Floyd will fight Maidana

First topic message reminder :

It's now official. Not a fan of this fight as I don't see what Maidana can do that will cause him any problems, a better fight than Khan in my opinion though.

Chris my issue was less with who the champion is but rather that it was not a recognised title defence. The NYSAC were quite clear with their stipulations Chris, any title fight had to be over 15 rounds, not the 10 rounds they fought over, the CSAC can regard it as what they want but in fairness who cares about them.

I do not think that fight is testament to Armstrongs greatness at all anyway, he'd already gone life and death with him for the Welterweight does beating an already vanquished foe at a higher weight really add a great deal?

TopHat24/7 wrote:But he's not 'staying at WW', he's moved throught the weights from 130 to 135 to 140 to 147 to 154 (ish), and won every time he's entered the ring.

The way you write about him it's as if he's only ever campaigned as a WW.

He's been @ 147 for some time now, I give Mayweather his props - he is an incredible boxer - just not a top 10 ATG which is probably how he sees himself

A welterweight who enters the ring at the divisional limit has no obligation to move up in weight, the fact he's been in the division for some time is more down to him hitting his physical limit.

Nobody is saying he has an obligation to move up, only that we would like to see him try.

Personally I think he's moved up enough, it's almost as if he's been at Welterweight his whole career.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Chris my issue was less with who the champion is but rather that it was not a recognised title defence. The NYSAC were quite clear with their stipulations Chris, any title fight had to be over 15 rounds, not the 10 rounds they fought over, the CSAC can regard it as what they want but in fairness who cares about them.

I do not think that fight is testament to Armstrongs greatness at all anyway, he'd already gone life and death with him for the Welterweight does beating an already vanquished foe at a higher weight really add a great deal?

Not disagreeing with the fact it wasn't recognised by the NYSAC, mate, but like we say these days fighters make belts, not the other way around. That notion wasn't as popular back then, but the California title, in terms of what had gone before, carried the most weight at that time, I feel, when you factor in who Garcia had beaten to get to that point. As I said, appreciate that this kind of view wouldn't have been so popular at the time, but in retrospect Garcia was the man with the most legitimate claim to being the best Middle in the world at the time, regardless of which belt he had / didn't have.

With regards to your other point, again I see where you're coming from, but in fairness in the interim of losing to Hank in their Welterweight title fight and defending against him at Middle, Garcia had surprised a lot of people with his form, coming on leaps and bounds and being held in much higher regard than when they first met. Neither were genuine 160 pounders obviously, but Garcia was still much closer to being than Hank was; he was the best part of a stone heavier when they weighed in for the fight. I'd argue that, second time round, Armstrong was facing a slightly better version of Garcia while facing even more troublesome disadvantes in terms of weight / size, although you do raise fair points I'll stress.

This is the kind of thing I don’t get, who are we to decide he has moved up far enough? Surely this is dictated by how well he handles the challenges at each weight. Now we don’t know how well Floyd will handle middle because he has never fought there.

However based on the fact he handled two of the better light middles in the world, if not with ease, then reasonably well, I think those of us assuming that he could manage middle and at least compete there are hardly coming out of left field in reaching this conclusion.

The obsession with not losing is the main driving factor. Theres nothing wrong with losing in pursuit of a great challenge. Nearly all the greats have lost fights. Much rather have the losses and see the top fighters pushing themselves, taking on the toughest challenges and challengers and witnessing great fights. The standard was set way before Mayweather and he doesnt measure up to it. Hes chosen to sacrifice greatness for easier money and continues to do so.

Boxing is one of the few sports where you actually get the opportunity to test yourself. A footballer in the conference League can't just decide on day to turn up at the Nou Camp as ask to replace Messi.

Floyd is in the fortunate position of being able to dictate who and when he fights but still expects us to bow down and praise him irrespective of what he does. Are we supposed to praise him if he drags Matthew Hatton out of retirement in an act of great benevolence or are we allowed to pour scorn on a man who is the equivalent of a man with a Ferrari who doesn't want to put his car in fourth gear let alone his foot to the floor?

