Fighters that need to retire!

Happy Christmas every1 hope you had a good christmas. Soon it will be new years and for next year here is something I am hoping for in boxing it is fighters that need to retire. Here are ten guys that should retire if you have any others you think should retire add them in.

1. Roy Jones - this guy was one of the best of all time imo but he has fought on wa to long he is getting knocked out badly by guys he would school years ago and if he does not stop he could get badly hurt.



2. Holyfield - this is another fighter who was qulity years ago but sadly will not retire he is already getting badly hurt and he looks punch drunk when he talks I think his licence should be revoked.



3. Hopkins - this guy is in his late 40s now he should learn from guys like Jones and Holyfield what will happen if you fight too long but he will not take the warning and I reckon he will get knocked out badly soon he is too old.



4. Morales - this guy should retire he had a great career not much more to prove it is sad to see him losing to guys like Maidana now.



5. The Klitchkos - these guys are killing heavyweight boing they are also getting older especially Vitali who is 40 now. The have been champs for ges now and the divison has become dead nobod is interested in it. It would be better for boxing if these guys retied and the division would become more exciting nobody is interested in it now.



6. Tarver - I heard this guy is still fighting what is the point?



7. Pacquiao - maybe not retire immediately but after next year he has looked like he is on the slide and imo Freddie Roaches illness means he is not at his best anymore and is losing it. Lets not forget that Pacquiao is also a politician and has said he want to president one day so maybe he is not focused on his boxing like he should be. Marquez schooled him imo he was very lucky to win that fight.



8. Sturm - this guy is the new Ottke he stays in Germany robbing fighters and does not trael like a tre champ. He has no interest in being the best he just takes easy fights and then relies on the ref and udges to get the win.



9. Enzo - now he is at light heavy and says he wants to fight Cleverly but tbh this guy has suffered some of the worst knock outs we have seen it is very dangerous for him to continue somebody should say to him that it is time to retie before he gets badly hurt.



10. Johnson - this guy is far too old now and loses almost every fight these days it is clear he is past it and he should retire.

To answer your "topic" Waingro.

1. RJJ - no arguments there, we've been calling for his retirement for 5 years.
2. Holyfield - other than Evander, there's not a person alive who hasn't wanted to see the back of him for the past 5 years as well.
3. Hopkins? The current LHW champion? Past it? He's past it when he decides he is, not before. He hasn't been Knocked out - hell he hasn't been knocked down much of late - barring Pascal catching him cold 26 rounds of boxing ago.
4. Morales. Current alphabelt holder at 140 and a likely future Khan opponent. Whilst I thought he'd looked awful against second rate opposition, fair play - he stepped up to the mark against Maidana - a top rate 140lb contender. Yes he's old - but age is just a number if you can perform that well.
5. The Klitschkos. Why should they retire? Because Wlad whipped your favourite fighter into retirement? If they retired - maybe Haye could then make a comeback and try to steal a portion of the disintegrated title by clowning for 12 rounds and throwing about 100 punches all fight. Wouldn't that be good.
6. Tarver is fighting and winning. The point is that he's looking for a final payday against a Kbro. He won't get one.
7. Manny - agreed actually. Retire on a high, not after a loss to someone you'd have beaten at your peak.
8. Sturm. The old Waingro patriotism coming out again. He's got to avenge being robbed blind in his draw with Murray first 'gro
9. Enzo - no-one on earth but Enzo and Frank want Enzo to keep fighting. So no news here.
10. Johnson - I thought he looked OK when he was stopping Green just a year ago. Still a contender in the 168 division.

So 1, 2, 7 and 9 are close to the mark - and the others are way off.

And no Toney?

You might want to edit your list 'gro.

Pretty much agree with Oxys choices above apart from Manny and Enzo who has no reason to retire at 31 and now having a fresh start at Light Heavyweight

As long as he keeps winning like his last fight Steff - he can stay at 175 as long as he likes.

I don't want to see him get KOd again, nothing more than that.

A fight with Clev would be good. Im getting tickets for February the 25th as well

Toney is a good point this guy should have retired years ago. What about Margarito? Cotto destroyed him in there last fight as did Pacquiao should he retire now?

Pretty much everyone online has written Margarito off.

I don't know how well he and Michelle have saved their cash - so we don't know how much he needs to keep fighting.

He still has enough such that he will be able to lay a whipping on most B level opponents - however - at the top level, you'd have to say that his time has come and gone. His eye is as vulnerable as a virgin in a lecher's convention - and it isn't going to become less vulnerable the longer he fights.

Manny paved the way and Cotto's December destruction finished the job.

If he wants to retain the sight in his eye - he should stop. Now.

