in the thread when you had a go at me for nothing.All I was saying is that Floyd could turn up at your door and say "Listen kid,there are maybe a couple of fighters in history who would beat me" and you would tell him,"what do you know? I pick winners"

You are unable and unwilling to admit you are or could possibly be wrong.I've been wrong and ate crow several times on here,because that's what grown ups do.You are almost universally considered one of the most immature posters on the forum,and even when someone is being civil to you,you like to be a keyboard tough guy.
Ease up on the grudges.We can't afford for the Vegas odds to get fucked up just because you're having a bad day.

Feel free to keep laughing your ass off.I suggest whilst you're not playing at being Lefty Rosenthal you learn how to debate and discuss matters like a grown up.
As for being on defense,try and remember how you took a perfectly civil post from me and went on the attack with it.So ease up on the jive Clive.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Yep yep. Will get to both shortly.


Sorry mate.Hadn't seen this when I sent a reply there.atsch


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Again isn't the classic your field. I don't know about you but i'm at work. That is more important than your trolling ass. SRR lost to Jake and beat him back way more if thats what you are talking about "in his prime".
> 
> Yeah... I JUST KNOW 20 famous boxers. Just 20.


I don't think you even know that.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> Let's pretend we're both adults and have a civil,measured chat over this.
> 
> Can you elaborate on what you mean when you say "Unable to tolerate people's opinion is not I just so you know" please?
> I know you're laughing your ass off but I've exposed you as a liar earlier in the thread when you had a go at me for nothing.All I was saying is that Floyd could turn up at your door and say "Listen kid,there are maybe a couple of fighters in history who would beat me" and you would tell him,"what do you know? I pick winners"
> ...


what in the world are you on about?

I don't admit when i'm wrong? i know many of you seen my post where i said i took the loser before. Like Haye vs Wlad. Hell i have even admit fighters when they got the wrong fighter. And what does that i picked from 70-85 percentile mean?

This whole shit got stirred up again bc someone have a problem with my opinion, period. Don't try to make me look like the bad guy here just bc i retaliated.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> what in the world are you on about?
> 
> I don't admit when i'm wrong? i know many of you seen my post where i said i took the loser before. Like Haye vs Wlad. Hell i have even admit fighters when they got the wrong fighter.
> 
> This whole shit got stirred up again bc someone have a problem with my opinion, period. Don't try to make me look like the bad guy here just bc i retaliated.


You really need to stop with all this bad guy stuff.People don't dislike or hold grudges the way you think they do.
I replied to a post you made about Robinson with no malice whatsoever.I only asked Tommy if he was really surprised that you thought SRR was the only man who could beat Floyd then made an insulting post before going onto post complete inaccuracies about me.
You're no bad guy to me,but you can't expect to insult someone and not have it questioned.
Capiche?


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> You really need to stop with all this bad guy stuff.People don't dislike or hold grudges the way you think they do.
> I replied to a post you made about Robinson with no malice whatsoever.I only asked Tommy if he was really surprised that you thought SRR was the only man who could beat Floyd then made an insulting post before going onto post complete inaccuracies about me.
> You're no bad guy to me,but you can't expect to insult someone and not have it questioned.
> Capiche?


The OP was about 154 in history and i said only one that is a *safe bet* is SRR bc of his size and style.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> The OP was about 154 in history and i said only one that is a *safe bet* is SRR bc of his size and style.


At light middleweight mccallum and norris would beat him. Take that to the bank.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> The OP was about 154 in history and i said only one that is a *safe bet* is SRR bc of his size and style.


I know you did.But why are you so offended that I suggested Tommy should not be surprised by that?
I know how highly you rate Floyd,so I don't find it surprising that that was your answer.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> I know you did.But why are you so offended that I suggested Tommy should not be surprised by that?
> I know how highly you rate Floyd,so I don't find it surprising that that was your answer.


You must have selective memory. start from page 4 to see how it got started. Tommy kept egging it on between you and him and i didn't go in on you guys till late and we all escalated.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

But idc, this is an internet forum it is not that serious. i prefer to talk a little trash every once in a while to live up the place. And If i see something that i feel like responding then i will. I know you guys long enough to know where you guys stand and honestly i don't see too many bad posters on this site which is why i prefer chb.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> You must have selective memory. start from page 4 to see how it got started. Tommy kept egging it on between you and him and i didn't go in on you guys till late and we all escalated.


Please stop with the blatant lies Tiang or I'm not playing here anymore.
I posted a civil response to you,made a perfectly non-insulting point about not being surprised at your choice then you said something about not caring for my opinion.
Tommy correctly said it was a shitty thing to say and that's where it started.

Go back and check.You went on the offensive so if you're going to tell blatant lies that you yourself even point out the page they're on,then there really is no point.
You are lying.Prove me wrong and check page 4 again to be safe.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> I know you did.But why are you so offended that I suggested Tommy should not be surprised by that?
> I know how highly you rate Floyd,so I don't find it surprising that that was your answer.


You guys put words in my mouth as "only" then the lols then the smart ass remarks and i said...

i said that yeah i don't ever know what i'm talking about... but yet i keep picking winners. How offensive that?
Then i used your shit against you about not valuing my opinion so i said likewise. Even BJ called you guys out before i even jumped in to bump old ass threads. You guys asked for this.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> You guys put words in my mouth as "only" then the lols then the smart ass remarks and i said...
> 
> i said that yeah i don't ever know what i'm talking about... but yet i keep picking winners. How offensive that?
> Then i used your shit against you about not valuing my opinion so i said likewise. Even BJ called you guys out before i even jumped in to bump old ass threads. You guys asked for this.


