Nice, Amir Khan gets Mayweather next Now you will see Floyd tested, 28 year old young gun in Amir with stupidly quick hand speed and a trainer who is not delusional. Also at Wembley in front of 80,000 fans nice.
Will have £100 on Khan, just need hope Khan shows us some more reasons why he has the key to beat Floyd at the end of the month when he fights.
On May 06 2015 04:51 wei2coolman wrote: lol, it's one thing to dislike mayweather's choice of pointfighting in boxing, it's another to say he's not a great champ.
I don't think so. I gave a perfectly objective argument to support my take on this : which mayweather fights ever needed a rematch ? You can argue that it is because he outclassed all his opponents and I could accept that argument, but it still makes my point true. It takes two to tango, weither you believe mayweather is more a dancer than a boxer, or that he outclassed all his opponent, he never had a fight that was good enough to be placed remotly close to the best boxers. Another proof of that : mayweather is, in my opinion, better than manny pacquiao right now (maybe not prime but that's a stupid discussion) but pacquiao won more title/recognition (not talking about belt, but about fighter of the decade / years, or fight of year, etc.) because he had amazing fights and strong opposition. It's in the struggle that one see a true champion, he never had that opportunity (and I believe it is because he has a shitty style of boxing that abuse the flaws of boxing's rules). He is only known because he cries out loud everywhere that he is the best and that he earns more money than anyone (like a true member of the lumpen proletariat).
Just compare with the real deal, he is a fucking star and a hall of fame boxer despite being outweighted in many of his best fights. What made him are those fights, not his overall records/stats (which are in fact average compared to many other great fighters) : he has gone toe to toe with the greatest of his generation, and always proved he could win. Just go watch his fights against riddick bowe for exemple ... legendary.
It's in the struggle that one see a true champion, he never had that opportunity
Meh. You could make the same argument of any boxer so good that nobody in his generation can remotely put him in danger in a ring (surprise! like Mayweather). I guess it's a compliment to him if he's so good that people start to say boxing is a badly designed game, while being around for millenia :D.
Btw, people are also saying, in the same exact reasoning pattern, that Wladimir Klitschko is not a GOAT and that he's boring because he does not have strong opposition. I suggest you put on boxing gloves and go show him some opposition then.
Wladimir Klitschko is really different tho : he has a huge weight advantage over his category, due to the new technique of body enhancement most notably.
Also : - boxing was always plagued by corruption and fixed matches (so the fact that the rules are old doesn't make them good) ; - boxing today is really different due to various things : money, culture, relationship between fighters and promoters, all things that evolved a lot in the last ten years (mostly at the end of tyson / lennox fight) ; - I don't believe mayweather is that good, but I guess that's a subjective judgement. Are you implying Mayweather is better than Ali ?
I'm not implying anything, I just think Mayweather is unfathomably better than some in thread would like to believe (not necessarily you, you seem like a boxing enthusiast). I don't really like how we disregard his achievements so quickly, just because his style doesn't fit the current norm of what's flashy and cool.
On May 05 2015 19:08 papaz wrote: Lol at all the so called "experts" coming forth to the defense of Mayweather. Floyd is the reason the scoring in boxing is a joke. He can hug all day, cherry pick the judge and get no point deduction. So the pressure is always on the guy with the aggressive style.
No wonder boxing has lost viewership over the years if a guy like Floyd is what's considered a great boxer. Lmao!
Its not Floyds fault that Pac-Man couldnt hit him. Everyone knew what Floyd would do. Everyone watched to see if Pac man could exploit Floyds style. He couldnt. He deserved to lose.
I like Floyds idea of having a rematch in hostile territory (China) for his 50 win breaking rocky's streak.
On May 05 2015 19:08 papaz wrote: Lol at all the so called "experts" coming forth to the defense of Mayweather. Floyd is the reason the scoring in boxing is a joke. He can hug all day, cherry pick the judge and get no point deduction. So the pressure is always on the guy with the aggressive style.
No wonder boxing has lost viewership over the years if a guy like Floyd is what's considered a great boxer. Lmao!
Its not Floyds fault that Pac-Man couldnt hit him. Everyone knew what Floyd would do. Everyone watched to see if Pac man could exploit Floyds style. He couldnt. He deserved to lose.
I like Floyds idea of having a rematch in hostile territory (China) for his 50 win breaking rocky's streak.
But boxing is not a sport where a fighter tries to hit the other and lose if he can't. It's a fight confrontation between two fighters, and the winner is the one who dominate the fight.
On May 05 2015 19:08 papaz wrote: Lol at all the so called "experts" coming forth to the defense of Mayweather. Floyd is the reason the scoring in boxing is a joke. He can hug all day, cherry pick the judge and get no point deduction. So the pressure is always on the guy with the aggressive style.
No wonder boxing has lost viewership over the years if a guy like Floyd is what's considered a great boxer. Lmao!
Its not Floyds fault that Pac-Man couldnt hit him. Everyone knew what Floyd would do. Everyone watched to see if Pac man could exploit Floyds style. He couldnt. He deserved to lose.