Agree with your take, Oxy. Manny should probably retire, and his is the most contentious of the names there probably (I'm not taking the K-bros or Sturm suggestion seriously). Many will think he should carry on, but personally I feel that he has faded of late, visibly so in the ring, and has far too many things outside of boxing going on, which will lead to improper preparation in all likelihood. Call it a day, and as you say don't lose to somebody that you would have panned at your best (a Cotto rematch a possibility of that happening?).

I'm not so sure guys, Marquez is and always has been too good for Pacquiao which makes his decline look more stark than it actually is, he's never looked good when an opponent shows him some defence. Am of the opinion that talk of him declining is a pre-emptive excuse incase Mayweather spanks him around the ring which would most probably happen if they met.

Manny struggled a heck of a lot more than in the previous two Marquez fights though, Ghosty, wouldn't you say? I think that's likely a result of him slowing down more than any significant advances in JMM's own game.

Agree with you regarding Manny not looking so good against that style of fighter, but I still think that between that fight and the Mosley fight, there is enough to suggest his best days may just be gone. Didn't work with the same energy around the ring, far less springy (in terms of his in and out attacks).

I think Mayweather beats him by decision regardless of when they met, but I'd wager that a Manny around the time of the Cotto fight makes it quite a close one, whereas these days I'd back Mayweather to win every round most likely.

Fists of Fury wrote:Manny struggled a heck of a lot more than in the previous two Marquez fights though, Ghosty, wouldn't you say? I think that's likely a result of him slowing down more than any significant advances in JMM's own game.

Agree with you regarding Manny not looking so good against that style of fighter, but I still think that between that fight and the Mosley fight, there is enough to suggest his best days may just be gone. Didn't work with the same energy around the ring, far less springy (in terms of his in and out attacks).

I think Mayweather beats him by decision regardless of when they met, but I'd wager that a Manny around the time of the Cotto fight makes it quite a close one, whereas these days I'd back Mayweather to win every round most likely.

A question for you: if you back Floyd to win everytime, why are you insistent on having Manny as your P4P number one? I appreciate until they meet this is still a subjective matter- but for me, if you believe Floyd > Manny, then he should be your p4p #1.

All Time Great wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:Manny struggled a heck of a lot more than in the previous two Marquez fights though, Ghosty, wouldn't you say? I think that's likely a result of him slowing down more than any significant advances in JMM's own game.

Agree with you regarding Manny not looking so good against that style of fighter, but I still think that between that fight and the Mosley fight, there is enough to suggest his best days may just be gone. Didn't work with the same energy around the ring, far less springy (in terms of his in and out attacks).

I think Mayweather beats him by decision regardless of when they met, but I'd wager that a Manny around the time of the Cotto fight makes it quite a close one, whereas these days I'd back Mayweather to win every round most likely.

A question for you: if you back Floyd to win everytime, why are you insistent on having Manny as your P4P number one? I appreciate until they meet this is still a subjective matter- but for me, if you believe Floyd > Manny, then he should be your p4p #1.

I reckon Andre Ward beats Sergio Martinez at a catcweight as well - but I've still got Martinez at 3/4 on my p4p table with Ward down in 6.

Head to head matchups are fickle and lead to azania-style rankings. Mosley was a much much better boxer than Forrest but still couldn't win an argument against him. Mayweather, in 3 years - has fought a blown up lightweight, an ancient Mosley and a dodgy/disappointing end to an Ortiz fight. Whilst some of those fights were the best available challenges at the time (Marquez wasn't) - that's not enough to win back the crown he had already lost to Manny post Hatton and Cotto.

Manny has looked slower since the Margarito fight - where he was slower than the Cotto performance, despite weighing in at pretty much the same weight. He was slower still against Mosley and the spark was out against Marquez.

And with Floyd in jail for 3 months and thus probably not fighting until July/August if at all - I don't think its unreasonable to have Manny retaining the number 1 spot. Officially - he won.

oxring wrote:

All Time Great wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:Manny struggled a heck of a lot more than in the previous two Marquez fights though, Ghosty, wouldn't you say? I think that's likely a result of him slowing down more than any significant advances in JMM's own game.

Agree with you regarding Manny not looking so good against that style of fighter, but I still think that between that fight and the Mosley fight, there is enough to suggest his best days may just be gone. Didn't work with the same energy around the ring, far less springy (in terms of his in and out attacks).

I think Mayweather beats him by decision regardless of when they met, but I'd wager that a Manny around the time of the Cotto fight makes it quite a close one, whereas these days I'd back Mayweather to win every round most likely.

A question for you: if you back Floyd to win everytime, why are you insistent on having Manny as your P4P number one? I appreciate until they meet this is still a subjective matter- but for me, if you believe Floyd > Manny, then he should be your p4p #1.

I reckon Andre Ward beats Sergio Martinez at a catcweight as well - but I've still got Martinez at 3/4 on my p4p table with Ward down in 6.