You've completely lost me now.I don't think bj has quoted me or been quoted once by me in this thread.
You said in an offensive way about not valuing my opinion and I certainly responded but did not "put words in your mouth"
I really don't know if it's a reading comprehension thing or something and as I am only competent in one language I certainly wouldn't insult anyone who is posting outwith their mother tongue but you've totally lost me here.
OK, you win.I don't know what,but I give up anyway.
Enjoy those winnings,and if you were any sort of decent guy you'd be sharing the chance to get wealthy with us.
Now I'm sorry but I can't continue in this hamster's wheel.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> You've completely lost me now.I don't think bj has quoted me or been quoted once by me in this thread.
> You said in an offensive way about not valuing my opinion and I certainly responded but did not "put words in your mouth"
> I really don't know if it's a reading comprehension thing or something and as I am only competent in one language I certainly wouldn't insult anyone who is posting outwith their mother tongue but you've totally lost me here.
> OK, you win.I don't know what,but I give up anyway.
> ...


me either... the fun and the heat of the debate has died...


----------



## IsaL (Jun 5, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> me either... the fun and the heat of the debate has died...


You're as bad as the average Pacturd.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

tommygun711 said:


> I havent bet on boxing outside of ruddock-tyson and leonard-hearns 2.


How old are you?! :blood


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

Tliang is getting a lot of trash for opinions that he has managed to back up pretty damn well _with his own criteria._

I'm not saying I agree with him, but at the end of the day, it's all subjective. If I were that into ranking fighters I'd stick to conventional. As it is he seems to really value the perfect record and consistency.

What's so wrong about that? Nothing objectively wrong.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Strange, I haven't mentioned Duran yet.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> Tliang is getting a lot of trash for opinions that he has managed to back up pretty damn well _with his own criteria._
> 
> I'm not saying I agree with him, but at the end of the day, it's all subjective. If I were that into ranking fighters I'd stick to conventional. As it is he seems to really value the perfect record and consistency.
> 
> What's so wrong about that? Nothing objectively wrong.


tliang has a history of defending Floyd at all costs. He's said ridiculous shit in the past and been owned time and time again. He became furious when people suggested that the Fab 4 had faced better opposition despite the fact he hadn't seen any of them fight, went crazy when I pointed out Floyd's flaws in a post that used images (in a thread which specifically asked for his flaws), and so he has arrived at narrow criteria which perfectly and uniquely accommodate Floyd's record. There are only 3 undefeated ATG's (Floyd, Lopez, and Marciano) so according to that criteria, they should be the top 3 of his list.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> How old are you?! :blood


28. I guess its unfair to say that i DIRECTLY bet on it but my father bet money for me on the leonard-hearns fight. Didnt turn out well for me.


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> tliang has a history of defending Floyd at all costs. He's said ridiculous shit in the past and been owned time and time again. He became furious when people suggested that the Fab 4 had faced better opposition despite the fact he hadn't seen any of them fight, went crazy when I pointed out Floyd's flaws in a post that used images (in a thread which specifically asked for his flaws), and so he has arrived at narrow criteria which perfectly and uniquely accommodate Floyd's record.


I have a fair idea of what he has said in the past. I just moved on. I don't think he was that outrageous in this thread. Shit, despite how much he likes Mayweather he called Ray Robinson a safe bet. They both make the WW limit easy. He's not as bad as they come, in fact, even if they are wrong (and I agree that a few of them are, that's neither here nor there) I believe he is good at backing up his own opinion. I don't feel the need to name an outright Flomo as an example but there are much worse opinions from that camp.

We all have ridiculous opinions like that. We just keep them to ourselves a little more.

And shit. There's a long list of boxers and trainers who actually agree with him. They don't spend as much time discussing the sport as we do but not many are going to jump all over Paulie Malignaggi or Roberto Garcia for their lack of knowledge or specific criteria when they name the things they think make Floyd one of the shortlist greats.



> There are only 3 undefeated ATG's (Floyd, Lopez, and Marciano) so according to that criteria, they should be the top 3 of his list.


Only if that's the only criteria he ranks on. He has indicated otherwise, I believe he had two fighters in front of Mayweather? It's a start.

For one though, Marciano's career was a third the length of Mayweathers, and he was brought along much slower. Hasn't he repeated 20 years more than once? Not that well educated on Lopez.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> I have a fair idea of what he has said in the past. I just moved on. I don't think he was that outrageous in this thread. Shit, despite how much he likes Mayweather he called Ray Robinson a safe bet. They both make the WW limit easy. He's not as bad as they come, in fact, even if they are wrong (and I agree that a few of them are, that's neither here nor there) I believe he is good at backing up his own opinion. I don't feel the need to name an outright Flomo as an example but there are much worse opinions from that camp.
> 
> We all have ridiculous opinions like that. We just keep them to ourselves a little more.
> 
> ...


I'm fairly sure he's the worst of the bunch, at least on CHB. He has said some utterly baffling things. Just terrible. And without having even watched the fighters, that's the real crime. It's not having the opinion, it's forming it with no solid basis.


----------



## IsaL (Jun 5, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I'm fairly sure he's the worst of the bunch, at least on CHB. He has said some utterly baffling things. Just terrible. And without having even watched the fighters, that's the real crime. It's not having the opinion, it's forming it with no solid basis.


He loses credibility.


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I'm fairly sure he's the worst of the bunch, at least on CHB. He has said some utterly baffling things. Just terrible. And without having even watched the fighters, that's the real crime. It's not having the opinion, it's forming it with no solid basis.


I've seen him show decent knowledge before. Maybe we have different expectations since I used to spend more time on boxingscene than here. He does post out of his scope but it seems to be because of the variety of fighters that get thrown at him.

