Discussion in 'Mythical Matchups' started by puerto rock, May 17, 2017.
Floyd via stink
To beat Floyd at 147lbs your first name must either be Ray or Thomas
I think Floyd takes a close one. Would be one of the harder fights of his career.
Yeah, because Floyd dominated SUUCCCHHH impressive competition at 147...
Yeah but we can shred many resumes if we want to. It's not like he only fought bums. It's not whether or not you think his resume is the best of all time...it's about the abilities that he displayed. Some people think Larry Holmes resume is weak...but so what? He showed real talent. Same with Joe Louis. Back in the late 80s some pundits were criticizing Hagler's resume.
Oh for Christ sake, I don't have time for this malarkey today.
To answer the thread's question, I'd expect Floyd to win a decision over Palomino, but Palomino would be competitive and win his shares of rounds. He'd be just a step too slow to actually beat Floyd.
Lol, come on. It can be easily argued that Maidana deserved at least a a draw against PBF. Guy wasn't that dominant at WW.
How many guys as good as Maidana did the all time Welterweight greats beat at age 39?
I dunno bout at 39, but a prime Palomino would beat the ever living shit outta Maidana.
Maidana was nothing special. Any all time great beats him.
PBF wasn't 39 when he fought Maidana
mayweather jr was only 37 when he fought maidana!!! and had only been a pro for 18 years
This is where Sly overrates Floyd. Saying the only 147 pounders that can beat him are Leonard, Hearns, and Robinson is an absolute fallacy and a lie
Floyd is an all time great at the lighter weights but he wasn't all that impressive at 147 and 154,
On the contrary my dear Watson . What it is is this : Floyd was sooo impressive from 130lbs to 140lbs that comparitively he was less impressive at 147 and above. So psychologically fight fans assume he was mediocre at the higher weights. But no. He was as dominant a welterweight as any other welterweight in history (name another welterweight with as many consecutive world title wins)...also in most fights he had he didn't lose more than 4 rounds. So I'm terms of both number of concecutive title wins and ease in which he won them he's up there with anyone. In terms of level of BEATEN opposition in the higher weights, on aggregation, he's better than anyone not named Leonard. You may scoff at this on first thought but if you think about it objectively you will realize that it is true.
Or neither. My exquisite logic cannot be refuted
This desperate response with the overuse of emoticons and under-use of words proves the point that my logic cannot be refuted.
Your logic is clouded by your emotions though.
Those emotions you have flooding through you for Mayweather similar to that of a woman has when she's deeply in love with a guy (a guy she thinks is 'the One' but he treats her like shit)....and thus her inner 'Rationalization Hamster' is spinning furiously....
Sly has defintively became the most confused poster on this site alongside Neil. At first, I tought he was only trolling, but it has now became obvious that he actually believes what he writes. As you said, he's acting like an emotionnal women.
that's rich coming from you. You're the most maligned poster on the boxing forums. Any criticism from you is typically considered a compliment.
Anyway, of course I believe what I write. It's logical. I can back up what I say all day long. Mayweather for example has an excellent record by any objective measure. He has been as dominant as any fighter in history and even if people want to criticize his opposition using all kinds of spurious arguments...there are at least two fighters above welterweight that he dominated which they cannot find excuses for and that's Canelo and Cotto....even if the reach for excuses regarding his domination of Mosley, Pacquiao, Hatton, Judah and his clear victory over De La Hoya in his first stint at 154lbs they just cannot find excuses for Canelo and Cotto. Floyd's 49-0, 25+ consecutive title fight wins and titles in 5 weight classes didn't happen by fluke...he has demonstrated the ability to back up his accomplishments.
Try refuting that if you can
Lol, not that I care about these kind of teenage popularity contest bullshit, but you're by far the least respected guy here. There isn't a thread in which you post where someone isn't laughing at you. you were sometwhat decent a few years ago, but you turned into a huge joke lately.
As for the Cotto win, sure it was a good win, but not exactly the kind of win that makes anybody with half a brain think that it means that the only welters that has a chance against PBF are hearns and Leonard. As for the Canelo fight, it is a hell of a win, but agains, it doesnt erase the times PBF looked ordinary at WW.
Anyway, I'm a fan of PBF the fighter, and he was an excellent one, and I think that he sometimes get underated by old time fans. But the way you hype him is just absurd.
I agree with you that I care not for teenage popularity contest however do not confuse being the most controversial with being the least respected. My picks and opinions are often argued against, and often annoy other posters, but my viewpoints and arguments are grudgingly respected. In that sense I'm the forum Bill O'Reilly. You, however, are the Dan Quayle around these parts.
Just want you to understand the distinction
Separate names with a comma.