Head to head matchups are fickle and lead to azania-style rankings. Mosley was a much much better boxer than Forrest but still couldn't win an argument against him. Mayweather, in 3 years - has fought a blown up lightweight, an ancient Mosley and a dodgy/disappointing end to an Ortiz fight. Whilst some of those fights were the best available challenges at the time (Marquez wasn't) - that's not enough to win back the crown he had already lost to Manny post Hatton and Cotto.

Manny has looked slower since the Margarito fight - where he was slower than the Cotto performance, despite weighing in at pretty much the same weight. He was slower still against Mosley and the spark was out against Marquez.

And with Floyd in jail for 3 months and thus probably not fighting until July/August if at all - I don't think its unreasonable to have Manny retaining the number 1 spot. Officially - he won.

Officially he may have won, but real boxing fans smell a bad decision a mile off. Lost 9 of the 12 rounds by a clear margin.

Not sure how anyone can really have Manny top of the pile. I struggle to have him in the top three. That said i've always thought his record flattered him somewhat and Floyd pitches a shut out no matter when they fight.

Oxy

Your point falls down there when you consider Pacquiaos recent opposition too and the manner of 'victory'. Does beating Margarito, an even more faded Mosley and getting a gift against Marquez constitute a better recent record than three fairly comfortable wins over the aforementioned Mosely and Marquez as well as Ortiz?

For me I would have to say a definite no especially when you consider his performance against Marquez, styles makes fights yes but there is a certain style Mayweather struggles with unlike Pacquiao which gives a fair few added points. Both being champions in the same weight class with Mayweather now being an overwhelming favourite must also come into consideration.

Fists

I don't think there has been an appreciable decline in Pacquiao, Marquez wasn't any better than before but he had the added benefit of 20+ rounds in the past when he beyond doubt had cracked the supposed Manny puzzle.

Can see both sides of the argument to a degree, but I do think there's been a notable and gradual decline in Pacquiao over the last couple of years. I watched his demolition of Cotto again the other day, and against Mosley and Marquez in particular he just hasn't looked that same swashbuckling specimen that he once was. His footwork in particular has taken a downturn.

Not sure I agree with all of those, Waingro, but some decent shouts.

Personally I don't think think there is a real decline, his footwork didn't look the same as it did against Cotto, but in my opinion that's to do with the opponent. He can't move in and out and dart around like he was allowed to against Cotto.

It's Manny's kryptonite, you go to the left and he's a tad clueless and his footwork is not there, watch Barrera 2, Morales 1, all 3 Marquez fights and the Mosley fight, all fighters moved to the left and his footwork and overall performance was nowhere near as good as when he's riproaring through the likes of Cotto and Barrera the first time, coincidence? I don't think so.

Manny's an exceptional fighter but there's something he lacks when fighters don't come out to fight him.

As for a Cotto rematch, I think that's highly unlikely. Cotto is a fully fledged 154 pounder now and I don't think Cotto would be willing to come down to 147 again and I don't think Manny would be happy to come back up to 154 and don't think either would really fancy a catchweight of 150 either in truth, although that woudl be more favourable to Manny.

Agree with OXY's first post in response to this "topic". However, i do not agree that Pacman would have beaten Mayweather in his prime. Not whatsoever. But each to there own i suppose. I cant beleive that the K Bros are on this list along with Hopkins?! Seems a bit odd to me. There is no need for them to retire at all. Holyfield and Jones are at the forfront of everyones minds, they should not be boxing, simple as that.

Margarito is a good shout. However, as someone has already stated, he could probably paste most B level fighters.

Another one to retire for me would be Ryan Rhodes. Has had a SUPER long career and lost convincingly on his big outing against Alvarez. Maybe one more big fight then call it a day.

Is Scott Lawton still fighting?

I think it depends what angle you are viewing these retirements from. Only Jones and Holyfied and potentially Enzo would be in the "need to retire" bracket and in imminent danger, as opposed to the "right time to retire" bracket.

Sturm and the Klitschkos are obvious no's. Cant understanding the reasoning there whatsoever.

The rest I see I decent case for. Obviously with Jones and Holyfield the priorety is health and safety. The others are more to do with the stage they are at in their careers.

I dont see Hopkins in imminent danger of a serious beating, but it may be a nice way to bow out at the top as champion rather than to hang around where inneviteably he will be beaten. If he beats Dawson in a return fixture then I think the time would be right.

Johnson - agree. Again hes not being bashed around but hes become a gatekeeper and a very old one at that. Green aside, he seems to have lost every noteably fight in the last few years.

Tarver - not sure. Hes past his best and no real threat at heavyweight but could survive in a pretty weak cruiser division I imagine.

Morales - agree. Hes one of my favourite fighters of all time and would prefer to see him quit now.

