Page 2 of 3

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 26 Jan 2016, 11:29
by man
BoxBuzz wrote:Mayweather never had the opportunity to really face an equal.....but I don't think he would have beaten JCC.....
prime JCC vs floyd: top fight. but i think
JCC's biggest weapon was his determination,
while he was technically a straight forward
guy, kind of a stronger version of ricky hatton.
floyd usually read these types very well.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 26 Jan 2016, 11:42
by Ambling Alp II
Chavez was light years better than Ricky Hatton.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 26 Jan 2016, 18:52
by BoxBuzz
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Super feather would be the worst division for Chavez. That's Floyd at his best, Chavez was better at 35 & 40. The dude that went life and death with lockridge and laporte gets scalped by Floyd.

so...in your opinion, he was best at his most inexperienced? And the Castillo version would simply overwhelm JCC?

Seems a bit kiltered. But I'll give it a think through.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 26 Jan 2016, 19:36
by SaadOffTheDeck
BoxBuzz wrote:
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Super feather would be the worst division for Chavez. That's Floyd at his best, Chavez was better at 35 & 40. The dude that went life and death with lockridge and laporte gets scalped by Floyd.

so...in your opinion, he was best at his most inexperienced? And the Castillo version would simply overwhelm JCC?

Seems a bit kiltered. But I'll give it a think through.
Huh? He was as experienced as Chavez at 130. I think any version of Floyd beats him handily, but Julio's best shot is 135(where Floyd fought Castillo and Chavez fought ramirez) & 140. You may need a trip to the data base.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 27 Jan 2016, 02:44
by man
Ambling Alp II wrote:Chavez was light years better than Ricky Hatton.
i referred to their style of straight
forward pressure.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 27 Jan 2016, 04:42
by SaadOffTheDeck
You should have just countered that Floyd was light years better than roger.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 27 Jan 2016, 14:41
by Ezzard
Hi Saad nice to see you back. Thought you must have gone to prison!

Anyway... Never supported either man in any fight. Both were defensive geniuses but I feel both get overplayed too.

I'd expect Whittaker to win...or the ref just to call the whole thing off after 3 rounds and we all switch to watching our lawns grow...

As for Chavez... Floyd would never have made 130 in the 1980s. And for all the barbs thrown at Floyd for his micro-managed career...fighting guys past their best...out of the best weight classes...it's fair to say Chavez was never a welterweight. That draw was the best thing to ever happen to Whittaker.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 27 Jan 2016, 15:15
by SaadOffTheDeck
Floyd was never a weight drainer.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 27 Jan 2016, 22:20
by SaadOffTheDeck
Oh, my bad, thanks ezz. Just busy with work, a girl half my age and looking after my dad. Plus, boxing is pretty awful these days.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 28 Jan 2016, 04:53
by Ezzard
Good to know you are well and all is good.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 28 Jan 2016, 11:42
by Ezzard
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Oh, my bad, thanks ezz. Just busy with work, a girl half my age and looking after my dad. Plus, boxing is pretty awful these days.
Feels like it's looking up over here.

Finally getting Frampton-Quigg which is a genuine big fight and would have been in any era. If we can get Brook fighting genuine contenders... Maybe Joshua-Haye... Get Khan in the ring. Flanagan looks like a quality fighter. And many more.

No doubt the sport is in a mess with the way it's run but it could be and should be a great era for us Brits.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 28 Jan 2016, 14:51
by SaadOffTheDeck
Ezzard wrote:
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Oh, my bad, thanks ezz. Just busy with work, a girl half my age and looking after my dad. Plus, boxing is pretty awful these days.
Feels like it's looking up over here.

Finally getting Frampton-Quigg which is a genuine big fight and would have been in any era. If we can get Brook fighting genuine contenders... Maybe Joshua-Haye... Get Khan in the ring. Flanagan looks like a quality fighter. And many more.

No doubt the sport is in a mess with the way it's run but it could be and should be a great era for us Brits.
Definitely good in the UK. Here its ufc by a landslide. I still watch. Just pretty over arguing with the morons in cs.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 28 Jan 2016, 20:52
by BoxBuzz
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Super feather would be the worst division for Chavez. That's Floyd at his best, Chavez was better at 35 & 40. The dude that went life and death with lockridge and laporte gets scalped by Floyd.


Ya think so do ya?

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 28 Jan 2016, 20:58
by SaadOffTheDeck
BoxBuzz wrote:
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Super feather would be the worst division for Chavez. That's Floyd at his best, Chavez was better at 35 & 40. The dude that went life and death with lockridge and laporte gets scalped by Floyd.


Ya think so do ya?
I know so. Sad you can't distinguish between divisions.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 29 Jan 2016, 20:39
by BoxBuzz
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
BoxBuzz wrote:
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Super feather would be the worst division for Chavez. That's Floyd at his best, Chavez was better at 35 & 40. The dude that went life and death with lockridge and laporte gets scalped by Floyd.


Ya think so do ya?
I know so. Sad you can't distinguish between divisions.

Well you know sad, so I won't argue.

Anyway answer is...... Whitaker. And to argue with me on this would be very Saad indeed.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 29 Jan 2016, 21:28
by SaadOffTheDeck
:zzz: :zzz:

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 29 Jan 2016, 22:05
by Undefeated49-0
King Carlos wrote:Whitaker would lead behind the jab. He never had any issue with pressing the fight in his prime.