I like Floyds idea of having a rematch in hostile territory (China) for his 50 win breaking rocky's streak.
But boxing is not a sport where a fighter tries to hit the other and lose if he can't. It's a fight confrontation between two fighters, and the winner is the one who dominate the fight.
On May 05 2015 19:08 papaz wrote: Lol at all the so called "experts" coming forth to the defense of Mayweather. Floyd is the reason the scoring in boxing is a joke. He can hug all day, cherry pick the judge and get no point deduction. So the pressure is always on the guy with the aggressive style.
No wonder boxing has lost viewership over the years if a guy like Floyd is what's considered a great boxer. Lmao!
Its not Floyds fault that Pac-Man couldnt hit him. Everyone knew what Floyd would do. Everyone watched to see if Pac man could exploit Floyds style. He couldnt. He deserved to lose.
I like Floyds idea of having a rematch in hostile territory (China) for his 50 win breaking rocky's streak.
But boxing is not a sport where a fighter tries to hit the other and lose if he can't. It's a fight confrontation between two fighters, and the winner is the one who dominate the fight.
No, that's what fighting is. boxing =/= fighting.
That's because you don't know what dominate means. You don't need to kill your opponent in boxing, you can dominate space, dominate by technic, but it's not a one way fight, where ONE fighter try to hit the other, it's a one versus one. A defensive player who barely tries to hit, who didn't hurt his opponent and who run around should not win with a majority decision, unless he knock down his opponent with one or two good hit : bottom line one fighter has to be better in more than just dancing to win, which is PRETTY OBVIOUS. boxing =/= dancing
On May 06 2015 04:51 wei2coolman wrote: lol, it's one thing to dislike mayweather's choice of pointfighting in boxing, it's another to say he's not a great champ.
I don't think so. I gave a perfectly objective argument to support my take on this : which mayweather fights ever needed a rematch ? You can argue that it is because he outclassed all his opponents and I could accept that argument, but it still makes my point true. It takes two to tango, weither you believe mayweather is more a dancer than a boxer, or that he outclassed all his opponent, he never had a fight that was good enough to be placed remotly close to the best boxers. Another proof of that : mayweather is, in my opinion, better than manny pacquiao right now (maybe not prime but that's a stupid discussion) but pacquiao won more title/recognition (not talking about belt, but about fighter of the decade / years, or fight of year, etc.) because he had amazing fights and strong opposition. It's in the struggle that one see a true champion, he never had that opportunity (and I believe it is because he has a shitty style of boxing that abuse the flaws of boxing's rules). He is only known because he cries out loud everywhere that he is the best and that he earns more money than anyone (like a true member of the lumpen proletariat).
Just compare with the real deal, he is a fucking star and a hall of fame boxer despite being outweighted in many of his best fights. What made him are those fights, not his overall records/stats (which are in fact average compared to many other great fighters) : he has gone toe to toe with the greatest of his generation, and always proved he could win. Just go watch his fights against riddick bowe for exemple ... legendary.
It's in the struggle that one see a true champion, he never had that opportunity
Meh. You could make the same argument of any boxer so good that nobody in his generation can remotely put him in danger in a ring (surprise! like Mayweather). I guess it's a compliment to him if he's so good that people start to say boxing is a badly designed game, while being around for millenia :D.
Btw, people are also saying, in the same exact reasoning pattern, that Wladimir Klitschko is not a GOAT and that he's boring because he does not have strong opposition. I suggest you put on boxing gloves and go show him some opposition then.
Wladimir Klitschko is really different tho : he has a huge weight advantage over his category, due to the new technique of body enhancement most notably.
Also : - boxing was always plagued by corruption and fixed matches (so the fact that the rules are old doesn't make them good) ; - boxing today is really different due to various things : money, culture, relationship between fighters and promoters, all things that evolved a lot in the last ten years (mostly at the end of tyson / lennox fight) ; - I don't believe mayweather is that good, but I guess that's a subjective judgement. Are you implying Mayweather is better than Ali ?
I'm not implying anything, I just think Mayweather is unfathomably better than some in thread would like to believe (not necessarily you, you seem like a boxing enthusiast). I don't really like how we disregard his achievements so quickly, just because his style doesn't fit the current norm of what's flashy and cool.
He is better at dancing than many legendary boxers yeah. That does not make him a boxer on par with those legends tho, unless you don't understand what is boxing, or what has been boxing in history. It's way more than just technicity, thankfully. Many people don't know that, but Evander Holyfield is one of the most crafty and technic fighter that ever fought in the heavy weight, and was a pretty small heavy weight at that (he had to train hard in order to gain muscle and enter the heavy weight division, unlike Tyson who, despite being quite small, always weighted a ton) - in this regard much like Mayweather, but obviously a lot less efficient, quick, and with less defensive ability. Yet he was much more than that and today almost no one remember him for his technicality.
you've just reduced all of mayweather's tactics to 'dancing' but he was pretty aggressive in the pac fight. he was able to effectively land his straight right all night.