I don't mean to come across as a joyboy sticking up for another, but he does seem to know what Floyd is doing that makes him unique (as unique as any great fighter mind you).

If I can try give you a bit of insight, since it's probably safe to say I am higher on Floyd than you, I really rate the shut-out of Marquez. I hate that fight but I think that was masterful. Can't really blame him for being really high on Floyd if he thinks the same thing.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> I've seen him show decent knowledge before. Maybe we have different expectations since I used to spend more time on boxingscene than here. He does post out of his scope but it seems to be because of the variety of fighters that get thrown at him.
> 
> I don't mean to come across as a joyboy sticking up for another, but he does seem to know what Floyd is doing that makes him unique (as unique as any great fighter mind you).
> 
> If I can try give you a bit of insight, since it's probably safe to say I am higher on Floyd than you, I really rate the shut-out of Marquez. I hate that fight but I think that was masterful. Can't really blame him for being really high on Floyd if he thinks the same thing.


He's shown nothing but ignorance in the back-and-forths I've had with him.

It doesn't have much to do with Floyd's h2h abilities, there are few I'd rate on par, but in terms of accomplishment, sheer quality of wins, Floyd has plenty ahead of him. Not a ton, but a fair number. And it definitely includes the Fab 4. Which tliang fought to the death over.


----------



## IsaL (Jun 5, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> I've seen him show decent knowledge before. Maybe we have different expectations since I used to spend more time on boxingscene than here. He does post out of his scope but it seems to be because of the variety of fighters that get thrown at him.
> 
> I don't mean to come across as a joyboy sticking up for another, but he does seem to know what Floyd is doing that makes him unique (as unique as any great fighter mind you).
> 
> If I can try give you a bit of insight, since it's probably safe to say I am higher on Floyd than you, I really rate the shut-out of Marquez. I hate that fight but I think that was masterful. Can't really blame him for being really high on Floyd if he thinks the same thing.


Tim Bradley nearly replicated the same schooling and Tim is who? Slick has become JMMs kryptonite. I can't give Mayweather huge props for beating JMM. Too many unfair advantages.


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> He's shown nothing but ignorance in the back-and-forths I've had with him.


I think you might be throwing the baby out with the bathwater a little.



> It doesn't have much to do with Floyd's h2h abilities, there are few I'd rate on par, but in terms of accomplishment, sheer quality of wins, Floyd has plenty ahead of him. Not a ton, but a fair number. And it definitely includes the Fab 4. Which tliang fought to the death over.


The different priorities is what I'm getting at. It's not wrong to rank on something like that, it's against the norm. That's the crux of what I'm saying. Truth be told I'm bothered by the 'terminal illness' thing. That's some shit discourse tbh.

He's ridiculed for an opinion that is different. He's not trudging in and saying that Floyd would beat Robinson comfortably, that's the kind of Flomo that I'm used to.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

IsaL said:


> Tim Bradley nearly replicated the same schooling and Tim is who? Slick has become JMMs kryptonite. I can't give Mayweather huge props for beating JMM. Too many unfair advantages.


Thats not being fair to floyd. Tim fought a considerably older JMM. One that had slipped alot compared to the one floyd fought, and JMM was alot more competitive with Bradley.


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

IsaL said:


> Tim Bradley nearly replicated the same schooling and Tim is who? Slick has become JMMs kryptonite. I can't give Mayweather huge props for beating JMM. Too many unfair advantages.


Bradley won a close decision over Marquez, which some scored for Marquez (not me). Marquez has fought more professional rounds than _any_ current boxer as far as I'm aware. More than B-Hop. Jury is still out on how much Marquez has left but IMO he looked very old in his two fights prior to Alvarado who was a step-down in competition.

Mayweather dominated and dropped him five years ago, coming off of two of the biggest wins of his career. To Marquez' credit he has bounced back from this dominant loss amazingly. It is overlooked how rarely this happens. This is a great achievement by Marquez.

I do not agree.


----------



## ChampionsForever (Jun 5, 2013)

90s De la Hoya beats him


----------



## IsaL (Jun 5, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Thats not being fair to floyd. Tim fought a considerably older JMM. One that had slipped alot compared to the one floyd fought, and JMM was alot more competitive with Bradley.


JMM was coming up two weight divisions. He looked flabby, lethargic, and considerably slower. Mayweather was clearly and obviously the bigger, stronger, younger, and faster fighter. What hurts Floyd in that fight is the same thing that will hurts him in the Maidana fight, unfair advantages. Weight, and now Gloves.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

IsaL said:


> Tim Bradley nearly replicated the same schooling and Tim is who? Slick has become JMMs kryptonite. I can't give Mayweather huge props for beating JMM. Too many unfair advantages.


1. Tim is elite.
2. Much closer fight, even if it had a little to do with Bradley showboating and (arguably) throwing rounds away.
I had it rather wide for Bradley but a lot of the rounds were close, Mayweather schooled him, Bradley beat a slower older Marquez.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> Bradley won a close decision over Marquez, which some scored for Marquez (not me). Marquez has fought more professional rounds than _any_ current boxer as far as I'm aware. More than B-Hop. Jury is still out on how much Marquez has left but IMO he looked very old in his two fights prior to Alvarado who was a step-down in competition.
> 
> Mayweather dominated and dropped him five years ago, coming off of two of the biggest wins of his career. To Marquez' credit he has bounced back from this dominant loss amazingly. It is overlooked how rarely this happens. This is a great achievement by Marquez.
> 
> I do not agree.


Hopkins has 6 more pro rounds.
And Jason Nesbitt has fought more rounds as a pro than Hopkins and Marquez combined.


