JMM v. Bernard Taylor.

[Rover]

Of course Taylor has a resume nowhere close to JMM's, but he's the type of fighter stylistically who would cause JMM problems (slick boxer, and I'd rate him higher than Julian Wheeler, who fought JMM on even terms until the stoppage in the last round). I'll go with JMM by close decision; I don't think he'd be as cautious against Taylor as he was against Norwood due to the power difference. Taylor went 15 with Pedroza, so I'm sure he could go 12 with JMM in normal conditions. (The heat the day Taylor fought McGuigan was horrid, and Barry later had a taste of that medicine.)

[tennessee]

this would be an excellent match-up! prime for prime at featherweight, id lean towart Taylor in a close fight. i think maybe JMM was better as a lightweight as he was at feather. just dont see JMM hanging with Pedroza like BT did.

[tennessee]

this would be an excellent match-up! prime for prime at featherweight, id lean towart Taylor in a close fight. i think maybe JMM was better as a lightweight as he was at feather. just dont see JMM hanging with Pedroza like BT did.

[Rover]

The JMM of lightweight actually was stylistically different from the JMM of featherweight.
I do see JMM "hanging with" Pedroza and Sanchez (the latter would be a horrible fight) but losing close decisions.
The lightweight JMM was much more willing to go to war than the feather version. He did with Pac at feather but that was as a result of having been forced to by the first round. The JMM later in his career has taken more chances than the feather version did.

[Nile4000]

Taylor was a superb talent, but he didn't fight the top notch guys until it was too late, and he probably had too many amateur fights anyway.But he probably could pull out a decision here.

[Rover]

Taylor was a superb talent, but he didn't fight the top notch guys until it was too late, and he probably had too many amateur fights anyway.But he probably could pull out a decision here.

He fought Pedroza when it was too late? That was in October 1982; he'd have gone to the 1980 Olympics but for the boycott. So fighting the best feather in the world about two years into your career is too late?

[Datsue]

A guy with fast feet & fast hands who won't lead is JMM's nightmare. He'd look bad here at times, & ship plenty (especially early).

But I still think he'd be too strong for Taylor, ultimately, & either get to him late or overwhelm him for the close-but-clear points win.

[Nile4000]

Taylor was a superb talent, but he didn't fight the top notch guys until it was too late, and he probably had too many amateur fights anyway.But he probably could pull out a decision here.

He fought Pedroza when it was too late? That was in October 1982; he'd have gone to the 1980 Olympics but for the boycott. So fighting the best feather in the world about two years into your career is too late?

I was basically saying that he never fought a lot of the other top ten guys like Lockridge, Laporte, Nelson, etc.Always seemed like a featherweight version of Howard Davis Jr.But at least he won the NABF featherweight belt, and the USBA jr. lightweight belt.Probably one of the two or three locks for the gold medal in 1980.He actually may have fought Pedroza a year too soon.

[Rover]

Taylor was a superb talent, but he didn't fight the top notch guys until it was too late, and he probably had too many amateur fights anyway.But he probably could pull out a decision here.

He fought Pedroza when it was too late? That was in October 1982; he'd have gone to the 1980 Olympics but for the boycott. So fighting the best feather in the world about two years into your career is too late?

I was basically saying that he never fought a lot of the other top ten guys like Lockridge, Laporte, Nelson, etc.Always seemed like a featherweight version of Howard Davis Jr.But at least he won the NABF featherweight belt, and the USBA jr. lightweight belt.Probably one of the two or three locks for the gold medal in 1980.He actually may have fought Pedroza a year too soon.

He fought the best feather in the world from 82-85. Better than Lockridge, Laporte and Nelson (until perhaps late 84). Lockridge left feather in January 84 to fight Mayweather. Point is Pedroza was the best when Taylor fought him, and he'd have been the best had Taylor fought him in 83. Taylor never fought any of the three you mentioned, correct?

[Nile4000]

^yep.

[Nile4000]

If he had fought more top ten people, maybe his career wouldn't have ended up like it did.

[Rover]

If he had fought more top ten people, maybe his career wouldn't have ended up like it did.

He went for the very top dogs. I give him credit for that. He hadn't fought any top 10 people before Pedroza, and he performed very well in that fight. That tells me that fighting more top 10 fighters before another title shot wouldn't have impacted the outcome.

[misterpunch]

i dont believe it! I DO NOT FRIGGIN BELIEVE IT! rover dreams up a thread under the guise of a imaginary match up...to continue his insane idea - disproved time and time again - that taylor fought mcguigan in the fearsome heat of a september in belfast! DO NOT! REPEAT NOT!! let yourself get tricked into yet another waste of time arguing with him on this ridiculous point.

