Where now for last nights winners and losers?

First topic message reminder :

Firstly hats off to Garcia and Mayweather for producing career best performances to overcome their major rivals in two interesting fights.

First off Garcia and Matthyse, having gone into the fight as a massive underdog Danny Garcia produced a performance of great skill and maturity to blunt the offensive arsenal of Lucas Matthyse. A fight that cements his place as the premier light welterweight in the world he should now start to get the recognition he deserves, the scorecards were for me criminally close. Garcia from start to finish with the exception of a couple of mid fight rounds dominated his more revered opponent, showing grit and determination to take anything the argentine had to offer while his left hook did the physical damage it was his superior boxing skills that won the day. For Garcia a fight with Mayweather at welterweight seems the obvious next step, his stock is as high as anyones in and around the divisions but for Matthyse his options seem less obvious. With no belts to his name and brutal power he will once again fall into the who needs him club, an eminently beatable boxer who unfortunately seems fairly reliant on his power, Garcia is no speed merchant but had the faster hands and feet throughout.

As for the main event well it was a boxing masterclass up until the 8th round where Mayweather switched off went on the retreat and allowed Alvarez to pick up rounds through aggression if nothing else. The fight will have done little to persuade his detractors that his fights are a bit boring, a supremely talented once in a generation boxer who is far too good to be in good fights. For Mayweather it would appear that Garcia is next up, getting him to fight as main support would seem to be a deliberate ploy to get him in the publics consciousness. For Alvarez a bit of rebuilding is needed, he's still young and has obvious talent but doesn't have a real identity as a boxer, he wants to box but lacks the footwork or speed to be overly successful yet lacks the stamina and power to be an aggressive come forward fighter.

Mayweather vs Garcia
Alvarez vs Cotto
Matthyse vs Maidana

The three fights I think are most sensible next steps for all those involved.

azania wrote:Why should Floyd fight mid weights? He has nothing to prove to anyone. He will beat Martinez anyday. But why do it? Lets not forget he was once touted as a Naz opponent and naz weighed 126.

Floyd actually weighed 150 at fight night and had to eat big just to put on weight.

The man is a nailed on top 3 P4P with only Ray Leonard and Ali above him.

True bro. But why not beat Martinez? Worth it just to see the HATERS go into meltdown!

I agree that Floyd could beat Martinez at middle but how does he get to middleweight?
Can't see him doing it. It appears that lmw is a stretch.

RanjitPatel wrote:I agree that Floyd could beat Martinez at middle but how does he get to middleweight?
Can't see him doing it. It appears that lmw is a stretch.

What you mean bro? He just weigh the same as he did last night. Dont make no differance! Mayweather can put a WHOOPING on Martinez and still be weighing 150. Mayweather so TALENTED he can SCHOOL guys 20 pounds heavier.

I mean how can he fight for a middleweight title when he isn't a middleweight?
I don't know the ins and outs of what sort of catchweight a title can be on the line for but im just doubting that Floyd could make it. To me winning the middlewight title would be the point in fighting Martinez.
If Floyd could come in at his normal weight it doesn't make sense.

What dont make sense bro? Mayweather can fight Martinez for the middleweight title long as he dont weigh over 160 which will NOT happen. Money weigh in at 150-152 and Martinez WEIGH IN at 159/160 and WEIGH 167-170 on FIGHT NIGHT. Wont matter NOTHING because Money still too TALENTED!

Ranjit there is no lower limit only an upper limit except at heavyweight. So in theory a Minimumweight could fight a heavyweight though it would never get sanctioned in practice

Don't think he's quite top 3, but Floyd's ahead of Leonard in my book. I thought that Saturday was Floyd's crowning glory, in many ways. The sheer enjoyment of watching a craftsman at work is the same in any walk of life. Those that weren't impressed by/found dull the landslide that FMJ inflicted on a very decent young fighter are too difficult to please; I always used to enjoy Whitaker's performances and here is someone who has raised the bar still higher. Saturday night, for me, was an embodiment of what boxing is supposed to be about.

As for where Floyd goes now, I imagine that it will be Garcia next, who will bring the most interest (some of it via his father) and, therefore, money to the table. It appears that he is better than ever, has taken very little punishment in his 15 years in the pro game and can re-calibrate his own ambitions.

