Fight Time From 4am-McGregor vs Mayweather**MOD Warning in 1st Post**

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Tiernan Bradley also gives the spar to Conor:

http://www.irishnews.com/sport/boxing/2017/08/09/news/in-mcgregor-s-corner-the-truth-about-that-spar-between-paulie-malignaggi-and-conor-mcgregor-1105459/

Have no doubt Conor reviewed that interview before it went out - interesting though that Conor couldn't put this guy down in sparring, seems the focal point has now changed from power to winning sparring sessions - doesn't bode too well, regardless of how many sparring sessions Conor allegedly wins he's not going to outbox Floyd.

So what happened to the power?

Just over 2 weeks and this circus is over

noc1980 wrote: »

So what happened to it being 'impossible' for Conor to even be competitive with a pro boxer? Is it because Malignaggi is old and has been retired for 5 months? Is that enough to demote him from top pro / former champion to useless cannon fodder now? If so, what has soon to be 41 yrs old Floyd been reduced to, in his 2 years of inactivity?

But you dont know what happened in sparring ? Plus its sparring . Plus Paulie is not knocking out any fully grown man in sparring . What did you expect to happen ?

Also dont compare Paulie with Floyd . Its comparing an average PL player to Messi.

And lets just say he is on the same level as Paulie for arguments sake . Paulie would be 100/1 in a fight with Floyd.

Sam Eggington who ko'd Paulie . He would be 100/1 . Anyway you try paint the picture Conor stands no chance .

The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman wrote: »

There is a decent article on McGregor on ESPN long but a good read -

http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/page/enterpriseMcGregor/conor-mcgregor-shaped-dublin-roots-prepares-fight-floyd-mayweather

"McGregor, for all his bravado, can be fragile. Norman Mailer wrote about approaching Ali's psyche like you'd approach a squirrel. That's true for Conor too. "You got to be very cautious what you say around Conor," says striking coach Owen Roddy."

Anyway those who apparently know him best seem to think he's mentally fragile not to read too deep into that I'm sure most fighters have some of that. But I'd worry that there are only yes men around him and people who view things similar. Also from the article I would worry about the way he spends money. Even Billionaires can go broke if you spend it unwisely.

Regardless you have your opinion , I have mine.

The ESPN article about McGregor is absoulutely hilarious.

Mellor wrote: »

He wasn't knocking out many in the ring either to be fair.

Yeah i think thats why a lot on this forum thought he would be the perfect sparring partner . He does carry an ego though and obviously likes to talk and talk and talk . Nobody is really surprised it didnt work out.

That clip is gas btw

Mellor wrote: »

Why do you think losses years ago has an impact on the assessment of his current ability? Genuine question, as I don't understand that logic.

It's important to look at a fighter's entire body of work, when you are making an assessment of them. Past losses can, and often do, indicate potential weaknesses in the present/future.

I am of the opinion, that Conor has still not completely ironed out the weaknesses that caused those losses. He has made improvements... but he is still quite a bit away from being what you might term "the complete fighter"!! (if such a thing truly exists)

Say he had not taken those fights, but was the same fighter today in terms of ability - only unbeaten. In that hypothetical, I don't think he should be ranked any higher, were an objective ranking possible.

But the fighter of today, is a product of all his fights... so an undefeated Conor McGregor, would likely be a different fighter. I don't necessarily agree with the idea, that everybody gets better after suffering a loss.

'Win or learn' is a nice soundbite... something cool to tell the young kids in the gym. But there is also such a thing as, 'win AND learn'... like coming through a very though fight, where you almost lost, but you found a way to win! (perhaps without performing great)... You still have the win, but also some important lessons too!

Look at Jon Jones Vs Gustafsson, for example... tough fight for Jones... he was pushed hard. But he found a way to win. And I do believe, this win helped him grow and improve as a fighter... he is a better fighter today, because he came through difficult fights like that. And he still has a perfect unbeaten record... 'win AND learn'...

Losses obviously do change you as a fighter... and they do make you reflect on things. But I'm not so sure that they necessarily make you a better fighter. Different... but not necessarily better.

Conor has improved since entering the UFC... but he still has weaknesses that have not been fully addressed. We can see this from his two fights against Diaz. (in fact, Diaz found additional weak points, that weren't so obvious before)

But like I said previously, Conor is obviously a very good fighter on his day. I don't mean any of the above to be construed in a way that I'm suggesting he is anything other than that. But you can't just ignore certain fights and performances, and focus only on the ones where he performed great.

In fairness, the majority of his performances have been top notch. But he does have the occasional dodgy performance in him. That's what his record shows us... and none of those bad performances were against top fighters either. (this is certainly something worth highlighting)

Just asking a question btw. I agree that Jones is the GOAT, for numerous reasons. I also don't think that an MMA fighter is define by his record.

I do think fighters are defined by their records... In some respects, you might say it's a touch unfair. But it's the reality of combat sports!

If a video emerged tomorrow, of Bruce Lee being defeated in a fight for example, how would this affect his legacy?? Just a hypothetical I'll throw out there...

Obviously we can't really know for sure, whether Bruce was actually a great fighter anyway... so maybe it's a pointless example... and he would still hopefully remain an inspiration in terms of his skills and his great mind for martial arts....

But any such video, would clearly change how Bruce Lee is viewed. (imo anyway). That's just the harsh reality of combat sports... A huge part of his aura, is built around the idea of him being almost undefeatable.

Floyd Mayweather too... He has basically built an entire industry around the fact that he's never been defeated. If losses don't really matter... why does everyone seem so fascinated by undefeated fighters??

Your entire record is important, as a fighter... in many different respects. That's the way I view it. Barring probably only the very end of a career, if you are well past your prime years. That's the only slight exception I would make, in certain circumstances!

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

He can exploit it much more than any other opponent Floyd has faced in a long time too......

Given that McGregor's 74" reach is the longest Floyd has had to deal with in that long long time.

Yeah should land at will man .