88Chris05 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Chris my issue was less with who the champion is but rather that it was not a recognised title defence. The NYSAC were quite clear with their stipulations Chris, any title fight had to be over 15 rounds, not the 10 rounds they fought over, the CSAC can regard it as what they want but in fairness who cares about them.

I do not think that fight is testament to Armstrongs greatness at all anyway, he'd already gone life and death with him for the Welterweight does beating an already vanquished foe at a higher weight really add a great deal?

Not disagreeing with the fact it wasn't recognised by the NYSAC, mate, but like we say these days fighters make belts, not the other way around. That notion wasn't as popular back then, but the California title, in terms of what had gone before, carried the most weight at that time, I feel, when you factor in who Garcia had beaten to get to that point. As I said, appreciate that this kind of view wouldn't have been so popular at the time, but in retrospect Garcia was the man with the most legitimate claim to being the best Middle in the world at the time, regardless of which belt he had / didn't have.

With regards to your other point, again I see where you're coming from, but in fairness in the interim of losing to Hank in their Welterweight title fight and defending against him at Middle, Garcia had surprised a lot of people with his form, coming on leaps and bounds and being held in much higher regard than when they first met. Neither were genuine 160 pounders obviously, but Garcia was still much closer to being than Hank was; he was the best part of a stone heavier when they weighed in for the fight. I'd argue that, second time round, Armstrong was facing a slightly better version of Garcia while facing even more troublesome disadvantes in terms of weight / size, although you do raise fair points I'll stress.

Think we're going off on a bit of a tangent but i've not been called every name under the sun for a change so will continue.

Not disputing who the champion was at Chris but personally all things considered don't think it was a world title but that's slightly beyond the point. If we use Mayweather as an example here, lets say for a moment Cotto shocks the world and beats Martinez, the prospect of moving up becomes a lot more attractive. Mayweather would in my opinion win any rematch fairly comfortably regardless of weight but is winning the middleweight title against somebody he's already beaten that much of an achievement? It would be an easy fight to market, Cotto rediscovers his mojo with career best win, Mayweather looking for a record breaking 5th legitimate world title.

Yeah, can see what you mean when you draw the comparison between Floyd and Cotto rematching at 160, Hammersmith. Again, I'd just add that those two are a bit closer in natural size / weight than Armstrong and Garcia were, and that Mayweather obviously wouldn't be as outweighed in the rematch as Armstrong was.

Anyway, it seems to be my fault as to why we've gone off on a tangent as I misunderstood the exact context you were using when you said it wasn't the legit Middleweight title or whatever it was....Sorry!

Rowley wrote:I don't think he would lose to GGG.

He would get Knocked out by GGG, even Murray and Macklin would have a chance at beating him at middle. People should stop the shouts for him and Golovkin. Mayweather should not fight any good Middleweight, infact he should give up the light-middle weight belt, it's a joke....he's not a light middleweight.

3fingers wrote:

Rowley wrote:I don't think he would lose to GGG.

He would get Knocked out by GGG, even Murray and Macklin would have a chance at beating him at middle. People should stop the shouts for him and Golovkin. Mayweather should not fight any good Middleweight, infact he should give up the light-middle weight belt, it's a joke....he's not a light middleweight.

On what basis do Murray and Macklin beat him, as for his light middleweight belt he won that by beating the champion.

i dont have any problem with him fighting Maidana. at least we know Marcos will give it his all. could be a decent fight.

unfortunately both mayweather and alvarez proved that boxing is tedious when guys go up too far in weight. what did alvarez do so badly against Flloyd?? Flloyd didnt want to fight, he kept clear for 12 rounds and landed pitter patter shots. Alvarez didnt bother chasing him because he knew he would be playing into Flloyds hands and made to look stupid.