You'd have to think that the mythical 50-0 would be in his sights - assuming he intends to fight twice a year for the next two or three years, he could, in theory, reach that target on or around his 39th birthday in 2016.

Gareth A Davies seemed confident that Mayweather would be coming to the UK in May 2014 this morning.

captain carrantuohil wrote:As for where Floyd goes now, I imagine that it will be Garcia next, who will bring the most interest (some of it via his father) and, therefore, money to the table. It appears that he is better than ever, has taken very little punishment in his 15 years in the pro game and can re-calibrate his own ambitions.

You'd have to think that the mythical 50-0 would be in his sights - assuming he intends to fight twice a year for the next two or three years, he could, in theory, reach that target on or around his 39th birthday in 2016.

The problem with any Floyd opponent captain...Is that people can't see them beating him so abuse Floyd for taking "Easy" fights.......

Which is perverse because Canelo was one of the best fighters in the World............

The real problem is some people want to see him beat...and won't accept any opponent.....

Martinez gets away with.........Macklin, Barker and Murray as opponents........

and Mayweather gets hammered off some for Alvarez, Guerrero and the like..

He can't win.........

I have him above Leonard but top 5 not top 3......

The anti-Floyd brigade......Play the man and not the ball.....

Have not always enjoyed Floyd performances but I enjoyed Saturday’s. There comes a point where one just has to admire greatness and accept that it won’t be around forever and on Saturday against the best opponent available to him Floyd made a very good fighter look completely bereft of any kind of solutions to the problems he was posed.

Floyd’s handspeed, perception of distance and speed of mind are once in a generation stuff. As to the OP where he goes next is tricky, think if Khan gets through Alexander him in the UK next May is a real possibility which will give Garcia a little time to get a bit of form at welter to legitimize and stoke the fires for him in September.

Biggest loser - Canelo for his urine-weak performance.

Biggest winner - Floyd for taking in $50m+ for a showcasing workout.

Are you crazy...........Canelo is a winner.........He's young just earned a fortune........and this loss has come at a time where it won't be held against him when he comes back..

Everybody has lost to Floyd..so what !!

Nelson didn't suffer for Sanchez..

It's urine-weak because you 're sore floyd won..admit it!!.......Don't let dislike cloud your judgement.

I genuinely didn’t think Alvarez was poor on Saturday, think he just was not up to the job and realised as many have done previously how good Floyd is once you are actually in there with him and got discouraged on the back of this realisation. Think he had moments of success in a lot of rounds but alas found he was just in with a guy who did everything he could do that little bit better than him.

Have to be careful here the two biggest canelo detractors from Saturday night are strongy and Tophat..

Two guys who have an anti-Floyd agenda.........They are heaping their disappointment of another great win on to his opponent..

It's like a Republican blaming Romney for an Obama election instead of congratulating Obama on a good campaign..

How about your pro-Floyd agenda big boy? You can't see a bad word said.

And I'm just calling what I see, haven't said a bad word about Floyd since the fight. Words have included 'masterclass', 'virtuoso', 'thing of beauty' and 'exceptional' though.

Yeh....that sounds like I'm really hating on Floyd!!

I admire Floyd............But I try to look objectively..........

Top 5 for me.......but not number 1........

Thing is I've been watching Boxing for thirty years and seeing a guy get hammered for fighting two p4pers in the last year when the loved-Hagler fought sack all for seven bar Hearns.....Going from 130 -152 for Canelo is no different from hagler fighting Spinks at 170........Spinks often weighed 171.......

People forget Hearns fought Mark Medal types..........Leonsrd fought Dave boy greens and was down for Stafford !!........and Robbo fought crummy Germans......

Floyd has to fight guys that can beat him every fight.......

Does rankle..and even then they are garbage..after !!

Agree with all you say, Jeff. Mayweather made a telling point before the fight about the likely value of his experience against Canelo's comparative greenness at championship level. The fight itself showed how completely Floyd has mastered a difficult art. He has picked up so many little subtleties over the course of 22 championship fights, plus contests against folk like Marquez and Mosley, that when he assembles them as thoroughly as he did against Canelo, the gap between him and his opponent resembles a chasm.