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

dyna said:


> Hopkins has 6 more pro rounds.
> And Jason Nesbitt has fought more rounds as a pro than Hopkins and Marquez combined.


:cry

Okay thanks for the schooling. Do you keep this information yourself?


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

tommygun711 said:


> 28. I guess its unfair to say that i DIRECTLY bet on it but my father bet money for me on the leonard-hearns fight. Didnt turn out well for me.


Ah, alright.

For a second I thought you were going to end up being old enough to be my daddy and that tripped me to fuck because I always imagined you being in the same age group. :lol:


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> :cry
> 
> Okay thanks for the schooling. Do you keep this information yourself?


It's all on boxrec.
http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?cat=boxer&human_id=1414
http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=12222&cat=boxer
http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?cat=boxer&human_id=31221


----------



## Capaedia (Jun 6, 2013)

dyna said:


> It's all on boxrec.
> http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?cat=boxer&human_id=1414
> http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=12222&cat=boxer
> http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?cat=boxer&human_id=31221


Much appreciated. I overlooked that somehow, but have noticed the statistics around it.


----------



## VG_Addict (Mar 13, 2013)

Andrade could give Floyd a good fight. 

He's a tall, rangy, fast southpaw with a good jab.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

quincy gonna come on soon and tell y'all what time it is.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)




----------



## Mushin (Dec 12, 2013)

Guys I would put my money on :

Duran @ 135
Pryor @ 140
Robinson, Leonard, Hearns @ 147
Norris @ 154


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Mushin said:


> Guys I would put my money on :
> 
> *Duran @ 135
> Pryor @ 140*
> ...


Pryor's best win was over Arguello, a fighter that Floyd would handled with relative ease at 140lbs.

I would never put money on Duran because he didn't consistently put in great performances, not even at Lightweight.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Pedderrs said:


> Pryor's best win was over Arguello, a fighter that Floyd would handled with relative ease at 140lbs.
> 
> I would never put money on Duran because he didn't consistently put in great performances, not even at Lightweight.


I'd bet my house on Duran. He's flat out better than Floyd.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> I would never put money on Duran because he didn't consistently put in great performances, not even at Lightweight.


Fuck off.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Flea Man said:


> I'd bet my house on Duran. He's flat out better than Floyd.


Of course you would. You detest Floyd Mayweather with a passion, but only a fool would bet their house on Duran to beat him. It has absolutely nothing to do with Duran's abilities, but more his consistency and his dedication. He found ways to lose against inferior opposition throughout his career, whereas Floyd has not. These are statements of fact, Flea.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> Of course you would. You detest Floyd Mayweather with a passion, but only a fool would bet their house on Duran to beat him. It has absolutely nothing to do with Duran's abilities, but more his consistency and his dedication. He found ways to lose against inferior opposition throughout his career, whereas Floyd has not. These are statements of fact, Flea.


Duran is unbeaten at lightweight though.

(Dejesus was at 140)


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

dyna said:


> Duran is unbeaten at lightweight though.
> 
> (Dejesus was at 140)


But he was still prone to the odd 'meh' performance there though, wasn't he?

With Duran being one of the most popular fighters in the history of the Internet, I think it's important we understand what it is we're actually discussing here before people get up in arms about what they think I'm saying. I'm not saying Duran loses, I'm just saying it's more than a possibility given his weight fluctuations, lack of discipline, and the amount of times throughout his career he simply didn't show up. Floyd Mayweather, love him or hate him, is a supremely talented fighter and could conceivably beat most fighters, not just Duran, on his best day. So no, I wouldn't bet anything on Duran defeating Mayweather. I wouldn't feel confident enough.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Pedderrs said:


> Of course you would. You detest Floyd Mayweather with a passion, but only a fool would bet their house on Duran to beat him. It has absolutely nothing to do with Duran's abilities, but more his consistency and his dedication. He found ways to lose against inferior opposition throughout his career, whereas Floyd has not. These are statements of fact, Flea.


Never lost at lightweight. And beat an ATG welter before he'd lose there.

You are extremely wrong if you think I let my dislike of a fighter cloud my ability to analyse him.

Anyway, I like Floyd. I don't like the overrating of him or his placing in the upper echelon of ATGs by fans.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Flea Man said:


> Never lost at lightweight. And beat an ATG welter before he'd lose there.
> 
> You are extremely wrong if you think I let my dislike of a fighter cloud my ability to analyse him.
> 
> Anyway, I like Floyd. I don't like the overrating of him or his placing in the upper echelon of ATGs by fans.


He never fought a fighter as good as Floyd at Lightweight. DeJesus nor Bunchanan qualify, as good as they were.

You wouldn't bet your house on the result anyway, Flea. You'd admit that if you were honest. Your fuckin' house on that fat, lazy twat Duran doing the business against one of the most skilled operators of the last 30 years? No deal.


----------



## Celtic Warrior 2.0 (Apr 12, 2014)

SRL, Hearns, Duran, SRR, Pacquiao, Paul Williams, Armstrong, Chavez, Arguello, Whittaker, Prime Mosley, Tito, Wilfred Benitez, Griffith, Pryor.


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Terry Norris would be really difficult. One of the toughest I can think of for Floyd.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> He never fought a fighter as good as Floyd at Lightweight. DeJesus nor Bunchanan qualify, as good as they were.
> 
> You wouldn't bet your house on the result anyway, Flea. You'd admit that if you were honest. Your fuckin' house on that fat, lazy twat Duran doing the business against one of the most skilled operators of the last 30 years? No deal.