Enzo - Il wait one more proper and see how he handles LH. He probably should have retired in truth but could prove a few people wrong in a pretty limited LH division if he copes with the weight

Pacquiao - Hes still a top fighter obiously, but the timing in his career could be right to finish up soon. I dont think hes at his blistering best anymore and would put that down to a collection of reasons, largely mentally. Interests outside the sport may have dampened his focus, motivation and desire. I only really view the last Marquez as a robbery. The other two are danger of becoming etched in history as robberies but they were very close fights capable of going either way. Even the last fight, while I though Marquez won with something to spare, I wouldnt go as far as calling it a "schooling". It was competitive all the way through and Marquez deserved to win. Obviously the Mayweather fight might be a great last hurrah but with imited options now and a career in politics more or less in swing then I can see a good argument fo him hanging up the gloves now. He doesnt come across as a hungry fighter anymore and the feeling I get is that its his talent keeping him up there but lacking the kind of fire he had earlier in his career. Hes more or less still boxing because he can get away with it, but Im not sure hes as fully focused now.

Is Barrera stiill active? He had one fight in 2011 and there was talk about a pointess Barrera v Morales IV. You wonder what makes guys like him keep going, he's got a law degree (or somethign along those lines) and a great career behind him. Don't want to see him put down by some guy he would've turned into taco meat in his prime.

James Toney is one guy that most certainly needs to retire, I watched the entire Lebedev fight and that was one of the saddest performances I have ever seen.

ok so we all know the first two on the list should retire, but that doesnt hide the fact this is a pathetic article.
wlad retire? do me a favour...
and the likes of morales and hopkins deserve enough respect to be allowed to make their own decisions, they are still fighting at a decent level. morales takes on his second undefeated, young fighter in a row in february i think, and to be honest his level of opposition over the past two years is not much different to khans and bradleys. maybe khan should retire, hes clearly past his best judging by the mccloskey and peterson performances

To be fair Morales has only fought Maidana in the past couple of years so can barely suggest his opposition is near that of Khan or Bradley, i'll give him credit for taking on Garcia but Cano was a nobody.

Just looking in quickly, but there are two comments RE: Pacquiao that are spot on, made by Chris and Manos.

Footwork, and mentality.

I think footwork is obviously a result of his advancing years, nobody can be a buzzsaw forever, and the mental side is due to politics and basically being a demi-God in his country, no doubt. As Chris says, a gradual decline, and he may be best served to call it a day sooner rather than later. Even someone like Bradley could cause him problems soon, and that'd be a crying shame to see an all time great of the sport lose to such opposition.

Have to disagree with 'Floyd pitches a shut out whenever they meet'. That is doing Manny a huge dis-service, given that the likes of Castillo, Oscar have run Floyd so close, and it seems to me that you are very much over-reacting to the recent performances of Manny, as opposed to looking back to say the Cotto fight as Chris says, where he was immense and causes absolutely anybody a whole load of problems through sheer speed, footwork, aggression and workrate.

Oscar ran Mayweather close?

He made him change his gameplan and up his workrate.

Wasn't really a close fight though, I struggle to give De La Hoya 4 rounds and that's being very generous to him.

Fists of Fury wrote:Just looking in quickly, but there are two comments RE: Pacquiao that are spot on, made by Chris and Manos.

Footwork, and mentality.

I think footwork is obviously a result of his advancing years, nobody can be a buzzsaw forever, and the mental side is due to politics and basically being a demi-God in his country, no doubt. As Chris says, a gradual decline, and he may be best served to call it a day sooner rather than later. Even someone like Bradley could cause him problems soon, and that'd be a crying shame to see an all time great of the sport lose to such opposition.

Have to disagree with 'Floyd pitches a shut out whenever they meet'. That is doing Manny a huge dis-service, given that the likes of Castillo, Oscar have run Floyd so close, and it seems to me that you are very much over-reacting to the recent performances of Manny, as opposed to looking back to say the Cotto fight as Chris says, where he was immense and causes absolutely anybody a whole load of problems through sheer speed, footwork, aggression and workrate.

I've always been one of those that says Floyd pitches a near shut-out against Pac. I said this before the last JMM fight. For me Floyd has the perfect style to negate anything Pac does. Pac looks awesome against static fighters and alswys has done. In the Cotto fight, as soon as Cotto fought behind the jac, Pac looked vulnerable and confused. Cotto didn't have the mentality to continue with that style. Floyd has supreme boxing intelligence and will stick and counter Pac to a wide decision.

Pac has good footwork, but against stationary and come forward (in straight lines) fighters. Against a fighters who shows him angles and latteral movement, but has the boxing intelligence to stick to a game plan, he will beat Pac. No disprespect to Manny, but I have always found him to be over-rated. Simply awesome against boxers who will engage him in toe to toe fights because of his punch power and speed. But against boxers, he is lacking.