If I were to pick out one aspect that sets him aside, though, it would be Floyd's intelligence, the one quality that you can't teach. It was the one thing that Tommy Hearns, as great a natural talent as Floyd, never had, to give the most obvious example. Floyd not only boxes to his own strengths, but to his opponents' weaknesses, which he dissects ruthlessly. If a tactic is not quite working to his satisfaction, you can see him refining it, or even doing away with it and replacing it completely, all while he is in the heat of battle. A rare gift and so enjoyable to see these gifts maturing at an age when most champions are ready for their pipe and slippers, whether they know it or not.

I'm one of those that's hard to please, although I know I'm watching someone utterly brilliant at what he does, I find Floyds fights dull. It's a combination of a) wanting to see him chinned and then realising after 2 / 3 rounds that ain't happening b) the fight is so one sided c) All of he's fights have a similar pattern, pot shotting and putting on a defensive masterclass. Don't blame the guy but I'd like to see him open up a bit and try and close the show.

A boxing master genius , but will say I won't be in any rush to watch he's next fight , think he'll genuinely have a hard time selling it on PPV in the states.

Cheers Rodders

He comes the in-objectivity though. Two p4pers?? Who? Because only the ridiculously biaised Ring (sadly) had Guererro Top10, nobody else did. And Canelo wasn't either as far as I'm aware, at least not consistently, though I've never doubted he was the biggest fight out there for Floyd and is still an excellent win (even if he did needlessly discredit it with the 152 catchweight).

Plus SSN had this as the first time Floyd had fought twice in a 12 month period since 2009, that's unimpressive in itself.

He won't have a problem.............He is miles ahead of any other fighter and like Frank Sinatra at the end people want to see a unique talent one last time..

Give youth a chance Rodders....You have much to offer but are so against modern fighters it kind of seems bitter Mate..

How does being miles ahead of any other fighter help selling a fight??

Because they are paying to see a unique talent...........

Criticism of Floyd is getting like criticism of Sir Alex ferguson.............Forget the titles...the 6-1 to City shows he wasn't all that!!!!!

Like Federer between 2004 and 2007, Tiger Woods in 2000/2001, Hendry or O'Sullivan in their prime, it's a real pleasure to watch a maestro at work. There was never much doubt that these guys were going to win when they were in full flower, but I don't remember Wimbledon, The Crucible or Augusta National being half empty in those days. The thrill comes from seeing someone do something better than any contemporary can and better than all but a handful of people ever have done. That applies to any field of human endeavour, competitive or not, in my opinion.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Because they are paying to see a unique talent...........

Criticism of Floyd is getting like criticism of Sir Alex ferguson.............Forget the titles...the 6-1 to City shows he wasn't all that!!!!!

Rigo and Donaire are unique talents but their fight was also dull to general fightfans, they were almost boo'd off and there's no way a rematch would sell PPV.

Boxing is carnal, it has bloodsport origins, whilst really keen fans want to see the Floyds and the Rigos of this world, they only make a tiny proportion of collective interest in the sport and the majority want more 'blood and guts'. And our general human passion for controversy means we tend to like less a schooling, which is what Floyd hands out. Fights like Garcia-LM get people clamouring for a rematcha and paying through the nose. Fights like Floyd-Canelo are a turn off.

He's not Rigo and Donaire.......

He's been a champion for nearly 16 years..He's the best fighter in the game....He's American and he's a marmite figure...

I'm not being bitter, he'd compete with the best in any era, I just don't find him entertaining to watch.

Whitaker another master wasn't a big seller not a PPV star, Mayweather has been marketed superbly however can't see what angle they can spin to sell record amounts, the all access is cringeworthy and he can't possibly act anymore of a bell-end to promote the show, now with no real rival, guys like my self won't be tuning in to the hope of him being chinned.

Cheers Rodders

It was a pleasure to see a master of his art at work. Mayweather has developed into the complete fighter. The most complete fighter that he can be. Ok, he could be more aggressive and 'exciting', but he doesn't need to be. He just dominated a younger, stronger, bigger fighter with relative ease. I don't think I've ever been so impressed with a Mayweather performance.

