Sugar Ray Robinson

First topic message reminder :

A concensus number 1 P4P (not mine though). My questions are simple. Will he ever be surpassed? What does a boxer either active, not born yet have to do to be able to claim that fabled mantle? Obviously no semi decent boxer is going to have over 100 fights let alone 200 fights.

What if a boxer has 50 fights and in that time wins titles and dominates his division from lightweight to middleweight and has 2 losses on his record (and avenged). Also have in mind that he beat some very good boxers who themselves can be classed as ATGs along the way. Would that do it?

Oscar got the lion share because he was the bigger name..........

Like Floyd should have for Manny...

Man are you dumb or what..

So Manny was being greedy then. Wanted more than he was worth.

Take the test.

I'd quote you Toppy but you edit your posts too quick for me........

No Manny was right to ask for what he was worth............

It wasn't 50/50 hence the fight not being made kid..

I'm not the one knocking either for it being made.........Just think If you want to hit Floyd for not accepting 50/50..you can hit Manny for not accepting alesser split too...Neither in the wrong really.

Neither is a coward.

Why I believe Floyd shouldn't be slapped for it..

I believe both should be slapped for it.

He wasn't worth half. He sounds like a divorced wife.

Okay, then why didnt Floyd offer 47%, Floyd wasnt worth 60% either.

Freddie Roach : Marquez pricing himself out of a fifth fight with Manny......He wants 50/50 split.........

You see Marquez knocked him out but Manny wants more because he's the bigger name.. (Source = Boxing news)

You see how pathetic it is to slap Mayweather........

You don't like him...Just admit it.

I dont particularly like him, no. But that doesnt mean I cant give him his due. All Im saying is you cant tell me this makes financial sense:
Fight Cotto 65-35, make 40 mill
Fight Pac 50/50, make 60-100 mil

If you fight Cotto, (or Ortiz) then its an ego-based decision, not money.

I imagine Floyd thought he'd eventually concede to his demands as Hagler did with Leonard...All negotiation has an element of call my bluff........

Mate, thats my point, I have no idea why this became a fracas

Does it make sense for manny to turn down double what he previously earned? Turn down a fight because he didn't want to be tested for steroids?

Floyd also turned down what was easily his biggest payday, no? As for the testing: Testing itself was never the issue, the timing was. After that got sorted money became an issue, then people went to jail, then Arum got greedy, then stadiums needed to get built. In the end I dont think either side was particularly desperate for the fight, and while it.was big money, neither really needed it desperately.

My main man Martinez, on the hand, we were ready for either, would have done for chewing gum (and a few mil)

Testing never the issue? Ok

The timing was, Floyd wanted OSDT, Pacquiao wanted to be forewarned.

Yeah. He wanted to know when the testers were coming. Kind of makes a mockery of OSDT.

But lets blame Floyd. After all he was only going to subject himself to the same procedure.

So Mayweathers completely blameless?

Take the test.

azania wrote:McGirt was a one armed fighter. His left shoulder was permanently damaged prior to the fight.

Other than that it was a great win. Berbick beating Ali was also a great win.

So was Ali ranked pound for pound number five for the previous two years when Berbick beat him, then, and was in the best form of his career?

Buddy's shoulder was fine by the time of the rematch, in which Whitaker beat the ever-loving pi$$ out of him.

Wrong 88. His shoulder was permanently damaged. He can't straighten it to this day. Straighten his left arm fully that is.

Well he and Al Certo were telling everyone that Buddy was in tip-top shape going in to the rematch, Az. His performance in the first Whitaker fight - and early in the second before Pea started absolutely shellacking him - didn't suggest a decrepit man as you suggest, even if he was less than 100% for the Madison Square Garden fight.

But then again, I'm talking to someone who implied that Whitaker's wins over McGirt are akin to Berbick's over Ali, which says it all, really.

If he takes the test then you want 50-50
Then the ring size
Then to enter the ring second
Then to decide the weight

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Be honest with yourselves If you bring more to the party....you want higher reward....

On another thread Haz said Whittaker beat better fighters than Floyd........

Guess Mcgirt is better than Oscar..............

Anything to put Floyd down..

He did.

I said McGirt was a better fighter than the faded version of Oscar Mayweather went in with.

azania wrote:SRR got smacked like somebodies b!tch against jake yet excuses are vomited out. Floyd has a zero and he gets accused of ducking someone schooled a few times by a guy Floyd slapped about for fun.

Beyond double standards.

The fight was 5-4-1 on all cards. Clueless.

88Chris05 wrote:Well he and Al Certo were telling everyone that Buddy was in tip-top shape going in to the rematch, Az. His performance in the first Whitaker fight - and early in the second before Pea started absolutely shellacking him - didn't suggest a decrepit man as you suggest, even if he was less than 100% for the Madison Square Garden fight.

But then again, I'm talking to someone who implied that Whitaker's wins over McGirt are akin to Berbick's over Ali, which says it all, really.

They're hardly going to say the shoulder is damaged are they? KO ran a piece before saying it was damaged and after the fight noted that buddy didn't use his left as he once did. He was hampered.

hazharrison wrote:

azania wrote:SRR got smacked like somebodies b!tch against jake yet excuses are vomited out. Floyd has a zero and he gets accused of ducking someone schooled a few times by a guy Floyd slapped about for fun.

Beyond double standards.

The fight was 5-4-1 on all cards. Clueless.

