sonofenoch wrote: Alot of boxers interviewed seemed to give him alot of credit in there saying he did well Yanks mostly, think I've only seen Bellew and Malinaggi being critical ........maybe they're just happy and relieved their game came out on top and prepared to give him some good will ........I personally think while not embarrassing himself did not do a great job
Ultimate Seduction wrote: » His technique wasn't boxing technique but it was effective point scoring and would have troubled Floyd, at least make him work hard if Conor had the conditioning to go with the game plan.
The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman wrote: » It didn't trouble Floyd, there was nothing that conditioning could have done to help McGregor, he gave it his best shot but doesnt have the necessary skills to fight someone of Floyd's calibre.
benny79 wrote: » Can I ask a question to the boxing experts. How did Conor only win the first round? I definitely taught he 100% won the second and even the third as Mayweather done absolutely nothing to justify winning them! This is why I hate boxing.. I watched the Packy fight and I taught the judges were giving Mayweather a good few rounds that Paco was clearly winning. Same with the boxing in the olympics
The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman wrote: It didn't trouble Floyd, there was nothing that conditioning could have done to help McGregor, he gave it his best shot but doesnt have the necessary skills to fight someone of Floyd's calibre.
Ultimate Seduction wrote: » I don't agree there. I think with better conditioning he at least lasts the distance. There was only 2 rounds in that 10 that Conor wasn't having any success. Floyd said himself, the game plan was to wait untill Conor gassed out then knock him out. That's exactly what happened.
walshb wrote: » And Floyd is still 49-0 for me.
walshb wrote: » One could make a case that Conor won the first 4 rds, maybe even 5....
Ultimate Seduction wrote: » I didn't see the judges scorecards? What were they? Conor won't the first 3 rounds, ludicrous if they didn't score it that way. You could lose every round in a fight and still be very competitive, so having success doesn't have to mean winning rounds.
Burkie1203 wrote: This was judged boxing not point scoring. FMs face post fight tells us all we need to know about CmcGs poor technique and how ineffective it was.
Maravilla33 wrote: » Think I will have to give up the internet if Paulie vs McGregor ever happens. I can't do this again....
Burkie1203 wrote: » On what basis? ?
walshb wrote: » Watch the rds and you will see, no? I gave him rds 1-3, with three being close.. 4 and 5 were more Mayweather, but switching off Sky commentary and taking the rds as the full 3 mins on mute, I wouldn't call giving them to Conor as bad calls..Mayweather was much more active in 4 and 5, but Conor was also active and holding his own.. It might have been a case of giving to Floyd because, well, he was nonexistent in 1 and 2, and just competitive in rd 3.. Anyway, it's irrelevant as regards the outcome, but relevant when breaking down what exactly happened.
Burkie1203 wrote: » But thats not how they judge fights. Ring craft, defensive capabilities all come into it. CmcG won rd 1. Rd 2 and 3 were even in my book. CmcG had no technique. Two of the three scorecards reflect that. From here on FM controlled the fight. All aspects of it. It was played out at his pace.
walshb wrote: » I am well aware how rds are and can be judged... I stand by my point..rds 4 and 5 being awarded to Conor wouldn't be bad calls..
walshb wrote: I stand by my point..rds 4 and 5 being awarded to Conor wouldn't be bad calls..
Burkie1203 wrote: » Would have been poor calls. FM was in control. He sussed CmcG out by then.
Ultimate Seduction wrote: » And rounds 1,2 or 3 going to Floyd would be bad calls. I'm not making an argument that Conor could have won or anything, he was clearly outclassed in the end, but he clearly won 1,2,3 and scraped 4. 5 was even.
paleoperson wrote: » No the bet never registered. It never went through, there was a problem. It couldn't be made.
The Nal wrote: » Hes 50-0. Marciano beat a lot of bums in that 49-0 and fought in one of the most uncompetitive times in heavyweight history. Sure, Saturday was a bit of an exhibition match but no more valid than some of Marcianos fights. Mayweather has beaten 22 world champions in those 50 fights.
Augeo wrote: » But how many of the bums weren't boxers? I'd be of the 49 - 0 view too.
This whole 'Conor only won the first 3 rounds because Mayweather let him' thing is such a nonsense argument. If Mayweather could have starched Conor in the first 3 rounds with no risk, he would have. If any of us get in the ring there with Mayweather we're done in the first minute of Round 1. No question. He couldn't do that to Conor because Conor showed enough nous, enough skill, and enough awkwardness to force Mayweather to sit back, watch, and figure out a path. Conor posed enough of a threat to earn those 3 rounds from Mayweather. Likewise, if Mayweather could walk back out there in Round 4 and KO Conor, he would have. Why would he not? Why hold back? He himself said he expected it to be done in Round 6/7, but it took longer than he expected because Conor was a lot better than he expected. Conor didn't win rounds due to pity from Floyd. Conor didn't make it to Round 10 because Floyd, for the first time in his life, in his final match, after the tickets had been sold and the PPVs bought, decided now is the time for him to put on a show for the fans. Now he will carry his opponent for 6 rounds more than he needed to, just to give the fans something to watch. That's ridiculous. He's KOed former world champions in 5 rounds, and he's gone 12 rounds of boring fighting in the biggest fight of his career at the time. He does what he needs to do to win the boxing match. The match went to round 10 because Conor was good enough to warrant a 40 year old Floyd needing 10 rounds to stop him. Conor won all the rounds he won (3, 4,5 however you look at it) because he earned the respect of Floyd to the point where Floyd let him have those rounds. I don't get why people are trying so hard to discredit what he did. He did very well, it was a good fight, and Mayweather won. Why do people have such a chip on their shoulder about this? Why the negativity? Why the desire to discredit what just happened? I don't get it".
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