Alvarez was the only live opponent at 154 and below. And he was a live opponent. But he wasn't anywhere near the level that Mayweather was on Saturday night. He'll come back though.

Where does Mayweather go from here? Four more fights and nobody to fight, nobody who can really challenge him, it would seem. Does he have anything left to prove?

The only real tests for him lie at 160. Martinez would be the obvious choice. A big name in the division but a small middleweight, possibly on the slide and there for the taking. He must be thinking about being a 6 weight world champion. But does he take the risk?

I picked a wide points decision for floyd in this one because I thought canelo's style would give floyd space, and Canelo wouldn't get to use the size advantage he had, unless he showed us something he hadn't up to now. I was disappointed, but not surprised, in Alvarez for the first half of the fight because his game plan (for what it was) 'being patient' seemed bizarre... Try and outbox the worlds best boxer? Fight your normal fight regardless of the opponent? I will credit Alvarez for at least giving it a go and attempting to pressure floyd in the second half of the fight.

That's just my assessment of what I expected and how it panned out, I will say that floyd looked magnificent, and whether his style suits or not, taking apart a talented bigger man like that is worth all the plaudits that come.

I think this anti-floyd thing, can get a bit misplaced, especially when it comes to  opponent choice. I don't like mayweather, I would like to see him lose, but at the same time part of me, as an objective (well most of the time) fan of the sport recognises I'm watching a very special fighter. When I'm looking at fighters I'd like to see him fight, I'm looking from a fans perspective for guys who have attributes that might make the fight competitive, because I like uncertainty in a fight's outcome.

Consequently, I've been disappointed in say Guerrero as an opponent because I couldn't see it being competitive. That doesn't mean that he's not a legitimate opponent. Just that I'm not personally excited by it. Floyd fights infrequently but generally against guys that are marketable and his standard of opposition has been generally high.

The only thing holding him back, and manny apart, he's blameless on this, is a lack of other great fighters in their prime, to judge him against. The whole defining fight thing.

When we're talking upper echelons of ATG lists you are going to get nit picked because you're judged at a different level.

I've never knocked Matweather just his opposition. To get into the Top 10 you need to have beater an ATG fighter in his prime. Floyd has not done.

Canelo was talked about being a publicity machine in Mexico long before he fought Mayweather. He was taken under the wing of a big television company and hyped to the last. His best win was against Trout who isn't that good and he was fighting the likes of Matthew Hatton not that long ago.

Canelo was a massive disappoint in my view and Floyd burst that bubble in emphatic style.

You can't beat Floyd without good footwork, Canelo's footwork was appalling, he has feet of clay.

Fast hands are required to land on Mayweather. Canelo has slow hands.

Floyd doesn't like being hustled by a high work rate. Canelo has no engine.

Floyd is so quick an opponent needs good body and head movement, Canelo was static.


Canelo was all hype and a prime Cotto was a better fighter. I would even fancy a battered up psychologically damaged Cotto to give Alverez a avert tough night.

Wax lyrically about Floyd but show some perspective about his opposition. Canelo is no great fighter.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He's not Rigo and Donaire.......

He's been a champion for nearly 16 years..He's the best fighter in the game....He's American and he's a marmite figure...

15 years, including the last 4 or so years of fighting only once a year and a year or two out 'retired'. Sorry, but you can't just trump out that '16 years' schtick for Floyd, it's too full of holes. Nobody considered SRL still the champ whilst he was out for years living it up.

You don't get it...........Your dislike for the guy means you don't see his true appeal as once-in-a-generation fighter..

Captain summed it up perfectly..

You said canelo was urine-weak........Very telling comment.

captain carrantuohil wrote:Like Federer between 2004 and 2007, Tiger Woods in 2000/2001, Hendry or O'Sullivan in their prime, it's a real pleasure to watch a maestro at work. There was never much doubt that these guys were going to win when they were in full flower, but I don't remember Wimbledon, The Crucible or Augusta National being half empty in those days. The thrill comes from seeing someone do something better than any contemporary can and better than all but a handful of people ever have done. That applies to any field of human endeavour, competitive or not, in my opinion.