LOL @ Mayweather being more skilled offensively.

Duh Floyd was pretty much the same way but you probably wouldn't know this if you hadn't seen him fight at 130.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 29 Jan 2016, 22:11
by Undefeated49-0
Ezzard wrote:Hi Saad nice to see you back. Thought you must have gone to prison!

Anyway... Never supported either man in any fight. Both were defensive geniuses but I feel both get overplayed too.

I'd expect Whittaker to win...or the ref just to call the whole thing off after 3 rounds and we all switch to watching our lawns grow...

As for Chavez... Floyd would never have made 130 in the 1980s. And for all the barbs thrown at Floyd for his micro-managed career...fighting guys past their best...out of the best weight classes...it's fair to say Chavez was never a welterweight. That draw was the best thing to ever happen to Whittaker.
Floyd only fought JMM and Canelo who were out of their weight classes and let's not forget that Saul was much bigger on FN and that same JMM flattened Packy at 147.

You guys kill me with this bull of Floyd as though he had total control over his entire career, he was under Top Rank for the vast majority of his bouts in his prime and none of the guys wanted to fight him when he consistently called all of them out Casamayor, Freitas didn't want him at 30, he called out Kostya, never got a response, called out PRIME SSM and DLH neither acted as if they had anything to gain from fighting him but somehow you have conveniently ignored that.

When Merchant asked a prime Shane if he would fight Floyd after his fight with Vargas we heard all the Tap Dancing one fighter could do only to end up with the lame excuse of "I have to have my teeth fixed and I might need surgery so I can't think past Monday".

So was Floyd controlling who he got to fight then, how about when he wanted Arum to match him with Cotto and was even willing to face Margo if he got Miguel for 8 mil and Bob said that "Cotto was too green".

But I wouldn't suspect that you'd take any of that into account though seeing that your post is filled with ignorance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqQAcyKTpUA

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 29 Jan 2016, 22:31
by King Carlos
Undefeated49-0 wrote:
King Carlos wrote:Whitaker would lead behind the jab. He never had any issue with pressing the fight in his prime.

LOL @ Mayweather being more skilled offensively.

Duh Floyd was pretty much the same way but you probably wouldn't know this if you hadn't seen him fight at 130.
Oh, is this fight at 130?

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 30 Jan 2016, 04:49
by Ezzard
Undefeated49-0 wrote:
Ezzard wrote:Hi Saad nice to see you back. Thought you must have gone to prison!

Anyway... Never supported either man in any fight. Both were defensive geniuses but I feel both get overplayed too.

I'd expect Whittaker to win...or the ref just to call the whole thing off after 3 rounds and we all switch to watching our lawns grow...

As for Chavez... Floyd would never have made 130 in the 1980s. And for all the barbs thrown at Floyd for his micro-managed career...fighting guys past their best...out of the best weight classes...it's fair to say Chavez was never a welterweight. That draw was the best thing to ever happen to Whittaker.
Floyd only fought JMM and Canelo who were out of their weight classes and let's not forget that Saul was much bigger on FN and that same JMM flattened Packy at 147.

You guys kill me with this bull of Floyd as though he had total control over his entire career, he was under Top Rank for the vast majority of his bouts in his prime and none of the guys wanted to fight him when he consistently called all of them out Casamayor, Freitas didn't want him at 30, he called out Kostya, never got a response, called out PRIME SSM and DLH neither acted as if they had anything to gain from fighting him but somehow you have conveniently ignored that.

When Merchant asked a prime Shane if he would fight Floyd after his fight with Vargas we heard all the Tap Dancing one fighter could do only to end up with the lame excuse of "I have to have my teeth fixed and I might need surgery so I can't think past Monday".

So was Floyd controlling who he got to fight then, how about when he wanted Arum to match him with Cotto and was even willing to face Margo if he got Miguel for 8 mil and Bob said that "Cotto was too green".

But I wouldn't suspect that you'd take any of that into account though seeing that your post is filled with ignorance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqQAcyKTpUA
Aren't you the man in the moon guy?

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 30 Jan 2016, 13:19
by Undefeated49-0
Ezzard wrote:Aren't you the man in the moon guy?
In your mind, I'm whatever you want me to be.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 30 Jan 2016, 15:10
by stevedoc
i think floyd would box his normal fight letting pernell come onto him i don't think this would be that tough of a fight for floyd , personally i think whitaker gets over rated now no doubt a good fighter but he wasn't as hard to land on as floyd i think floyd is faster and has much better timing ,whitaker gets a lot of credit for drawing with a shot chavez who lost 4 months later . no doubt some will say i nothing about boxing

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 30 Jan 2016, 16:05
by SaadOffTheDeck
Whitaker was virtually unhittable at lightweight. Of course Chavez was shot since he got schooled. Whitaker was past his best days and he was still miles better.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 31 Jan 2016, 16:12
by BoxBuzz
If undefeated is agreeing with me, this proves the theory that even a stopped clock is correct twice a day.

However...only once a day if it's a military clock.

Re: Mayweather vs Whitaker

Posted: 31 Jan 2016, 20:56
by Undefeated49-0
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Floyd and Manny were equally to blame. The first time they didn't meet because Manny wouldn't take drug tests. Like Leonard, Floyd sometimes looked for edges. The biggest stars always do. If he was the ducker many claim he wouldn't have immediately rematched Castillo.
Freddie Roach disagrees with you on who is to blame, he blames Manny Pacquiao flat out.