I like Flloyd and i believe his record is far better than many of his retractors suggest it is. I know why he never fought Manny, and i think Maidana is a good opponent. (so dont label me truss my friend) but there seems to be this bandwagon for flloyd now, that suggests everything he does is a boxing clinic...he went toe to toe with cotto for the fans, not cause cotto worked out his footwork...i thought he was boring against alvarez. he fought safety first all night and stunk the place out. if it was hopkins or wlad they would have been slated!i think alvarez has been hard done by. he couldnt fight a faster smaller, more nimble guy who didnt want to go near him

i dont want to see him fight golovkin, it will be dull. a powerful man chasing round a smaller faster guy for 12 rounds. thats not boxing. its hit and not be hit. not land a few pitter patters a round and keep on your bike.

maidana will be fun, garcia would be fun, bradley would be good. there are still good fights for flloyd without needing bigger men chase him round. so what if flloyd wins them easily. it would be more entertaining watching him throw punches against a guy he can fight than watching him touch his gloves on guys who are too strong for him. bradley could beat him, you never know. at least flloyd would engage

Have you even seen the Alvarez fight Lance because Mayweather 'running' is not what I saw, you can't counter punch by being out of range the whole fight.

was it an entertaining fight though? did anybody who wasnt just there to regurgitate flloyd appraisals get any entertainment from it. boxing at its worst, one guy landing weak punches whilst never planting his feet, against a guy who doesnt have the legs to catch up. golovkin, or any other middleweight would be the same. no thanks for me

I thoroughly enjoyed the fight, it epitomized what the sport is about, hit and not get hit, stick to your blood and guts wars between guys who don't have the ability to fight any other way.

No idea what fight Lance was watching.........

It wasn't Gatti-Ward but it was definitely not as described!

I found it a snoozefest, I fast forwarded he majority of the second half of the fight, the pattern was the same throughout and Canelo was wooden legged. Not Floyds fault he does what he always does , however Trinidad, De La Hoya would've bombed Canelo out. I prefers boxer who takes risks.

Cheers Rodders

Of course they would Rodney and you prefer any boxer who's not modern and highly regarded, you love Joe Louis but his whole title reign consisted of one risk.

Are Trinidad and De La Hoya not modern enough for you ?
Cheers Rodders

How many risks did De La Hoya take against Trinidad when he was literally running away?

You only mention them so you can use them against Mayweather.

Cheers Rodders

He was fighting a welterweight wrecking machine not a stiff legged Alvarez, my comment is to put the opponent in perspective , you wouldn't favour Alvarez against Trinidad , Vargas , Quartey or De la Hoya would you ?

Cheers Rodders

I wouldn't rule him out against Vargas or Quartey but lets also ignore the relative size of the participants. Counter punching a bigger and younger foe is frowned upon but running away from somebody is absolutely fine as long as your name isn't Floyd Mayweather.

Cheers Rodders

I'm tired of hearing about this great size disparity, how long as Mayweather campaigned at Welterweight & how many fights ? What was the catchweight the fight was made at ? I suppose you'll now begin to give Louis credit for smashing Carnera ,Baer etc and giving copious amounts of poundage away

Cheers Rodders

Ps use cheers Rodders again and I'll call my lawyers

Lets give Louis credit for beating a pair of ambling oafs.

Mayweather is a welterweight while Alvarez is a middleweight, that is the size disparity there and then but do keep playing down his whole career.

Cheers Rodders

P.s. Joe Louis is over rated.

The fight was made at 151lbs , Mayweather was the taller and had a longer reach, so let's just stop with this giant risk in size Floyd took.

Cheers Rodders

Alvarez was taller actually Rodney but lets just look at the dimensions on Boxrec and not take into account the weight and build of either of them.

Cheers Rodders.

Ok I'll take your word for it , it must be minimal. Look at whatever dimension you want to say Mayweather took this much larger foe on is inaccurate.