Federer was great but he didn't win every tournament hands down and Ronnie always had Higgins to keep him honest. There were only two truly all time great fighters in this era and the fact they didn't fight each other, regardless of who would have won, must hurt their legacy. Mayweather just has been rarely tested. It's like Ronnie playing a world champion in Ken Doherty, not much of a contest (although Ken would frustrate the hell out of him). Ken's is one of my all time favourite sports people so no disrespect intended.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You don't get it...........Your dislike for the guy means you don't see his true appeal as once-in-a-generation fighter..

Captain summed it up perfectly..

You said canelo was urine-weak........Very telling comment.

No, YOU are the one who seemingly doesn't get it. To the point you're just making yourself look stupid. Were the Rocky films chess matches? No. Were 'Fighter' or 'Raging Bull' based on classy punch perfect defensive fighters? No, they weren't. Excitement sells, especially to the generalist.

Your desperation to be Floyd's peg-boy is clouding your judgement and objectivity (if you ever had any), yes real boxing fans will continue to tune in to see the Grand Master at work, but the generalists, i.e. the majority won't.

And to adopt Captain's analogy, when was tennis more popular and making most money - when Fed was sweeping all before him with ease or when Fed-Nadal-Djok were possibly the greatest trifector in the history of the sport???

Have you ever seen The shining where Nicholson writes "All work and no play" a 100 times..

Why don't you write..

"I hate Floyd" a 100 times on here Mate.......

Floyd should be more like Frampton, Fury and Audley..

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You don't get it...........Your dislike for the guy means you don't see his true appeal as once-in-a-generation fighter..

Captain summed it up perfectly..

You said canelo was urine-weak........Very telling comment.

No, YOU are the one who seemingly doesn't get it.  To the point you're just making yourself look stupid.  Were the Rocky films chess matches? No.  Were 'Fighter' or 'Raging Bull' based on classy punch perfect defensive fighters? No, they weren't.  Excitement sells, especially to the generalist.

Your desperation to be Floyd's peg-boy is clouding your judgement and objectivity (if you ever had any), yes real boxing fans will continue to tune in to see the Grand Master at work, but the generalists, i.e. the majority won't.  

And to adopt Captain's analogy, when was tennis more popular and making most money - when Fed was sweeping all before him with ease or when Fed-Nadal-Djok were possibly the greatest trifector in the history of the sport???

Floyd is a top ppv fighter because he stinks and isn't popular..

You put me right..I apologise.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Have you ever seen The shining where Nicholson writes "All work and no play" a 100 times..

Why don't you write..

"I hate Floyd" a 100 times on here Mate.......

Floyd should be more like Frampton, Fury and Audley..

Good response, give yourself a special.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Have you ever seen The shining where Nicholson writes "All work and no play" a 100 times..

Why don't you write..

"I hate Floyd" a 100 times on here Mate.......

Floyd should be more like Frampton, Fury and Audley..

Good response, give yourself a :clap:special.

I think we are through Mate..You admitted to liking winding me up on the 606 rivalry thread..

I think we are going down this tragic road..and I'm not in the mood for wums.

captain carrantuohil wrote:Like Federer between 2004 and 2007, Tiger Woods in 2000/2001, Hendry or O'Sullivan in their prime, it's a real pleasure to watch a maestro at work. There was never much doubt that these guys were going to win when they were in full flower, but I don't remember Wimbledon, The Crucible or Augusta National being half empty in those days. The thrill comes from seeing someone do something better than any contemporary can and better than all but a handful of people ever have done. That applies to any field of human endeavour, competitive or not, in my opinion.

Post of the day..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

captain carrantuohil wrote:Like Federer between 2004 and 2007, Tiger Woods in 2000/2001, Hendry or O'Sullivan in their prime, it's a real pleasure to watch a maestro at work. There was never much doubt that these guys were going to win when they were in full flower, but I don't remember Wimbledon, The Crucible or Augusta National being half empty in those days. The thrill comes from seeing someone do something better than any contemporary can and better than all but a handful of people ever have done. That applies to any field of human endeavour, competitive or not, in my opinion.

