Will the Floyd haters forever harp on Mayweather-Castillo I?

It seems as far as in the ring achievements, all Hex and the rest of the simple minded Floyd haters can ever harp on is Mayweather-Castillo I? It seems to forever be the arguement of Floyd haters why so-and-so will supposedly beat Floyd. "Floyd arguably lost the first Castillo fight". Y'all sound like fuckin broken records! First off, yes Floyd ARGUABLY lost the fight. I wont argue w/anyone who scored it for Castillo cause it was an extremely close fight that honestly coulda gone either way. But I hate when the feeble minded Floyd haters call it a robbery. Bullshit! Not to mention it was Floyd's FIRST fight at 135, and he was suffering a hurt shoulder. Is a guy not allowed to have a bad night? And must we forget that he came back in the rematch and beat Castillo 8-4, or 9-3? It wasnt an exciting performance in the rematch, but it was convincing. I'm tired of that one fucking fight being the blue print of how every pressure fighter will supposedly beat Floyd.

Thoughts?

 

Floyd lost that fight for sure. I won't discredit his career but he ain't no undefeated unbeatable mofo like he's made out to be.

 

i scored the first fight for Castillo like most people did

 

Of course they will continue to hate on that fight. It's all they have.

 

I'ts not about eing a hater. The fight was close enough that it could have gone either way.

Floyd put away any doubts winning the rematch pretty easy.

But it doesn't change the fact that the first fight could have gone to either guy.

 

Offensively, I've got no problems with him.

It's his defence, that is blatantly fucking illegal, and the one time I'm aware of, that the referee properly enforced the rules and took points off him for his infamously career-long useage of his forearm/elbow, he fell to pieces, it seemed to me, that when Vic Drakulich froze out one of Fraud's fundamental components to his defensive system, he curled up, and turned into a flustered jellyfish, losing the remaining rounds, and the fight. For the good of boxing, I'd just like to see Fraud without the elbows to his opponents heads / throats in order to keep them away from him, it really is 'bitch' type stuff to have to resort to that, I'd also like to see him fight with his back behind him at all times . Hardcore sensitive Fraud-groupies or otherwise, there's no excuses for breaking the rules, yet he constantly can with impunity because ...uh?..well, he's American, and for god sakes losing hurts too badly, and it aint clinchin'..so, it's all good.

 

Doesn't James Toney use the same type of defensive style? Don't hear many complaints about his style. I'll Holla 5000

 

In regards to the backtwisting?.....Yes I believe he does, and yes it too is illegal, that shoulder roll shit should be banned. But I was talking mostly about Fraud's excessive useage of his elbow, I don't see Toney doing that.

 

The shoulder roll has been used for ages. Shit just look at Jake Lamotta.

 

Are you allowed to hit your opponent who's "performing the shoulder-roll",.. in the spine, kidneys, or back of the head?..:dunno:

 

Regardless of who you scored the fight for, outside of Marciano, there has never been ANY elite, all-time kind of fighter who hasn't suffered a defeat at some point in their career. So lets say you scored the fight for Castillo? Ok then, it maens Mayweather has ONE SINGLE ARGUABLE LOSS in his entire career. The guy is so good, he rarely loses multiple rounds in the same fight. He's special.

You don't have to like him. Hell, you don't even have to call him undefeated. But to harp on this as an attempt to discredit the guy's career only makes you look like the loser. And worse, you're the loser on the interweb. Ouch.

 

dsimon writes:

The problem is that the people who keep harpin and startin shit don't care about logic, or the real skill level of a particular fighter. Frankly it is really making this board suck lately. The intelligent conversations about a partocular topic have become more and more few and far between the idiocy.

 

You have to expect this retort with "p4p greatest eva" "most amazing fighter eva" "will neva eva lose a fight" "undefeated in 6 weight classes" schtick :dunno:

 

mayweather underestimated castillo in the first fight. he particularly underestimated the size of castillo in his first lightweight bout. he also had an injury to his rotator cuff.

arum pushed for the fight because he was anxious to get mayweather beat.

regardless mayweather won a close decision and also won the rematch that was clamored for. there was no rematch clause and mayweather couldve just as easily fought any lightweight contender and received the same payday from his hbo contract.

better yet he couldve went into hiding after his first controversial fight, avoid the rematch altogether, and not take on another threat for two whole years. sound familiar, de la hoya fans?

 

What was the title of this thread? :: Did this post answer your question? All this applogizing for a fight.....:doh:

 

In fairness the same thing happened with RJJ.

Before the loss to Tarver people brought up the first Montel Griffin fight alot, although now it seems like most acknowledge it was a dive (despite the obvious foul)

Until Mayweather looks bad again this will happen, and people from all walks of the spectrum that aren't attached to his nuts will have something to criticize him for, thats just the way it goes

 

I provided pertinent info. you are obviously more qualified to give a straight answer. keep hating what the guy says and continue watching his bouts in hopes of seeing a loss. sheep stay sheep

it says a lot when the only excuses you hear are after victories. two of which were against one of the best lightweights this decade.

 

You provided information we all know, the fact is he lost that fight and got a gift. The second fight has nothing to do with the first, nothing. Never has, never will.....but when you write a story giving 20 excuses as to why he didn't perform.....expect the criticism when you say he isn't beatable except when he is only at 2% "Money", mk?

 

That sounds a hell a lot like an opinion to me.

 

Now THAT'S an opinion ::

 

Damn you.

 

we did this in a TAAA thread awhile back

That you statement sounds like an opinion to him, is absolute fact.

Personally I think of it like I think of Hopkins/Taylor 1. Floyd won, I thought he won close, but it isn't the type of decision where you could argue he won a robbery, or if you did, it'd be a 7-5 for Castillo card as justification, which IMO isn't one you should or could argue so much about.

Now, Whitaker/Ramirez, fine but these fights that are 50-50, I just don't see it

 

You need to look up "fact" on Wikipedia, because you obviously don't know what it means.

 

Even if you think Mayweather lost the fight you have to give him credit for it. He moved up to fight the weights best champion. Even went thru with the fight with a bad shoulder. After a close fight Floyd could have moved back down in weight and took a close controversial decision with him. Floyd done what great champions before and after him had done. He immediately rematched and won a clear cut decision.

 

:bears:

 

Floyd won that fight for sure. I watched it probably 10 times scoring it over and over. Castillo was not landing shots inside Floyd was slipping them. People gave Castillo 2 much credit for ineffective aggressiveness including Lederman.

 

whats funny is that the 2nd fight wasnt as lopsided as people make it out to be...it was a close fight too
________
Children paxil

 

Slipping punches doesn't mean you win rounds either.

 

cry me a river.