Cheers Rodders

Alvarez outweighed him by 15lbs, how is that not being significantly bigger?

Cheers Rodders.

So we are taking on the night weight into consideration now , i persume Hatton was the much bigger man over Mayweather as well. At the end of the day Alvarez is a bigger fighter , but they both weighed 151 lb at the official weigh in & are similar height and reach, to suggest Mayweather didn't want to take a risk because Alvarez is this giant is far fetched.

Cheers Rodders

It's not far fetched at all it's an unquestionable fact that Alvarez is the naturally bigger man, suppose you think Sandy Saddler and Rocky Marciano are the same size too or what about Tommy Hearns and Mike Tyson?

Did Sandy Saddler / Marciano Tommy Hearns/Tyson weigh the same 24 hours beforehand?

Cheers Rodders

Hammersmith Harrier is the biggest WUM on the board. I don't know if he does it intentionally or not, possibly it's due to some type of personality disorder. I'll be happy when he gets himself his marching orders again.

Strongback wrote:Hammersmith Harrier is the biggest WUM on the board. I don't know if he does it intentionally or not,  possibly it's due to some type of personality disorder.  I'll be happy when he gets himself his marching orders again.

Stay out of it..............Roddy and Hammer are happy enough debating......eachother !!

Rodney wrote:Did Sandy Saddler / Marciano Tommy Hearns/Tyson  weigh the same 24 hours beforehand?

Cheers Rodders

I think it's about time you got with the times Rodney, weigh in weight doesn't mean a lot any more, do you think Martinez and Chavez jnr are the same size then or Broner and Rees?

Alvarez was awful against Mayweather to be fair. No discernible gameplan at all. A past it Cotto and de la Hoya put up a much better show. Alvarez spent a good while beating opposition thats not a great deal better than the sort Kell Brook has. He had his acid test against Trout which he scraped through (many thought he lost) and then was hopeless against Mayweather in a boring fight. Hugely overhyped fighter thats good but nothing special. Mayweathers record is basically what de la Hoya has minus all de la Hoyas big fights (Trinidad, Mosley, Hopkins, Pacquiao etc)

Which of those fights did De La Hoya win?

catchweight wrote:Alvarez was awful against Mayweather to be fair. No discernible gameplan at all. A past it Cotto and de la Hoya put up a much better show. Alvarez spent a good while beating opposition thats not a great deal better than the sort Kell Brook has. He had his acid test against Trout which he scraped through (many thought he lost) and then was hopeless against Mayweather in a boring fight. Hugely overhyped fighter thats good but nothing special. Mayweathers record is basically what de la Hoya has minus all de la Hoyas big fights (Trinidad, Mosley, Hopkins, Pacquiao etc)

Of course Mayweather had nothing to do with him looking awful..  

Mayweather had a lot do with Alvarez looking awful. He gave him a lesson. But Alvarez just isnt that good. His talent is nowhere near the hype.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Strongback wrote:Hammersmith Harrier is the biggest WUM on the board. I don't know if he does it intentionally or not,  possibly it's due to some type of personality disorder.  I'll be happy when he gets himself his marching orders again.

Stay out of it..............Roddy and Hammer are happy enough debating......eachother !!

An important lesson to learn the next time anyone is tempted to get involved when two or more of Truss' aliases start arguing with each other.

P.S. Hammersmith - no wonder you get personal insults fired at you when you start imitating people in your posts. There's a fair whiff of bellendishness about it.

You're missing the point , if Broner and Rees weighed the same as Chavez / Martinez on official weigh in day you'd have a point. Hatton should be facing Golovkin by your theory
Cheers Rodders

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Which of those fights did De La Hoya win?

He didnt win any but at least he took them on. He could have had Mayweathers unbeaten record if he wanted to by utilizing the same strategy picking opponents as Mayweather does. And plenty of people would have bought into it and been putting him top ten off all time, pound for great yada yada yada

superflyweight wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Strongback wrote:Hammersmith Harrier is the biggest WUM on the board. I don't know if he does it intentionally or not,  possibly it's due to some type of personality disorder.  I'll be happy when he gets himself his marching orders again.

