[Superthread] Mayweather vs Pacman NO STREAMING REQUESTS

Littlehorny · 23-02-2015 11:40PM

efb wrote: »

The most accomplished stylish technically gifted boxer in my lifetime is Floyd Mayweather Jr

Maybe your a politician as well, you didn't answer my question either.:)

efb · 23-02-2015 11:41PM

Mayweather earned more

Mister Vain · 23-02-2015 11:44PM

Pacman's career has been more exciting but Mayweather is technically a better boxer.

Littlehorny · 23-02-2015 11:55PM

You can't call yourself the best ever just cause you earned the most or are really technically skilled. If your going to talk the talk you have to be able to walk the walk.

efb · 24-02-2015 12:02AM

Littlehorny wrote: »

You can't call yourself the best ever just cause you earned the most or are really technically skilled. If your going to talk the talk you have to be able to walk the walk.

He's beaten everything in front of him. When hasn't he "walked the walk"?

megadodge · 24-02-2015 12:05AM

efb wrote: »

The most accomplished stylish technically gifted boxer in my lifetime is Floyd Mayweather Jr

Watch a few Roy Jones videos.

Henno30 · 24-02-2015 12:48AM

Rummycollie wrote: »

He lost 5 times, no he hasn't had the better career.

Guess that's bad news for Ali and Ray Robinson then.

Jesus Christ.

efb · 24-02-2015 12:49AM

megadodge wrote: »

Watch a few Roy Jones videos.

I have I even paid watch his heavyweight title win

megadodge · 24-02-2015 01:03AM

efb wrote: »

I have I even paid watch his heavyweight title win

Then you should retract your previous statement.

Roy Jones > Floyd Mayweather

Talib Fiasco · 24-02-2015 03:04AM

Roy Jones pound for pound is easily the best boxer of all time. His skill and ability could never be matched.

kryogen · 24-02-2015 03:08AM

efb wrote: »

The most accomplished stylish technically gifted boxer in my lifetime is Floyd Mayweather Jr

I assume you are young enough then yes? So young you don't remember Roy Jones Jr perhaps?

Manny has certainly had the more eye catching, exciting career tbh

Manny has had wars, he has had incredible triumphs and done things nobody else has.

Mayweather has his zero.

twowheelsonly · 24-02-2015 04:05AM

efb wrote: »

He's beaten everything in front of him. When hasn't he "walked the walk"?

He's been selective about who has been in front of him though - and 2 of them deserved better than what they got.

Castillo?? De La Hoya?? 2 extremely dubious decisions. Both men beaten by the judges in my opinion, and in the opinion of a lot of people that know a lot more than I do!!

He didn't walk the walk in a rematch against De la Hoya, choosing instead to retire - yet he's still here 6 years later.

He's about to walk the walk with Manny now, eventually, but only because there's nowhere left to hide at this stage. (Barring a mystery hand/arm/neck/back/foot injury or suchlike).

Hopefully it does go on. If Mayweather wins then fair dues to him and he can retire knowing that he fought and overcame the biggest challenge of his career but at least either way he won't be retiring with that big black cloud following him forever more.

efb · 24-02-2015 05:53AM

kryogen wrote: »

I assume you are young enough then yes? So young you don't remember Roy Jones Jr perhaps?

Manny has certainly had the more eye catching, exciting career tbh

Manny has had wars, he has had incredible triumphs and done things nobody else has.

Mayweather has his zero.

Yes I remember RJJ. Mayweather to me is the more skillful boxer.

efb · 24-02-2015 05:57AM

I wouldn't say the results were dubious - I've seen far worse, and I'm a big DLH fan.

I think a lot of people seem to throw a lot of stick at Mayweather bit when you are at the top that's part for the course

efb · 24-02-2015 05:59AM

megadodge wrote: »

Then you should retract your previous statement.

Roy Jones > Floyd Mayweather

No. He fought John Ruiz there. No reason to change my opinion. Why is Jones better?

supersean1999 · 24-02-2015 09:41AM

Sven ottke is probably the reason records can be slightly hard to guage a figher

walshb · 24-02-2015 10:08AM

efb wrote: »

I don't know why I bother. You come across as so negative on boxers

Says the poster who calls Mayweather detestable!

Bother with what? Please, tell me what I posted that has you so frustrated?

efb · 24-02-2015 10:23AM

walshb wrote: »

Says the poster who calls Mayweather detestable!

Bother with what? Please, tell me what I posted that has you so frustrated?

