Fight Thread For This Weekends Action: Vlad, De Leon, Mares, Santa Cruz... Oh, and Mayweather vs The Ghost

[davidemore]

First topic message reminder :

SOMEBODY, PLEASE LEAVE A YOUTUBE LINK TO THE FIGHT ON HERE AS SOON AS ONE POPS UP AND PM ME WITH IT TOO. I WILL BE WATCHING THE FIGHT SUNDAY MORNING

So, one big thread for all: predictions, live chat, reaction and banter.

Let's GET READY!

#Boxing

[manos de piedra]

"It's quite simple. Whoever Floyd fights is a bum after he wins easily."

This is obviously isnt true and a generalisation and assumption of opinion.
Is there even 1 example you could provide of someone calling everyone Mayweather beat a bum? There is a wide variation of opinion on all of his wins with varying degrees of credit afforded.

There are people out there who for one or another reason will not and probably never will give Mayweather enough credit. Thats life. But you act like this minority speak for everyone and is the popular opinion, and worse that any criticism of Mayweather or failure to conform to what your own evaluation of Mayweather is automatically consigns them to this minority viewpoint. Hence statements like the above.

What the result of this is, is that there is no middle ground for debate with Mayweather. You either must rate him as you do, or else you are one of those unreasonables that thinks everyone he beat was a bum and is a Mayweather hater. There is no allowance for the broad area between.

If you said that there were some people who will never give Mayweather his due credit and underrate him no matter what he does, then I would agree. But there is a distinct lack of allowance for any criticism at all of Mayweather, no real attempt at putting things into context and a trigger happy inclination to lump everyone into one singular (unreasonable) position on the matter.

I'm speaking to that minority who are blind haters.

You represent it as the popular opinion though, because dont qualify the statements and you repeat them continuosly. Whenever there are arguments against Mayweather you default back to this position frequently as well.

[azania]

It's quite simple. Whoever Floyd fights is a bum after he wins easily.

Whichever face first MW plodder gave Robbo problems was an ATG. Hagler would have made mincemeat of and all Robbo's opponents and Robbo himself. SRL would have beaten every fighter SRR beat and made easy work of those MWs, yet he's lower top 10 even with 4 ATG on his ledger.

Floyd will never win even if he goes upo and beats Wlad and Vit on the same night. Some excuse will be made.

You say this like it's an opinion every "Floyd Hater" holds. I've seen one person call Guerrero a bum which he then corrected as meaning not a bad fighter but just not in Floyds league (which is true as the fight shows).

Where are all these people that are now rubbishing Guerrero as a useless fighter?

it was an average performance vs an average fighter

Good enough for you?

The only other WW ranked higher that Floyd is JMM. Should he have rematched him after the one sided drubbing he gave him?

Who at WW should he have fought?

A quote from that same poster, so that's 1 person who does not rate the win or Guerrero.

I personally have no issue with him fighting Guerrero at Welterweight as Guerrero is a very good fighter and as you say a top ranked Welterweight. But I still don't like Floyd picking and choosing fights at Light Middleweight and then his fans, not Floyd himself just yet, saying Alvarez is too big and Floyd is excused for not fighting him despite being a Champion in the same division.

There was more than one. I can't be bothered to troll through the whole series of threads to prove a point.

I can understand why he could be tentative fighting more regularly at LMW. This is a guy who started at 130. No-one holds it against Pernell for picking the worst LMW champ to dethrone and hardly fought there again. He started off at 135 and was no where near a bonafide 154 fighter.

But I believe Floyd should fight Canelo. Easy money.

[azania]

"It's quite simple. Whoever Floyd fights is a bum after he wins easily."

This is obviously isnt true and a generalisation and assumption of opinion.
Is there even 1 example you could provide of someone calling everyone Mayweather beat a bum? There is a wide variation of opinion on all of his wins with varying degrees of credit afforded.

There are people out there who for one or another reason will not and probably never will give Mayweather enough credit. Thats life. But you act like this minority speak for everyone and is the popular opinion, and worse that any criticism of Mayweather or failure to conform to what your own evaluation of Mayweather is automatically consigns them to this minority viewpoint. Hence statements like the above.

What the result of this is, is that there is no middle ground for debate with Mayweather. You either must rate him as you do, or else you are one of those unreasonables that thinks everyone he beat was a bum and is a Mayweather hater. There is no allowance for the broad area between.

If you said that there were some people who will never give Mayweather his due credit and underrate him no matter what he does, then I would agree. But there is a distinct lack of allowance for any criticism at all of Mayweather, no real attempt at putting things into context and a trigger happy inclination to lump everyone into one singular (unreasonable) position on the matter.

I'm speaking to that minority who are blind haters.

You represent it as the popular opinion though, because dont qualify the statements and you repeat them continuosly. Whenever there are arguments against Mayweather you default back to this position frequently as well.

If you look I was generally responding to invividual posts and not making a broadcast.

[manos de piedra]

Well for example on another thread in direct response to me saying that he needed to fight to fight Alvarez to dispel the notion he wasnt taking on the toughest challenges and to assume a nailed on top ten position you said that this notion was only created by Floyd haters. Ergo I must be a Floyd hater because I believe Mayweather hasnt testing himself against the toughest available challenges. Followed by Anderson Silva and Chuck Liddell beating any oldie above 170lb. Again no real flexibility there for the middle ground and another exaggeration.

[azania]

Well for example on another thread in direct response to me saying that he needed to fight to fight Alvarez to dispel the notion he wasnt taking on the toughest challenges and to assume a nailed on top ten position you said that this notion was only created by Floyd haters. Ergo I must be a Floyd hater because I believe Mayweather hasnt testing himself against the toughest available challenges. Followed by Anderson Silva and Chuck Liddell beating any oldie above 170lb. Again no real flexibility there for the middle ground and another exaggeration.

I believe he doesn't need Saul to cement him top 10 place. He is already there. He's fought and beaten the best available except for Pac who refused the simple test and made them look easy.

As for the oldies, I stand by my comment. They are no better than the best UFC stand up fighters. Probably less skilled and rounded.

[manos de piedra]

He hasnt fought the best available though.

2007: Miguel Cotto
2008: Tony Margarito/Paul Williams
2009: Manny Pacquiao/Sergio Martinez
2010: Manny Pacquiao/Tim Bradley
2011: Manny Pacquiao

I dont particularly blame him for fighting Mosley, Cotto or de la Hoya, they were acceptable fights, but they were past their best when he fought them. I dont lay all the blame for the Pacquiao fight at his feet but I lay some blame. When you look at what he has done since 2007 he hasnt challenged himself enough for me. Its not rubbish,, its not poor, but its definately not taking on the toughest challenges available either.

Dont want to get the UFC fighters beating oldies but suffice to say I think their chances are less than slim.

[Diamond in the rough]

Bradley 2010 you joking???

[Sponsored content]