Stay out of it..............Roddy and Hammer are happy enough debating......eachother !!

An important lesson to learn the next time anyone is tempted to get involved when two or more of Truss' aliases start arguing with each other.  

P.S. Hammersmith - no wonder you get personal insults fired at you when you start imitating people in your posts.  There's a fair whiff of bellendishness about it.  

Go away..You add nothing

Rodney wrote:You're missing the point , if Broner and Rees weighed the same as Chavez / Martinez on official weigh in day you'd have a point. Hatton should be facing Golovkin by your theory
Cheers Rodders

What point am I missing, Broner and Rees weighed within the lightweight limit but one is quite clearly bigger the same with Chavez who despite weighing inside the middleweight limit is huge compared to Martinez. We do now have to take into account fight night weights, it's part of modern boxing and it's about time you realised that Rodders.

catchweight wrote:Mayweather had a lot do with Alvarez looking awful. He gave him a lesson. But Alvarez just isnt that good. His talent is nowhere near the hype.

He's lost once..........

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Strongback wrote:Hammersmith Harrier is the biggest WUM on the board. I don't know if he does it intentionally or not,  possibly it's due to some type of personality disorder.  I'll be happy when he gets himself his marching orders again.

Stay out of it..............Roddy and Hammer are happy enough debating......eachother !!

An important lesson to learn the next time anyone is tempted to get involved when two or more of Truss' aliases start arguing with each other.  

P.S. Hammersmith - no wonder you get personal insults fired at you when you start imitating people in your posts.  There's a fair whiff of bellendishness about it.  

What brought this on ???

Feel free to ask the mods If I have any aliases...

Or sling it..You don't add anything these days...

Go away..

He may not have the time , you know aswell as me Truss, Super was a cracking poster on the old beeb. Anyway you'll have to debate without me I'm off to catch the littlun's last feed before bedtime.

All the best Rodders

Rodney wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Strongback wrote:Hammersmith Harrier is the biggest WUM on the board. I don't know if he does it intentionally or not,  possibly it's due to some type of personality disorder.  I'll be happy when he gets himself his marching orders again.

Stay out of it..............Roddy and Hammer are happy enough debating......eachother !!

An important lesson to learn the next time anyone is tempted to get involved when two or more of Truss' aliases start arguing with each other.  

P.S. Hammersmith - no wonder you get personal insults fired at you when you start imitating people in your posts.  There's a fair whiff of bellendishness about it.  

What brought this on ???

Feel free to ask the mods If I have any aliases...

Or sling it..You don't add anything these days....

He may not have the time , you know aswell as me Truss, Super was a cracking poster on the old beeb. Anyway you'll have to debate without me I'm off to catch the littlun's last feed before bedtime.

All the best Rodders

Goodnight Rod..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Strongback wrote:Hammersmith Harrier is the biggest WUM on the board. I don't know if he does it intentionally or not,  possibly it's due to some type of personality disorder.  I'll be happy when he gets himself his marching orders again.

Stay out of it..............Roddy and Hammer are happy enough debating......eachother !!

An important lesson to learn the next time anyone is tempted to get involved when two or more of Truss' aliases start arguing with each other.  

P.S. Hammersmith - no wonder you get personal insults fired at you when you start imitating people in your posts.  There's a fair whiff of bellendishness about it.  

What brought this on ???

Feel free to ask the mods If I have any aliases...

Or sling it..You don't add anything these days...

Go away..

It was a fairly unfunny, light hearted joke, T-Bone and its not like you dont have previous.  

As for adding anything, there's bugger all to add to something which has been debated for these 5 pages and what seems like every second thread on this board.  It's like the dark days of 2009 and Floyd v Manny all over again.

..........