I think if Mayweather felt the Pacquiao fight was going to be easy he wouldnt have bothered with the drug testing demands. We all know it wasnt for the good of the sport that Mayweather introduced them.

He either felt Pacquiao was on something - which means something in Pacquiaos performances worried him. Or else he used it as a deliberate stumbling block. Why put up such a fuss over it you are confident of pitching a shut out regardless?

manos de piedra wrote:I think if Mayweather felt the Pacquiao fight was going to be easy he wouldnt have bothered with the drug testing demands. We all know it wasnt for the good of the sport that Mayweather introduced them.

He either felt Pacquiao was on something - which means something in Pacquiaos performances worried him. Or else he used it as a deliberate stumbling block. Why put up such a fuss over it you are confident of pitching a shut out regardless?

I cant speak for Floyd, but I believe the drug issue took a life of its own when Pac gave the numerous excuses for not taking it and floyd insisting. Neither could back down on their public stance, especially Floyd. It also has the effect of mind games on Pac which Floyd is winning.

I disagree that it wasn't good for the sport. I was brilliant for the sport. Fighters must be seen to be clean on a sport like boxing. Its not like sprinting where the only health issues affects the person taking them.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Wasn't really a close fight though, I struggle to give De La Hoya 4 rounds and that's being very generous to him.

He barely landed a glove on Floyd but to be fair he outworked him for 4 rounds max I had it an extremely comfortable 8-4 (116-112) to Floyd.

AlexHuckerby wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Wasn't really a close fight though, I struggle to give De La Hoya 4 rounds and that's being very generous to him.

He barely landed a glove on Floyd but to be fair he outworked him for 4 rounds max I had it an extremely comfortable 8-4 (116-112) to Floyd.

I had it close. 7-5 to Floyd.

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:I think if Mayweather felt the Pacquiao fight was going to be easy he wouldnt have bothered with the drug testing demands. We all know it wasnt for the good of the sport that Mayweather introduced them.

He either felt Pacquiao was on something - which means something in Pacquiaos performances worried him. Or else he used it as a deliberate stumbling block. Why put up such a fuss over it you are confident of pitching a shut out regardless?

I cant speak for Floyd, but I believe the drug issue took a life of its own when Pac gave the numerous excuses for not taking it and floyd insisting. Neither could back down on their public stance, especially Floyd. It also has the effect of mind games on Pac which Floyd is winning.

I disagree that it wasn't good for the sport. I was brilliant for the sport. Fighters must be seen to be clean on a sport like boxing. Its not like sprinting where the only health issues affects the person taking them.

I mean that the reason Floyd introduced the additional testing demands wasnt good for the good of the sport - it was for his own self interests.

With the amount of money to be had, and the prestige, I think if Mayweather felt this was a comfortable win then he would have dropped the demands and taken the fight. He had to do it for the de la Hoya fight. When Pacquiao was blitzing Hatton and Cotto I really dont think Mayweather fancied the fight. I think both guys were happy to make their money elsewhere and their out of the ring rivalry fueled interest in fights that might have been otherwise less meaningful. The idea that the big one might be around the next corner kept people interested.

The slower Pacquiao gets the easier it will become for Mayweather and I wont be too surprised to see him mysteriously drop the drug testing demands and push for the fight a bit more on the ack of Pacquiaos last showing. Would have to favour Mayweather to win it but I think theres a chance Pacquiao underperformed in the last fight due to a loss of focus and underestimating Marquez to some extent. So I would still see the fight as tough for Mayweather, especially early on. Wouldnt predict a shut out, but would back a Mayweather decision.

manos de piedra wrote:I think if Mayweather felt the Pacquiao fight was going to be easy he wouldnt have bothered with the drug testing demands. We all know it wasnt for the good of the sport that Mayweather introduced them.

He either felt Pacquiao was on something - which means something in Pacquiaos performances worried him. Or else he used it as a deliberate stumbling block. Why put up such a fuss over it you are confident of pitching a shut out regardless?

I feel the testing issue was simply Mayweather's way of saying, "Manny (or more acurately ARUM) isn't going to call the shots in this one" At the time a fight was mooted a few years ago, Manny was tearing everyone a new hole and rightly THE biggest draw in boxing. It's not too far fetched to assumed that he'd be the one in the driving seat when it came to doing a deal which would leave ARUM holding all the cards. Of course, Floyd doesn't like ARUM and threw them a curveball with the drug issue. Manny's team then reacted badly by refusing instead of saying "OK we'll take the tests now let's get back to reaming you out re venues, ring size, gloves, judges and who gets top billing etc"

Had Manny agreed to testing immediately, Floyd would had no choice but to sign up there and then otherwise he'd be seen as the one looking for an excuse NOT to fight.