I don't know how you can call what mayweather did "dancing" without making pacman look like a joke, when mayweather threw more punches, and landed more punches. lol.
Also, I would suggest comparing Mayweather with something other than the best heavyweights. I mean, sure, "pound for pound" is a thing, but boxing looks a lot different in welterweight and heavyweight...
On May 07 2015 09:46 ZenithM wrote: Also, I would suggest comparing Mayweather with something other than the best heavyweights. I mean, sure, "pound for pound" is a thing, but boxing looks a lot different in welterweight and heavyweight...
Who is the one who has been saying Mayweather is one of the best ? And you can compare to many other fighters : Chavez, Duran, Sugar Ray Leonard, Hagler are all on the same weight and they are all more agressive.
On May 07 2015 08:55 oneofthem wrote: you've just reduced all of mayweather's tactics to 'dancing' but he was pretty aggressive in the pac fight. he was able to effectively land his straight right all night.
I didn't even watched the fight. Maybe read I wrote before.... I said his style is rubbish and destroy the sport. Pacman may suck one fight, he proved himself before (throwing many punch, being mobile and always agressive) - Mayweather barely throw any punch in all his fights, and always lay back and just steal round with some little jabs. Just makes me laugh that people argue that he is one of the best when in fact he will be barely remembered as anything more than a cash cow. The sport will live on hopefully.
On May 07 2015 08:58 wei2coolman wrote: I don't know how you can call what mayweather did "dancing" without making pacman look like a joke, when mayweather threw more punches, and landed more punches. lol.
Well records are quite unclear. Mayweather did throw more than pac, but still not much compared to a normal fight. And secondly, most people accept Pacman was never in danger - stats have a lot of limit. They are maybe an indicative of the style of the fight more than a clear indicator of a winner (I remember you that Mayweather threw less punch than most of his opponent, and sometime still had a lower landing rate, like against Maidana I believe, but it does not mean he lost thoses fight, obviously).
On May 08 2015 00:44 ZenithM wrote: I think you missed the word heavyweight in my post. Anyway, I do think Mayweather is one of the best so your point still stands, I guess.
Edit: Man, I didn't read the part where you said you fucking didn't watch the fight. Hahaha why am I even arguing..
For the sake of the argument. I watched a cam from afar for like a minute and it was even more boring than doing nothing.
On May 08 2015 00:32 WhiteDog wrote: I said his style is rubbish and destroy the sport. Pacman may suck one fight, he proved himself before (throwing many punch, being mobile and always agressive) - Mayweather barely throw any punch in all his fights, and always lay back and just steal round with some little jabs.
its up to the sanctioning bodies to change the rules.. Mayweather is doing whatever it takes within the rules to win.
however, if u believe in the traditional rules of boxing then no rules should change. And guys like Mayweather and Larry Holmes will be able to go 48-0 in the most boring way imaginable. By backing up behind a jab and pot-shotting any incoming aggression.
Holmes went 48-0 and defended the Heavyweight title 20 times. And Yet, I've never heard an up and coming fighter ever say "i'm the next Larry Holmes".
Expect Mayweather to be remembered the same way Larry Holmes is remembered. History will be unkind to both guys.
On May 08 2015 00:32 WhiteDog wrote: I said his style is rubbish and destroy the sport. Pacman may suck one fight, he proved himself before (throwing many punch, being mobile and always agressive) - Mayweather barely throw any punch in all his fights, and always lay back and just steal round with some little jabs.
its up to the sanctioning bodies to change the rules.. Mayweather is doing whatever it takes within the rules to win.
however, if u believe in the traditional rules of boxing then no rules should change. And guys like Mayweather and Larry Holmes will be able to go 48-0 in the most boring way imaginable. By backing up behind a jab and pot-shotting any incoming aggression.
Holmes went 48-0 and defended the Heavyweight title 20 times. And Yet, I've never heard an up and coming fighter ever say "i'm the next Larry Holmes".
Expect Mayweather to be remembered the same way Larry Holmes is remembered. History will be unkind to both guys.
It already is. Floyds mouth does more work than his hands. Unless its women infront of him
this is how my favourite fighter combats guys who back up behind the jab...
btw, i ordered the shirt
to see it in practical application just look up "Mike Tyson vs Larry Holmes - Full Fight 1988" on youtube.com the commentator sounds like he is going to jizz all over himself
Thank you, anonymous stranger, who mentioned Gennadi Golovkin in this thread.
I watched the fight last weekend and that was quite some entertainment.
The post-fight press has it's burns to deliver too
The Guardian:
What is more significant, though, is the Kazakh’s determination to fight twice more in 2015 – against anyone willing to step into the ring with him, from Miguel Cotto to Saúl Álvarez, to Andre Ward to Floyd Mayweather.
Now a couple of those bouts – Ward and Mayweather – almost certainly will not happen. Ward, [...], and Mayweather, the welterweight king, wouldn’t share a ring with Triple G if he were armed with a nuclear bomb. Even at catchweight.