Post of the day..

Salad toss of the day....

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You don't get it...........Your dislike for the guy means you don't see his true appeal as once-in-a-generation fighter..

Captain summed it up perfectly..

You said canelo was urine-weak........Very telling comment.

No, YOU are the one who seemingly doesn't get it.  To the point you're just making yourself look stupid.  Were the Rocky films chess matches? No.  Were 'Fighter' or 'Raging Bull' based on classy punch perfect defensive fighters? No, they weren't.  Excitement sells, especially to the generalist.

Your desperation to be Floyd's peg-boy is clouding your judgement and objectivity (if you ever had any), yes real boxing fans will continue to tune in to see the Grand Master at work, but the generalists, i.e. the majority won't.  

And to adopt Captain's analogy, when was tennis more popular and making most money - when Fed was sweeping all before him with ease or when Fed-Nadal-Djok were possibly the greatest trifector in the history of the sport???

Floyd is a top ppv fighter because he stinks and isn't popular..

You put me right..I apologise.

1. Quote me where I said he stinks;

2. Quote me where I said he's unpopular.

?

TopHat24/7 wrote:No, YOU are the one who seemingly doesn't get it.  To the point you're just making yourself look stupid.  Were the Rocky films chess matches? No.  Were 'Fighter' or 'Raging Bull' based on classy punch perfect defensive fighters? No, they weren't.  Excitement sells, especially to the generalist.

Your desperation to be Floyd's peg-boy is clouding your judgement and objectivity (if you ever had any), yes real boxing fans will continue to tune in to see the Grand Master at work, but the generalists, i.e. the majority won't.  

And to adopt Captain's analogy, when was tennis more popular and making most money - when Fed was sweeping all before him with ease or when Fed-Nadal-Djok were possibly the greatest trifector in the history of the sport???

Names sell, and quality sells, not just brawls.

Why were Rigo and Donaire almost booed off then? And why has no network shown any interest in a rematch?

Also, I'm not saying ONLY brawls sell. I'm talking about quamtum and variety of sales as much as anything else.

Lots of love for Floyd in beating a slightly drained and largely unproven fighter. Has a win over such a mediocre opponent ever generated such a love in?

Can you think of a better opponent for him to have fought, south of 154?

Canelo at 154 would be better than 152. He needs to be looking for bigger challenges, if he wants to cement his place in the top 10.

His fights are dull, I don't see the point of watching him.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Why were Rigo and Donaire almost booed off then? And why has no network shown any interest in a rematch?

I think they were just booing Rigo for fighting off the back foot. Donaire couldn't have been much more aggressive.

STC wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Why were Rigo and Donaire almost booed off then? And why has no network shown any interest in a rematch?

I think they were just booing Rigo for fighting off the back foot. Donaire couldn't have been much more aggressive.

It was for the lack of action. Personally I enjoyed it, a footwork masterclass from Rigo. But that's my point, what the purists enjoy the generalists do not.

STC wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Why were Rigo and Donaire almost booed off then? And why has no network shown any interest in a rematch?

I think they were just booing Rigo for fighting off the back foot. Donaire couldn't have been much more aggressive.

Clearly he only did what he was allowed to do, But I thought donaire plodded forward without enough real intent, and lacked aggression in the fight. No doubt it just seemed that way, as his footwork wasn't up to getting him in range to let his shots go, but donaire was disappointing to me.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

STC wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Why were Rigo and Donaire almost booed off then? And why has no network shown any interest in a rematch?

I think they were just booing Rigo for fighting off the back foot. Donaire couldn't have been much more aggressive.

It was for the lack of action.  Personally I enjoyed it, a footwork masterclass from Rigo.  But that's my point, what the purists enjoy the generalists do not.

Personally I much prefer the Mayweathers, Wards and Rigos of the sport. If generalists don't like it then they can go back to watching football. Who cares about what they think?

The thing is though Mayweather will still sell large PPV numbers. The Guerrero fight wasn't exactly thrilling, it was over after the first round. I almost fell asleep watching it. Yet the fight after Mayweather's breaking records again. It is all about how they select and market his opponents, but the bottom line is Mayweather sells PPVs.