Floyd's refusal to sign up for the fight stems more from him not having his own way in negotiations as opposed to not having his own way in the ring. I still believe Mayweather disposes of Manny easily only now I believe he stops Manny after the halfway stage. I don't believe Manny can get "up" for this fight in the same way Mayweather can. Manny's stated he doesn't need Floyd and he's happy to retire without ever facing him. He'll still be a hero in the Phillipines whereas Mayweather is the one whose reputation will suffer. Manny's never proclaimed himself the greatest fighter on the planet, he just shrugs and smiles when others do it. Manny's never ranted a raved about Mayweather and come across as slightly unhinged at times in the process. Floyd is the one (out of the two) who makes a big deal out of it and therefore the pressure rests squarely on his shoulders. He's always said he can beat Manny, Manny's never made any predictions. Whilst this may appear to take all the pressure off Manny, the problem is that he needs that intensity to perform well and this is compounded by the fact that Floyd fights better when under pressure.

However, it's all irrelevant given the fight will never happen. More chance of the KBoys fighting each other

manos de piedra wrote:

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:I think if Mayweather felt the Pacquiao fight was going to be easy he wouldnt have bothered with the drug testing demands. We all know it wasnt for the good of the sport that Mayweather introduced them.

He either felt Pacquiao was on something - which means something in Pacquiaos performances worried him. Or else he used it as a deliberate stumbling block. Why put up such a fuss over it you are confident of pitching a shut out regardless?

I cant speak for Floyd, but I believe the drug issue took a life of its own when Pac gave the numerous excuses for not taking it and floyd insisting. Neither could back down on their public stance, especially Floyd. It also has the effect of mind games on Pac which Floyd is winning.

I disagree that it wasn't good for the sport. I was brilliant for the sport. Fighters must be seen to be clean on a sport like boxing. Its not like sprinting where the only health issues affects the person taking them.

I mean that the reason Floyd introduced the additional testing demands wasnt good for the good of the sport - it was for his own self interests.

With the amount of money to be had, and the prestige, I think if Mayweather felt this was a comfortable win then he would have dropped the demands and taken the fight. He had to do it for the de la Hoya fight. When Pacquiao was blitzing Hatton and Cotto I really dont think Mayweather fancied the fight. I think both guys were happy to make their money elsewhere and their out of the ring rivalry fueled interest in fights that might have been otherwise less meaningful. The idea that the big one might be around the next corner kept people interested.

The slower Pacquiao gets the easier it will become for Mayweather and I wont be too surprised to see him mysteriously drop the drug testing demands and push for the fight a bit more on the ack of Pacquiaos last showing. Would have to favour Mayweather to win it but I think theres a chance Pacquiao underperformed in the last fight due to a loss of focus and underestimating Marquez to some extent. So I would still see the fight as tough for Mayweather, especially early on. Wouldnt predict a shut out, but would back a Mayweather decision.

Of course he introduced it for his own self interest. I dont know of any active boxer who would act out of the interest of the sport over self interest. But once he nailed his flat onto the drug issue he wouldn't or couldn't back down....because of his public statements in acting out of the interest of boxing.

Also Floyd can and does make huge money from fighting the likes of JMM and Ortiz. I believe he grossed approx $40m for each. He wouldn't take more than that against Pac given the purse split of 50/50. Against JMM and Ortiz he took a 80/20 split and coupled with PPV buys got the 40m. So money wouldn't be that much of an issue.

I dont think Pac has got significantly slower. Its just that he has no plan B. Against SSM he did the same thing over and over and against JMM it proved that a counter-puncher would have his number. Look at his past fights and his punch output against counters and toe-2-toe fighters.

DAVE667 wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:I think if Mayweather felt the Pacquiao fight was going to be easy he wouldnt have bothered with the drug testing demands. We all know it wasnt for the good of the sport that Mayweather introduced them.

He either felt Pacquiao was on something - which means something in Pacquiaos performances worried him. Or else he used it as a deliberate stumbling block. Why put up such a fuss over it you are confident of pitching a shut out regardless?

I feel the testing issue was simply Mayweather's way of saying, "Manny (or more acurately ARUM) isn't going to call the shots in this one" At the time a fight was mooted a few years ago, Manny was tearing everyone a new hole and rightly THE biggest draw in boxing. It's not too far fetched to assumed that he'd be the one in the driving seat when it came to doing a deal which would leave ARUM holding all the cards. Of course, Floyd doesn't like ARUM and threw them a curveball with the drug issue. Manny's team then reacted badly by refusing instead of saying "OK we'll take the tests now let's get back to reaming you out re venues, ring size, gloves, judges and who gets top billing etc"

Had Manny agreed to testing immediately, Floyd would had no choice but to sign up there and then otherwise he'd be seen as the one looking for an excuse NOT to fight.