As a human he pretty much is - a wife beating money obsessed narcissist

walshb · 24-02-2015 10:39AM

efb wrote: »

As a human he pretty much is - a wife beating money obsessed narcissist

Ok, so can you tell me what frustrated you with my post(s)? Why you feel that you shouldn't bother?

efb · 24-02-2015 10:43AM

I feel you are unduly harsh on boxers a lot of negativity in your posts. It's my issue.

walshb · 24-02-2015 10:45AM

efb wrote: »

I feel you are unduly harsh on boxers a lot of negativity in your posts. It's my issue.

Again, in relation to this thread or the last couple of my posts on this thread what frustrated you?

This is what I posted: "Yes, punches as in plural. Hatton was softened up, tired, frustrated and ready to go. It was a hard night, and even harder having to fight two of them in the ring."

You quoted this post and said you didn't know why you bothered....What negativity is in that post? What is frustrating with it?

efb · 24-02-2015 10:50AM

It's my issue, I'll withdraw the remark if you like.

walshb · 24-02-2015 10:53AM

efb wrote: »

It's my issue, I'll withdraw the remark if you like.

No. It's just that I am not a mind reader. You quoted a post and made the remark. I thought it strange that you did that for the post in question. I didn't realize that you meant many of my posts. The quoted post was IMO nothing but an opinion, not negative or positive. Not sure how it was interpreted for you. By your comment it came across that you interpreted it as being negative, or unduly negative. That confused me.

BTW, I have 1000s of posts on the forum. Not all going to be glowing and praising. I wonder how many you have and how many I could select as not being all that positive? Positive and negative a lot of the time being a grey and subjective area.

supersean1999 · 24-02-2015 11:12AM

Take it outside lads

efb · 24-02-2015 11:35AM

I removed the offending post

walshb · 24-02-2015 11:45AM

efb wrote: »

I removed the offending post

For the record I was not offended. It is not the first time that something like that has been posted about my boxing posts.

FTA69 · 24-02-2015 12:04PM

Henno30 wrote: »

Guess that's bad news for Ali and Ray Robinson then.

Jesus Christ.

These things are always subjective discussions at the end of the day. What do we mean by "greatest" exactly? Many say Ali was the "greatest" ever due to the fact he overcame immense adversity, his icon status outside the ring, the fact he beat seemingly unbeatable people at the dawn and twilight of his career etc. In terms of stature he was certainly the "greatest" ever despite maybe not being the best boxer of all time.

Pacquiao's career has had it all really, he has gone toe to toe with the best of the best and had rematches, trilogies and a four-fight war with Juan Marquez as well as battles with the Mexican greats. He has had amazing KOs and been amazingly KO'd himself by one of the best out there. He's also galloped solidly through the lightest weights and is one of the most feared welters out there despite starting out weighing as much as a wet teabag. The fact he lost no more detracts from his greatness than it does from Robinson or Ali.

That having been said, Floyd must also be given his due, like him or not. In terms of "greatness" he has also beaten the best of the best and never once lost doing it. In terms of skill the man is one of the best ever and bar a few names i.e. Williams, Pacquiao etc; he's pretty much cleared out everyone put in front of him and nearly always done it in pretty convincing fashion. Like other fighters before him, he has also transcended the sport of boxing and is one of the most well known sportsmen in the world. He is also a "great" fighter.

FTA69 · 24-02-2015 12:06PM

megadodge wrote: »

Watch a few Roy Jones videos.

Roy was hugely skilled and talented but in a very unorthodox way. He relied heavily on his reflexes and his natural athleticism which allowed him to break many of the accepted fundamentals of the science of boxing. The problem is, when these started to desert him with the onset of age, his lack of fundamentals began to show with fairly disastrous consequences. There's a reason why Toney and BHop showed more longevity than him.

efb · 24-02-2015 12:11PM

walshb wrote: »

For the record I was not offended. It is not the first time that something like that has been posted about my boxing posts.

I shouldn't have publicly expressed something that was me thinking aloud

walshb · 24-02-2015 12:13PM

For me the greatest fighter, not just boxer is James Toney. The most natural and fluid and confident fighter I have ever seen. Loads more natural fighting talent than Floyd. Toney could do it all, and never ever needed to run or duck or spoil to do it. Just hard and honest brilliance. He wasn't blessed with exceptional speed or agility or really fast feet. He still had for me he most natural fighting talent of all. Met everyone and won titles from MW up to HW.

[Superthread] Mayweather vs Pacman **NO STREAMING REQUESTS**

Comments

[Superthread] Mayweather vs Pacman NO STREAMING REQUESTS