When we have these discussions on H2H matchups, we usually minimise such variables to allow for a strong analysis, otherwise it defeats the purpose. 
In reality, Duran may come in as a lazy fat shit, but there's no grounds for discussion in that case. We just sit there in the dark in a very high level of uncertainty and it's all just pointless.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> When we have these discussions on H2H matchups, we usually minimise such variables to allow for a strong analysis, otherwise it defeats the purpose.
> In reality, Duran may come in as a lazy fat shit, but there's no grounds for discussion in that case. We just sit there in the dark in a very high level of uncertainty and it's all just pointless.


I'm not having the H2H discussion. There was another user on these forums who claimed they would happily put money on Roberto Duran beating Floyd Mayweather Jr, I'm just saying I wouldn't be prepared to do that given the fickle nature of Duran's preparation and attitude.

The familiar pattern with Duran H2H discussions is that we take the absolute peak of Duran, which would be Montreal, and then we scrutinise every facet of his opponent's career until we can find basis for predicting a Duran win. It's all very one-sided.

Duran wasn't infallible, not even when he was on his A+ game. Floyd has the tools to beat him at his best, but whether or not that would happen will be subject to discussion for forever I imagine.

H2H discussions in general are pretty pointless, Defeated, but we engage in them anyway to pass the time and amuse ourselves.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> I'm not having the H2H discussion. There was another user on these forums who claimed they would happily put money on Roberto Duran beating Floyd Mayweather Jr, I'm just saying I wouldn't be prepared to do that given the fickle nature of Duran's preparation and attitude.
> 
> The familiar pattern with Duran H2H discussions is that we take the absolute peak of Duran, which would be Montreal, and then we scrutinise every facet of his opponent's career until we can find basis for predicting a Duran win. It's all very one-sided.
> 
> ...


'There was another user on these forums'...just say Flea. 
Flea was obviously talking about Floyd vs Duran under the same premises that I use when considering H2H matchups (or maybe he feels so sure of a fat lazy off-point Duran, which has existed, beating Floyd). We assume the fighter is motivated. When I think of another fighter that I know Flea loves for example, Fighting Harada, I'd say I'd bet on him beating a certain fighter too, the premises is obviously that we're talking a down and ready to go version of Harada.

So if we pick a fighter X at his best vs fighter Y at his best, then it doesn't _necessarily_ have to become very one-sided.

Under your premise though, yes...I couldn't bet my house on something. In fact if we're talking about betting..1. I'm not a betting man 2. In boxing anything can happen - it's just one of those sports, so I wouldn't be inclined to bet anyway.

The last point in your response was a point I was making with the Lomachenko conversations, Bullshit Peddler.


----------



## the cobra (Jun 6, 2013)

Obvious guys: Robinson, Leonard, Hearns at Welter or higher, Duran and Whitaker at 135 and 140. McCallum at 154 for sure.

I'd take on-point versions of Gavilan, Griffith, and Rodriguez over him. Anything less than their best could well be another story. I'd pick prime Oscar at 140 and 147. The Vargas version at 154 too. I'd favor Winky Wright at 154. Julian Jackson too. Even if he's hitting nothing but air and shoulder for the first half of the fight, that's going to take its toll. It's Julian fucking Jackson against a considerably smaller man. I have no idea about Floyd vs Napoles. It'd be a lovely fight though. 


Those are my favorites. I think he's about even money or better against damn near everyone else in the weight range. I do regard him as the H2H best in the history of the 130lbs division.


----------



## Dedication (Jun 9, 2013)

the cobra said:


> Obvious guys: Robinson, Leonard, Hearns at Welter or higher, Duran and Whitaker at 135 and 140. McCallum at 154 for sure.
> 
> I'd take on-point versions of Gavilan, Griffith, and Rodriguez over him. Anything less than their best could well be another story. I'd pick prime Oscar at 140 and 147. The Vargas version at 154 too. I'd favor Winky Wright at 154. Julian Jackson too. Even if he's hitting nothing but air and shoulder for the first half of the fight, that's going to take its toll. It's Julian fucking Jackson against a considerably smaller man. I have no idea about Floyd vs Napoles. It'd be a lovely fight though.
> 
> Those are my favorites. I think he's about even money or better against damn near everyone else in the weight range. I do regard him as the H2H best in the history of the 130lbs division.


I don't understand why people tab prime Oscar at 140/147 I mean what would've he done differently at those weights to make it more competitive? Like plz tell me what advantages he has in his prime and how he would utilise them?


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> 'There was another user on these forums'...just say Flea.
> Flea was obviously talking about Floyd vs Duran under the same premises that I use when considering H2H matchups (or maybe he feels so sure of a fat lazy off-point Duran, which has existed, beating Floyd). We assume the fighter is motivated. When I think of another fighter that I know Flea loves for example, Fighting Harada, I'd say I'd bet on him beating a certain fighter too, the premises is obviously that we're talking a down and ready to go version of Harada.
> 
> So if we pick a fighter X at his best vs fighter Y at his best, then it doesn't _necessarily_ have to become very one-sided.
> ...


I wasn't referring to Flea.

I suggest you go back to the very beginning, read what everyone has to say, and you will then have some frame of reference.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Pedderrs said:


> He never fought a fighter as good as Floyd at Lightweight. DeJesus nor Bunchanan qualify, as good as they were.
> 
> You wouldn't bet your house on the result anyway, Flea. You'd admit that if you were honest. Your fuckin' house on *that fat, lazy twat Duran* doing the business against one of the most skilled operators of the last 30 years? No deal.