Floyd's refusal to sign up for the fight stems more from him not having his own way in negotiations as opposed to not having his own way in the ring. I still believe Mayweather disposes of Manny easily only now I believe he stops Manny after the halfway stage. I don't believe Manny can get "up" for this fight in the same way Mayweather can. Manny's stated he doesn't need Floyd and he's happy to retire without ever facing him. He'll still be a hero in the Phillipines whereas Mayweather is the one whose reputation will suffer. Manny's never proclaimed himself the greatest fighter on the planet, he just shrugs and smiles when others do it. Manny's never ranted a raved about Mayweather and come across as slightly unhinged at times in the process. Floyd is the one (out of the two) who makes a big deal out of it and therefore the pressure rests squarely on his shoulders. He's always said he can beat Manny, Manny's never made any predictions. Whilst this may appear to take all the pressure off Manny, the problem is that he needs that intensity to perform well and this is compounded by the fact that Floyd fights better when under pressure.

However, it's all irrelevant given the fight will never happen. More chance of the KBoys fighting each other

I dont think either wanted the fight. Neither pushed hard for it and the drug demands were a handy and utterly pointless stumbling block for both fighters. I dont think even Mayweather is dumb enough to turn down a mega bucks fight that would rubber stamp greatness for the sake of trying to make Arum look bad if he genuinely felt Pacquiao was an easy nights shut out. He was happy to let Oscar call all the shots for their fight when he knew he had a big pay day that was winnable.

I actually think the fight could go ahead next year. The cynic in me would not be surprised to see Mayweather start to push for the fight more and drop the testing demands in act of supreme generosity.

I think Mayweather probably felt he could always beat Pacquiao but he wasnt interested in taking the risk while he could drift in and out of semi retirement making decent money for much lower risk.

People go about Pacquiaos career being a genius of match making but I actually think the opposite. He tends to fight the right guys at the wrong time when their stock is low - which makes him look bad and come in for stick. Mayweather is the opposite. He takes fights that are relatively low risk but at a time when they are at their most value. Guys like Ortiz are no great shakes but Mayweather fought him when he was at the crest of a wave and rated. Likewise Mosely and Hatton.

Manos, I dont believe the megabucks affected either of them in that they can get close to the same amount fighting others because they would notmally get a much larger purse split.

Manny also tends to fight 'names' and the promotion has been superb. Plus his exciting style wioll sell tickets.

azania wrote:Manos, I dont believe the megabucks affected either of them in that they can get close to the same amount fighting others because they would notmally get a much larger purse split.

Manny also tends to fight 'names' and the promotion has been superb. Plus his exciting style wioll sell tickets.

Yes but the prestige attached to the fight would be enormous. Why would Mayweather opt for similar money but less prestige over money and more prestige if he felt it was an easy night? Especially with so much pressure from the boxing world. He was happy to give into x,y,z against de la Hoya in order to make a big fight happen where he got the short end of the purse and had to give into almost every demand.

I genuinely dont think he was interested in it and the main reason was the risk attached. If he thought this fight would be a shut out I would have expected far more pushing for the fight and none of this additioanl drug demands. They were put in place for a reason and I dont think it was just to try and show Arum who the boss was. Which clearly didnt work if that was the intention in any event seeing as Arum didnt budge.

Its a handy tool for two camps who can make lots of money for much less risk elsewhere without either camp being entirely to blame. The rivalry also boosted the profile of the two fighters enormously making them both even more money.

manos de piedra wrote:People go about Pacquiaos career being a genius of match making but I actually think the opposite. He tends to fight the right guys at the wrong time when their stock is low - which makes him look bad and come in for stick. Mayweather is the opposite. He takes fights that are relatively low risk but at a time when they are at their most value. Guys like Ortiz are no great shakes but Mayweather fought him when he was at the crest of a wave and rated. Likewise Mosely and Hatton.

Bingo.

Ortiz being the classic example. Proponents of the fight pointed to the fact that Floyd was fighting a big southpaw, unbeaten at 147.

All true - but against Berto, Ortiz was floored by the counter right hand on his way in - and as one commentator wryly put it - no-one throws that punch better than Floyd. The guy had little chance, other than hustle against Mayweather - but Mayweather took great credit from the fight.

Mosley also - the signs were there than Sugar Shane wasn't what he once was. A run of poor performances led (somehow) to Margarito - who was expected to demolish him. Marg was weight drained and weaponless - and Mosley's lateral movement, even a slightly past-it Sugar was going to have too much for the Tijuana tornado. However - Floyd? Shane didn't do anything other than punch hard against Margarito that was going to challenge Floyd.

Manny should have fought a Bradley at 140 after fighting Hatton. Or after Cotto instead of Clottey. Unfortunately - Arum is trying to keep everything "in house" - and that means the tag of "faded" or "jaded" is being applied, sometimes unfairly, to previous Manny opponents.

A great shame as it damages the reputation of a great fighter.