[Rover]

i dont believe it! I DO NOT FRIGGIN BELIEVE IT! rover dreams up a thread under the guise of a imaginary match up...to continue his insane idea - disproved time and time again - that taylor fought mcguigan in the fearsome heat of a september in belfast! DO NOT! REPEAT NOT!! let yourself get tricked into yet another waste of time arguing with him on this ridiculous point.

This thread wasn't created to continue an argument about McGuigan.
Guess Chris Schenkel was lying when he called it hot as hell after that fight.
That comment was a side note at the end of my post; yet, you felt the need to bring it back up *months* later.
And nothing's been "disproved." The month is irrelevant.
Here's a hint, genius:
INSIDE
v.
OUTSIDE.
And this is where I denied your absurd charge.

[misterpunch]

no! YOU BROUGHT IT BACK NOW! i'm not fooled by your imaginary fight thread. you dropped the mcguigan crap into it to get an argument about THAT! if not, why did you mention it?

you lost that argument months ago and youre still sore at getting it wrong is the reason. you can fool some people, rover, but you cant fool em all.

and just to prove i'm right i guarantee you continue to push the heat question in ARGUMENT in this thread - prove me wrong!

[misterpunch]

no! YOU BROUGHT IT BACK NOW! i'm not fooled by your imaginary fight thread. you dropped the mcguigan crap into it to get an argument about THAT! if not, why did you mention it?

you lost that argument months ago and youre still sore at getting it wrong is the reason. you can fool some people, rover, but you cant fool em all.

and just to prove i'm right i guarantee you continue to push the heat ARGUMENT in this thread - prove me wrong!

[Rover]

no! YOU BROUGHT IT BACK NOW! i'm not fooled by your imaginary fight thread. you dropped the mcguigan crap into it to get an argument about THAT! if not, why did you mention it?

you lost that argument months ago and youre still sore at getting it wrong is the reason. you can fool some people, rover, but you cant fool em all.

and just to prove i'm right i guarantee you continue to push the heat question in ARGUMENT in this thread - prove me wrong!

I briefly mentioned the McGuigan fight in my analysis as a side note.
I lost no argument.
But I'll go as long as you want.

[Rover]

no! YOU BROUGHT IT BACK NOW! i'm not fooled by your imaginary fight thread. you dropped the mcguigan crap into it to get an argument about THAT! if not, why did you mention it?

you lost that argument months ago and youre still sore at getting it wrong is the reason. you can fool some people, rover, but you cant fool em all.

and just to prove i'm right i guarantee you continue to push the heat ARGUMENT in this thread - prove me wrong!

You're now replying to yourself and adding nothing new?

[misterpunch]

just be a good boy and stick to the thread

[Rover]

i dont believe it! I DO NOT FRIGGIN BELIEVE IT! rover dreams up a thread under the guise of a imaginary match up...to continue his insane idea - disproved time and time again - that taylor fought mcguigan in the fearsome heat of a september in belfast! DO NOT! REPEAT NOT!! let yourself get tricked into yet another waste of time arguing with him on this ridiculous point.

See, McGuigan wasn't brought up for *months* until you came along.

[Rover]

just be a good boy and stick to the thread

Take your own advice, old sport.

[Rover]

i dont believe it! I DO NOT FRIGGIN BELIEVE IT! rover dreams up a thread under the guise of a imaginary match up...to continue his insane idea - disproved time and time again - that taylor fought mcguigan in the fearsome heat of a september in belfast! DO NOT! REPEAT NOT!! let yourself get tricked into yet another waste of time arguing with him on this ridiculous point.

We were sticking to the thread (JMM v. Bernard Taylor) just fine until you showed up.

[misterpunch]

i have no comment to make on this imaginary fight - its not one that sets my heart beating to be honest

[Rover]

i have no comment to make on this imaginary fight - its not one that sets my heart beating to be honest

Ah, but you chose to comment in a thread about a fantasy fight about which you have no comment.
Classic.

[Rover]

i dont believe it! I DO NOT FRIGGIN BELIEVE IT! rover dreams up a thread under the guise of a imaginary match up...to continue his insane idea - disproved time and time again - that taylor fought mcguigan in the fearsome heat of a september in belfast! DO NOT! REPEAT NOT!! let yourself get tricked into yet another waste of time arguing with him on this ridiculous point.

Next time you want to talk crap about me, genius, do a little research.
As my first post in the thread shows, it was started on 9/23/2012.
The thread you're referring to where that other argument arose was started by Controversial...on 11/3/2012.