Oh, come on. You're out of line. :twisted

Rightly or Wrongly, I think people apply Duran beating a fighter of SRL's ridiculous quality at 147 to what he could do at 135. I mean, I could see him being #1 'H2H' at lightweight even without Montreal and based solely on the merit of the abilities shown over his near-decade long championship reign there, but it's definitely at the forefront of people's thoughts when he's discussed. Funnily enough aside from DeJesus III, four of my top five favorite performances from him came above 135.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Pedderrs said:


> I'm not having the H2H discussion. The familiar pattern with Duran H2H discussions is that we take the absolute peak of Duran, which would be Montreal, and then we scrutinise every facet of his opponent's career until we can find basis for predicting a Duran win.


What's the problem there? :huh


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> What's the problem there? :huh


This one's simple. A typically fit Duran gets inside. He's better there.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> This one's simple. A typically fit Duran gets inside. He's better there.


I'm shamelessly biased for Duran. :lol: ops


----------



## Hoshi (Aug 21, 2012)

In hypotheticals I give the benefit of the doubt to the person with a better resume. Shock horror :lol:

Whitaker, Duran, Hearns, Leonard, McCallum (devastating beatdown) Chavez. I'd be very confident in these names beating Mayweather. I give him a shot against Chavez but if Castillo and Maidana can give him trouble and expose his bad habits it is not unreasonable to think the great Mexican could give him fits.


----------



## MEXAMELAC (Apr 14, 2014)

Pedderrs said:


> But he was still prone to the odd 'meh' performance there though, wasn't he?
> 
> With Duran being one of the most popular fighters in the history of the Internet, I think it's important we understand what it is we're actually discussing here before people get up in arms about what they think I'm saying. I'm not saying Duran loses, I'm just saying it's more than a possibility given his weight fluctuations, lack of discipline, and the amount of times throughout his career he simply didn't show up. Floyd Mayweather, love him or hate him, is a supremely talented fighter and could conceivably beat most fighters, not just Duran, on his best day. So no, I wouldn't bet anything on Duran defeating Mayweather. I wouldn't feel confident enough.


You got to be fucking kidding me :lol:. Why the would anyone even consider this?? What makes this topic worthy of a discussion is thinking BOTH fighters would be at their best. If not, then what's the point?


----------



## MEXAMELAC (Apr 14, 2014)

Bogotazo said:


> I'm fairly sure he's the worst of the bunch, at least on CHB. He has said some utterly baffling things. Just terrible. And without having even watched the fighters, that's the real crime. It's not having the opinion, it's forming it with no solid basis.


I agree. Having a couple of points here and there doesn't mean you know what you're talking about. I bet that after getting in countless arguments, he picked up some things to make his argument sound somewhat credible. But when you hear shit that's waaaay the fuck off, you regret not pulling the plug on the debate sooner.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

MEXAMELAC said:


> I agree. Having a couple of points here and there doesn't mean you know what you're talking about. I bet that after getting in countless arguments, he picked up some things to make his argument sound somewhat credible. But when you hear shit that's waaaay the fuck off, you regret not pulling the plug on the debate sooner.


Hear shit way the fuck off on fantasy match ups? Like what? Present quotes from me that's ridiculous. 
They have no common opponents and fight in different eras and you think you are definitely right? Now that is being ridiculous. You guys are too full of yourselves. 
And you guys keep missing the bottomline. If you guys are always right and i'm always wrong they why am i the best handicapper on this site? Hmmm.... you guys are so smart.:rolleyes

People lie
Little bitches lie (bozo and friends)
Stats don't lie


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Capaedia said:


> Tliang is getting a lot of trash for opinions that he has managed to back up pretty damn well _with his own criteria._
> 
> I'm not saying I agree with him, but at the end of the day, it's all subjective. If I were that into ranking fighters I'd stick to conventional. As it is he seems to really value the perfect record and consistency.
> 
> What's so wrong about that? Nothing objectively wrong.


Don't worry about it bro. They are part of the posers/asslicking crew. They pm each other when they need help in an debate. If you corner them, then they freak out and wanna attack me personally, talking shit about my video, my band, my race, my will being. They gang up on people who have different opinions. Tiny Dejesus can drop and beat Duran but they think is impossible for Floyd to beat someone like Duran. So do i need to say more, how stuborn and self-centered they are?

You got bozo talking about i defend Floyd at all cost which is bs, bc i address the good and the bad on Floyd. Meanwhile he nuthugs the shit out of JMM. 
If that is not a big time hypocrite, i don't know what is. saying the poll agrees with him so therefore he is right until everyone thinks Bradley beat JMM then the poll is not correct bc it doesn't agrees with him. The guy is so full of shit.

He says that i got owned but his crew is still fuming for months and he is the one pleading for help to his friends to help support his argument.

They all team up and still can't beat me in a debate. You see them quoting me? Nope, they are just going to bullshitting the forum with their beliefs.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

tliang1000 said:


> Don't worry about it bro. They are part of the posers/asslicking crew. They pm each other when they need help in an debate. *If you corner them, then they freak out and wanna attack me personally, talking shit about my video, my band, my race, my will being. They gang up on people who have different opinions.* Tiny Dejesus can drop and beat Duran but they think is impossible for Floyd to beat someone like Duran. So do i need to say more, how stuborn and self-centered they are?
> 
> You got bozo talking about i defend Floyd at all cost which is bs, bc i address the good and the bad on Floyd. Meanwhile he nuthugs the shit out of JMM.
> If that is not a big time hypocrite, i don't know what is. saying the poll agrees with him so therefore he is right until everyone thinks Bradley beat JMM then the poll is not correct bc it doesn't agrees with him. The guy is so full of shit.
> ...


I never did any of this. :lol:

You know I'm very Pro-Duran as well as being a Floyd fan, but I don't take boxing debates personally and to bed with me.