Thing is though Oxy, look at what you've just typed and you'll notice that it's almost impossible to dismiss Mayweathers opposition without dismissing Pacquiaos later opposition.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Thing is though Oxy, look at what you've just typed and you'll notice that it's almost impossible to dismiss Mayweathers opposition without dismissing Pacquiaos later opposition.

It is - but that's the point isn't it? We should dismiss both - or neither.

I'm not holding Manny's recent career as a mirror to what Floyd's might have been.

The main difference I see Oxy is that Mayweather fights boxers in good form rather than when they look vulnerable due to a loss or two.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The main difference I see Oxy is that Mayweather fights boxers he knows he has the beating of in good form rather than when they look vulnerable due to a loss or two.

With that addition, I'd agree.

Should we forget his previous Welterweight reign? Luminaries like Baldi and Judah whilst Margarito and Cotto and Williams (and Mosley) had to scrap out the remaining belts between each other?

On the other thread, you asked why Manny didn't fight Berto - well, as I'm trying to be impartial and apply the same criticism to both men - why didn't Floyd fight Marg, Cotto and Williams?

Judah wasn't in good form. In fact - Oscar at 154 wasn't really in good form. It was a brave performance from a legend of the sport - but I don't really count a win over the walking punchbag and nothing more since a defeat to Hopkins at MW as evidence of "good form".

That's my point about fighters that are made for Floyd. Mosley and Ortiz both were. If we're criticising Manny by saying that he's picking fighters who make him look good - what about Floyd?

Lets be honest Oxy, Mayweather beats everyone whether it be Pacquiao or anyone else yet Pacquiao wouldn't fight Mosely because he was too good, not my words but those of Freddie Roach.

With regards to Margarito, Cotto and Williams there has been a great deal of revisionism to suggest they were bigger players than they were when Mayweather was beating the higher ranked fighters in Baldomir and Judah. He should have faced them instead of retiring but before that they weren't as highly rated as they've been taken to be. Could I also ask how do you get Mosely in the ring when he had such a killer toothache?

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Lets be honest Oxy, Mayweather beats everyone whether it be Pacquiao or anyone else yet Pacquiao wouldn't fight Mosely because he was too good, not my words but those of Freddie Roach.

With regards to Margarito, Cotto and Williams there has been a great deal of revisionism to suggest they were bigger players than they were when Mayweather was beating the higher ranked fighters in Baldomir and Judah. He should have faced them instead of retiring but before that they weren't as highly rated as they've been taken to be. Could I also ask how do you get Mosely in the ring when he had such a killer toothache?

See this I don't buy.

Roach has said some pretty stupid stuff - because Manny beats Mosley post-Cotto (for both fighters) in my opinion. As for how big players Cotto, Williams and Marg were - well - they were the other beltholders at the weight.

Judah was the darling of the US fight scene for a while - and for some unknown reason. He had, in truth, lost all his major challenges. Baldomir was a journeyman who had the good fortune to come upon a distracted and disinterested Judah. Cotto and Marg were legitimate challenges - and Margarito was well proven at the weight. Mayweather picked JMM for his comeback as JMM brings a "whole country" to the table in Mexico. What about Margarito? Pre-ban - his popularity was never in question.

As for Mayweather's unbeaten run - well it should have ended Castillo I and Oscar ran him close. He's not unbeatable - but he hasn't yet come across the fighter who has the key. Now he's serving at the pleasure of the state of Nevada (it is Nevada state Pen he's in I believe? Not sure, check it) he may never come across the fighter with the key to winning.

However - there have been opponents that Floyd hasn't fought - who'd have run him close. Manny post Hatton/Cotto or Cotto pre-Marg would have given him a challenge - and one I would have paid to see. Certainly a challenge he was well capable of overcoming - he is a fantastic fighter - but a challenge nonetheless.

Margarito, Cotto and Williams were pretty big players on the welterweight scene to be fair. Mayweather drifted in and out of retirement when they were around so he deserves some criticism for that if Pacquiao can be accused of not fighting Berto. Around 2006/7 Margarito, Cotto and Williams were all rated as top 5 welters if I remember rightly.

The Baldomir and Ortiz fights, even the Judah one to a lesser extent highlights Mayweathers ability to fight average enough fighters but at a time when the wins look good.

When considering Baldomir and Judah, Cotto and Williams don't come into consideration as they simply were not rated at the weight at the time, they subsequently came to be which leads into the De La Hoya and Hatton fights both of whom were considered the most likely to beat him.

Baldomir was the recognised ring magazine number 1 at the time of the fight.

Im not criticising him for fighting Baldomir, Im criticising him for not fighting Cotto, Margarito and Williams - if Pacquiao is to be accused of handpicking the likes of Margarito instead of Berto.

Not just Berto but there were legitimate fights to be had at light middleweight which were overlooked in favour of Margarito, that fight can in no shape or form be legitimised.