Beaten by someone no better than Hamsho. So much for the best ever. Getting a happy slap from a plodder.

hazharrison wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Be honest with yourselves If you bring more to the party....you want higher reward....

On another thread Haz said Whittaker beat better fighters than Floyd........

Guess Mcgirt is better than Oscar..............

Anything to put Floyd down..

He did.

I said McGirt was a better fighter than the faded version of Oscar Mayweather went in with.

Better than the version manny fought.

Well Certo wasn't normally the type of guy to mince his words - some of the stuff he came out with was so blunt and to the point it was almost beyond belief. I'm not denying that McGirt had shoulder problems during his career, but as I've said before, in my eyes, unless there are really extenuating circumstances, excuses get left outside the ring once you're in it.

I mean seriously, Az - it's you who has been bemoaning how many 'excuses' get made for Robinson's defeat, is it not?

Maybe if Tucker hadn't injured his hand against Tyson he'd have continued his good start and outscored him. Maybe if Hearns hadn't done the same against Hagler he'd have won. Maybe if Haye's toe hadn't given him jip he'd have got to Wladimir. Maybe if Golota's knee wasn't in bits he'd have beaten Lewis.

It matters little, really. I know you're desperate to outdo Truss in the 'Mayweather's the greatest, anyone who says otherwise is deluded' contest or whatever it is, but be reasonable, mate.

I bet the Floyd pages in the magazine will take some abuse tonight.

Not saying that a fit buddy would have won but he was hampered going into the fight. Pernell was a great boxer but not in floyd's league.

Better than Duran imo

You are aware that you've previously stated that Whitaker was the greatest defensive master of all time and ranks ahead of Floyd pound for pound in the past, aren't you? Not a criticism of you changing your mind as we all do it (and I think it's unhealthy if we never change our opinions on things from time to time, as we're all always learning) but how can he go from being behind to being in a different league altogether?

azania wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

azania wrote:SRR got smacked like somebodies b!tch against jake yet excuses are vomited out. Floyd has a zero and he gets accused of ducking someone schooled a few times by a guy Floyd slapped about for fun.

Beyond double standards.

The fight was 5-4-1 on all cards. Clueless.

Beaten by someone no better than Hamsho. So much for the best ever. Getting a happy slap from a plodder.

Clueless.

88Chris05 wrote:You are aware that you've previously stated that Whitaker was the greatest defensive master of all time and ranks ahead of Floyd pound for pound in the past, aren't you? Not a criticism of you changing your mind as we all do it (and I think it's unhealthy if we never change our opinions on things from time to time, as we're all always learning) but how can he go from being behind to being in a different league altogether?

He probably renounced US citizenship

88Chris05 wrote:You are aware that you've previously stated that Whitaker was the greatest defensive master of all time and ranks ahead of Floyd pound for pound in the past, aren't you? Not a criticism of you changing your mind as we all do it (and I think it's unhealthy if we never change our opinions on things from time to time, as we're all always learning) but how can he go from being behind to being in a different league altogether?

I think everyone knows the answer to this.

Nope. Just not a blind fanatic. He got smacked by a chump.

azania wrote:Nope. Just not a blind fanatic. He got smacked by a chump.

Who did?

SRR

Right, thought you were talking about Whitaker. I am (without any hint of oneupmanship, as well) genuinely interested to know how Mayweather has gone from being below Whitaker in the all-time race to now being in a different league, though. What has suddenly given Floyd such a massive leap up?

I changed my mind after watching older Floyd fights and struggling to stay awake watching pernell.

Fair enough, if a fighter's style plays a part in how you rate them.

I don't take any issue to people putting Mayweather ahead of Pernell as long as they're reasonable about it. When I have Whitaker in front, I always stress that it's by a slither. I don't know how you can deduce that Mayweather is a complete class above, or how Truss can claim that only an 'idiot' could have Pea higher than Money.

I just don't think there can be more than a very small margin in it either way. I don't like this attitude which develops when certain fighters are compared whereby it seems you have to be emphatically on one side or emphatically on the other. There are definitely areas where Floyd outscores Pernell. He's got slightly better ring smarts and has more longevity at the highest level. He also has more wins in the 'good' bracket than Pea, for my money. However, I believe that Whitaker has a couple of really 'great' entries on his ledger which Mayweather can't match, was ever so slightly more gifted physically and also tested himself more than Floyd has. A head to head is a pick 'em.

You can make all the excuses you want, but Whitaker took on Chavez whereas Mayweather never faced Pacquiao. And on top of that, Pea made far more concessions to make that fight happen than Mayweather was being asked to make to fight Manny. The way Mayweather has dithered over that fight for years makes me highly doubtful that he'd have defended against a 1997 version of De la Hoya when he was on his way up, too.

Anyway, I'll stop before we get back in to all that 50:50, drug testing, PPV draw nightmare.

Is this Az attention seeking thread still going. It really should be taken out and shot. Life's too short and beautiful to waste it debating with someone who had no concept of how to construct a coherent and honest argument. Within three weeks he'll no doubt contradict almost every point he's made in this thread.

Why not debate the thread as opposed to me. Either that or leave the thread.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I'd quote you Toppy but you edit your posts too quick for me........

Trussy-wussy where do you get your bizarre ideas from?? I’ve gone back through pages 4 5 and 6 of this thread and haven’t found one edited post of mine. Are you sure you’re not imagining things? Seeing stuff that isn’t there?? I know you like doing this as it’s the glue that holds you flakey arguments together but probably best to avoid doing it when it’s so provably wrong.