----------



## TSOL (Dec 15, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> Don't worry about it bro. They are part of the posers/asslicking crew. They pm each other when they need help in an debate. If you corner them, then they freak out and wanna attack me personally, talking shit about my video, my band, my race, my will being. They gang up on people who have different opinions. Tiny Dejesus can drop and beat Duran but they think is impossible for Floyd to beat someone like Duran. So do i need to say more, how stuborn and self-centered they are?
> 
> You got bozo talking about i defend Floyd at all cost which is bs, bc i address the good and the bad on Floyd. Meanwhile he nuthugs the shit out of JMM.
> If that is not a big time hypocrite, i don't know what is. saying the poll agrees with him so therefore he is right until everyone thinks Bradley beat JMM then the poll is not correct bc it doesn't agrees with him. The guy is so full of shit.
> ...


what kinda music does your band play


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> Oh, come on. You're out of line. :twisted
> 
> Rightly or Wrongly, I think people apply Duran beating a fighter of SRL's ridiculous quality at 147 to what he could do at 135. I mean, I could see him being #1 'H2H' at lightweight even without Montreal and based solely on the merit of the abilities shown over his near-decade long championship reign there, but it's definitely at the forefront of people's thoughts when he's discussed. Funnily enough aside from DeJesus III, four of my top five favorite performances from him came above 135.


Duran could be a fat, lazy twat though?

All of this has stemmed from me replying to some dude who said he'd put money on Duran beating Floyd with me replying "I would never put money on Duran". I was simply making the point that some fighters were more consistent than others, and although I take the point that Duran didn't start losing until after he was finished with the Lightweight division, we must also concede that there were no Floyd Mayweather Jrs for him to fight there. So no, I wouldn't put money on it. I could analyse the two fighters at their very best and come to some well-thought conclusion as to why I think Duran's educated pressure, in-fighting abilities, and his feinting would cause Floyd problems he's never came close to encountering before, but I would never put money on the outcome for the reasons I've said.



Hands of Iron said:


> What's the problem there? :huh


I can't tell if you're kidding but I'll answer anyhow.

We take Duran of Montrael, a great fighter but one that only won narrowly on the cards that night, and then we take Floyd Mayweather Jr and discuss all of the times he has looked vulnerable. "Oh, Castillo made him look ordinary. I thought he lost that". "Mosley's right hand had the dude in trouble" or we talk about how much success Cotto had when those the two fought. What we don't talk about is how Benitez virtually shut Duran out for 15 rounds with a bit of movement and a jab. We don't talk about the times that Duran failed to show up because he simply wasn't motivated or he'd been eating too much the week before. None of this comes into the equation because we supposedly take the two at their best, but then we continue to bring up every round in Floyd's career where a punch got past his shoulder-roll.



MEXAMELAC said:


> You got to be fucking kidding me :lol:. Why the would anyone even consider this?? What makes this topic worthy of a discussion is thinking BOTH fighters would be at their best. If not, then what's the point?


I wasn't looking for a H2H discussion, but the moment I said "I would never put money on Duran" the forum went into meltdown, as it typically does when one dares deny Duran's untouchable greatness.



> Whitaker, Duran, Hearns, Leonard, McCallum (devastating beatdown) Chavez. I'd be very confident in these names beating Mayweather. I give him a shot against Chavez but if Castillo and Maidana can give him trouble and expose his bad habits it is not unreasonable to think the great Mexican could give him fits.


A prime example of what I'm talking about.

No, if Castillo and Maidana can give Floyd trouble and expose his bad habits I guess it isn't unreasonable to think the great Mexican could give him fits, but then again the great Mexican ran into a bit of trouble himself a long the way. Rocky Lockridge gave Chavez a tough night's work, as did Taylor, Whitaker and Randall. I usually wouldn't like to bring up the Randall fight, but it's as relevant as the Maidana fight in my opinion considering Floyd's age and inactivity.


----------



## Mushin (Dec 12, 2013)

Pedderrs said:


> Pryor's best win was over Arguello, a fighter that Floyd would handled with relative ease at 140lbs.
> 
> I would never put money on Duran because he didn't consistently put in great performances, not even at Lightweight.


I'd pick Floyd to beat Arguello because the style matchup would favor him, that doesn't mean Arguello wasn't great. Pryor is a different story though, he would be all over Floyd, wouldn't let him breathe.

Every fighter has lackluster performances here and there (like Floyd had against Augustus and Castillo), but overall I would favor Duran at LW.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Pedderrs said:


> Duran could be a fat, lazy twat though?
> 
> I can't tell if you're kidding.


:lol:

I couldn't be any less serious. Aside from the serious post included.

You're making perfectly valid points all throughout but I honestly couldn't give a shit less who thinks so and so would beat Duran, nevermind get my drawers twisted in a bunch over it. I hold a similar view to you where H2H discussions are involved. I'm quite secure with Robearto(e)'s place in history, with his skills and abilities, his top wins and performances.


----------



## Pedderrs (Jun 1, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> :lol:
> 
> I couldn't be any less serious. Aside from the serious post included.
> 
> You're making perfectly valid points all throughout but I honestly couldn't give a shit less who thinks so and so would beat Duran, nevermind get my drawers twisted in a bunch over it. I hold a similar view to you where H2H discussions are involved. I'm quite secure with Robearto(e)'s place in history, with his skills and abilities, his top wins and performances.


How do you think Floyd would have dealt with Ken Buchanan, Thomas Hearns, Marvin Hagler, and Iran Barkley? I think he beats Buchanan more convincingly without the controversy, he probably lasts a tad longer against Hearns, would have been well in his element with the Hagler that showed up against Duran, and I'm not sure about Barkley. Barkley wasn't great but he was fuckin' huge and could hit.

I feel my posts becoming more and more controversial. I'm headed for a ban, breh.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Pedderrs said:


> How do you think Floyd would have dealt with Ken Buchanan, Thomas Hearns, Marvin Hagler, and Iran Barkley? I think he beats Buchanan more convincingly without the controversy, he probably lasts a tad longer against Hearns, would have been well in his element with the Hagler that showed up against Duran, and I'm not sure about Barkley. Barkley wasn't great but he was fuckin' huge and could hit.
> 
> I feel my posts becoming more and more controversial. I'm headed for a ban, breh.


I'm honestly not sure he would've dealt with some of them, Addie. Calling factors into play here of a different sort than those you brought up for Duran. I actually think he's defensively skilled enough to last the distance with Hearns if he really wanted to, but any chance of winning would have to be thrown out the window along with it. He'd force Marvin to come forward and it was curve ball for him when Duran didn't engage him as expected. That version was a prime incarnation, he was just a little awed by what was going on and who he was fighting. He'd still be far and away the biggest and most skilled guy Floyd ever set foot in the ring with. That fight just simply wouldn't come off. Not at 160.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> I never did any of this. :lol:
> 
> You know I'm very Pro-Duran as well as being a Floyd fan, but I don't take boxing debates personally and to bed with me.


Yeah i I know you don't Iron. Yeah i've been trying not to do that as well. No CHB before bed LOL.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

TSOL said:


> what kinda music does your band play


The band i'm in right now only play originals. Our style is alternative, hardrock, punk, metal and a bit of pop feel to it. I got a prodigy guitarist who is 18 jamming with me and we are writing some good stuff. IMO anyways. We are in process of making an album and hopefully upload to the world soon but in the past/youtube, i've done covers, mainly alternative.


----------



## Bill Jincock (Jun 19, 2012)

I highly doubt Mayweather would beat someone with the stye of Buchanan more clearly than Duran did(or was on points before the controversial ending).

it would be a chessmatch where neither man has any problems with opposing power\strength, or fighting at their own pace and trying different things, that alone would make it a lot more competitive than the swarmer with lightning fast feet against textbook technician without enough power to keep respect dynamic of the duran buchanan fight.2-3 point top quality technical fight and win for Floyd i'd guess, unless a great and busy jab against someone with a range advantage bothers him more than i think it would.


----------



## the cobra (Jun 6, 2013)

Dedication said:


> I don't understand why people tab prime Oscar at 140/147 I mean what would've he done differently at those weights to make it more competitive? Like plz tell me what advantages he has in his prime and how he would utilise them?


Mobility and volume mainly, pumping his jab while on the move a la the Trinidad performance and forcing Floyd to come to him. I wouldn't have prime Oscar imitate a pressure fighter against Floyd. By the time of their actual fight, he couldn't bounce around the ring anymore and had to fight with a style he was never particularly great at. They'd probably land about the same number of clean punches, but Oscar would take rounds on activity and the generally harder blows. It'd be a different kind of fight than their actual meeting. Oscar's footwork is the main difference between the version that fought Floyd and the prime version.


----------



## Dedication (Jun 9, 2013)

the cobra said:


> Mobility and volume mainly, pumping his jab while on the move a la the Trinidad performance and forcing Floyd to come to him. I wouldn't have prime Oscar imitate a pressure fighter against Floyd. By the time of their actual fight, he couldn't bounce around the ring anymore and had to fight with a style he was never particularly great at. They'd probably land about the same number of clean punches, but Oscar would take rounds on activity and the generally harder blows. It'd be a different kind of fight than their actual meeting. Oscar's footwork is the main difference between the version that fought Floyd and the prime version.


At the same time Floyd's best success came when he kept him at the center of the ring, Oscar simply didn't have anything defensively to neutralize Floyd's offense. Pumping the jab can only get you so far if you don't implement it intelligently.

But you don't need to reply to this post cos I probs won't give an answer I'll just quote Money on this " Well OK. Well you know that's what they all say, I just say September 17th you see".

On a sidenote I love how gangsta Mayweather says "you see".


----------



## Dedication (Jun 9, 2013)

Mushin said:


> I'd pick Floyd to beat Arguello because the style matchup would favor him, that doesn't mean Arguello wasn't great. Pryor is a different story though, he would be all over Floyd, wouldn't let him breathe.
> 
> Every fighter has lackluster performances here and there (like Floyd had against Augustus and Castillo), but overall I would favor Duran at LW.


Castillo - Mayweather had one arm. Straight up.

Augustus - That weren't a lackluster performance Mayweather got outboxed in spots. Period. They were just constantly adapting to eachother.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

How was Floyd vs Augustus lack luster. Floyd looked amazing. 

Have people actually seen this fight?


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> The band i'm in right now only play originals. Our style is alternative, hardrock, punk, metal and a bit of pop feel to it. I got a prodigy guitarist who is 18 jamming with me and we are writing some good stuff. IMO anyways. We are in process of making an album and hopefully upload to the world soon but in the past/youtube, i've done covers, mainly alternative.


Hell yeah bro


----------



## MEXAMELAC (Apr 14, 2014)

tliang1000 said:


> Hear shit way the fuck off on fantasy match ups? Like what? Present quotes from me that's ridiculous.
> They have no common opponents and fight in different eras and you think you are definitely right? Now that is being ridiculous. You guys are too full of yourselves.
> And you guys keep missing the bottomline. If you guys are always right and i'm always wrong they why am i the best handicapper on this site? Hmmm.... you guys are so smart.:rolleyes
> 
> ...


Cool. You're right and we're ALL wrong.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

MEXAMELAC said:


> Cool. You're right and we're ALL wrong.


No right or wrong in fantasy debates and by now is all water under the bridge.


----------

