BoxRec

It seems like this is pure satire. He's trying to say Ali unofficially lost the Ken Norton rematch, while Mayweather unofficially lost 2 fights. He's criticizing Ali for laying on the ropes and absorbing a bunch of punches, just like Mayweather does. He's saying he fought more world champs in the 5-belt 17-division era than other ATG's fought in the 1-belt, 8-division eras. It's almost like a comedy routine.

Lackeos wrote:It seems like this is pure satire. He's trying to say Ali unofficially lost the Ken Norton rematch, while Mayweather unofficially lost 2 fights. He's criticizing Ali for laying on the ropes and absorbing a bunch of punches, just like Mayweather does. He's saying he fought more world champs in the 5-belt 17-division era than other ATG's fought in the 1-belt, 8-division eras. It's almost like a comedy routine.

Exactly.

The very fact he feels the need to explain tells you all you need to know about this insecure, grasping, classless braggart.

All the money in the world can't buy him class nor can his skilfully cherrypicked resume bring him the affirmation from the public he so desperately seeks.

jezzamundo wrote:[

Mayweather didn't officially beat Castillo, but the majority of people who saw it thought Castillo deserved the win. I've watched it twice and once had Castillo winning 115-111, the other time 114-112. The judges were clearly biased towards Floyd in that fight, the wideness of their cards is evidence of that. Floyd did clearly win the rematch, but the scorecards were actually closer for that fight, perhaps in reaction to the injustice of the first fight.

IMO, Bradley has a better shout for winning the first Pacquiao fight (I had it 115-113 to Pac Man) than Mayweather for winning the first Castillo fight, same goes for Lara-Canelo (I had a draw) Lomachenko-Salido and Ali-Norton 2. That's boxing though, isn't it, scoring is subjective and different judges have different preferences

Judges are not supposed to have preferences... because the 4 criteria for scoring a boxing match are very clear...1 clean and effective punches landed... 2 defense... 3 effective aggressiveness... 4 ring generalship...

If both boxers score the same number of punches, to the same effect, the boxer who makes the other boxer fail to reach a target with more punches wins the round, because he was a hair more accurate with the number of punches he did throw and evaded more blows... If both fighters threw and landed the same number of punches to the same effect, the more aggressive boxer, who pushed the pace and made the fight for that round, wins the round... If both fighters threw and landed the same number of punches to the same effect, and they both were equally aggressive for that round, the boxer who better controlled the distance, the pace, the ring space, and the style of fight being fought is the guy who wins the round... If both fighters threw and landed the same number of punches to the same effect, and were both equally aggressive, and they each controlled the distance, the pace, the ring space, and the style of fight being fought equally ... then it's a 10/10 round.

If judges have excellent intelligence, vision, short term memory, a strong sense of fairness, objectivity, strong powers of concentration, have moral rectitude, a sense of fair play, a really solid knowledge of boxing basics, and are blessed with relatively good mental and physical health -- they're scores in most cases should be the same -- or very close to one another in terms of rounds scored for whom.. If their scores are all over the map they're not very good professional boxing judges and Boxing has to do better than that.. If their scores all agree perfectly but they're all contrary to reality, as in all giving a non-deserved round to a very close and undeserving winner -- then there may have been some coordinated scoring and signaling going on.

montrealsuper wrote:Quack Quack Quack - floyd is the most protected fighter ever - boring style boring uninteresting talker and a low class person - his reign as face of boxing disgusted and drove away boxing fans and potential boxing fans to watch UFC - Go away fraud coward you stunk out boxing with your handpicking cowardice and ducking BS

While I disagree with all of that I agree with the bolded. Floyd took it easy at times but he did step it up at times alos. He's interesting to listen to. While he made a ton of money, I will say he's partly to blame for the exodus to UFC.

tobyh5 wrote:I watched that and was pissed no one pointed out the obvious.

He has beaten more world champions yes, but thats a twisted statistical fact. He is active in an era of 17 weight classes and 4 champions per division plus interim, super, regular champions.

Previous champions, (pre-80's more so) come from an era of a lot less guys around who had held a belt that you could beat.

How about someone bored goes out and adds up how many champions there were for maybe five years before some of these guys where champion and up to their retirement and calculate what percentage of all champs existing in that timescale they beat. Do the same to Floyd. Calculate how many people have claimed to be a champion in that timescale and work out what percentage he beat. I am guessing his figure is not so commanding then.

KiwiRider wrote:If you say something enough, history sometimes remembers that, and with the 49-0 has data to back it up. When the people who actually watched his fights, knew the background, are gone- he will probably be remembered as tbe

Sad eh?

No, because people will still be watching Ali fights. They do now. I doubt people will be watching Floyd fights 50 years from now on ESPN classic.

world ranked wrote:

Heretic wrote:Wilder with hes 38 wins and 37 knock outs will soon surpass him.

It is not about the record.. It is who you beat and when. Floyd does not have that many wins over prime ATG opponents.

People seem to forget he beat ATG guys when he WASNT in prime which is impressive as well. To fight elite guys dominated when ur not in YOUR prime.

They weren't in their prime neither.

IKSRTFO wrote:

world ranked wrote:

Heretic wrote:Wilder with hes 38 wins and 37 knock outs will soon surpass him.

It is not about the record.. It is who you beat and when. Floyd does not have that many wins over prime ATG opponents.

People seem to forget he beat ATG guys when he WASNT in prime which is impressive as well. To fight elite guys dominated when ur not in YOUR prime.

They weren't in their prime neither.

No disagreement but you would gave those guys full credit if they beat Mayweather and wouldn't have blinked or said that he wasn't in his prime and that if Pacquaio would have won he would beat FLoyd at anytime in there careers but somehow that same logic doesn't apply when Floyd won.

IKSRTFO wrote:

KiwiRider wrote:If you say something enough, history sometimes remembers that, and with the 49-0 has data to back it up. When the people who actually watched his fights, knew the background, are gone- he will probably be remembered as tbe

Sad eh?

No, because people will still be watching Ali fights. They do now. I doubt people will be watching Floyd fights 50 years from now on ESPN classic.

That Gatti, Corrales & Pacquaio fights all will played 50 years from now.

world ranked wrote:

IKSRTFO wrote:

world ranked wrote:
People seem to forget he beat ATG guys when he WASNT in prime which is impressive as well. To fight elite guys dominated when ur not in YOUR prime.

They weren't in their prime neither.

No disagreement but you would gave those guys full credit if they beat Mayweather and wouldn't have blinked or said that he wasn't in his prime and that if Pacquaio would have won he would beat FLoyd at anytime in there careers but somehow that same logic doesn't apply when Floyd won.

Pacquiao wasn't in his prime when he fought Floyd neither so if he would've beat Floyd, it would be a past prime version of Pacquiao who had a longer career than Floyd has.

world ranked wrote:

IKSRTFO wrote:

KiwiRider wrote:If you say something enough, history sometimes remembers that, and with the 49-0 has data to back it up. When the people who actually watched his fights, knew the background, are gone- he will probably be remembered as tbe

Sad eh?

No, because people will still be watching Ali fights. They do now. I doubt people will be watching Floyd fights 50 years from now on ESPN classic.

That Gatti, Corrales & Pacquaio fights all will played 50 years from now.

They don't even play these fights now. Corrales was 17 years ago and they don't play it at all.

There's nothing wrong with fighter's believing that they're all-time-greats. A prerequisite of gaining Hall-of-Famer success is possessing an arrogant mentality, which doesn't go away just because of retirement.

Enlightened-One wrote:There's nothing wrong with fighter's believing that they're all-time-greats. A prerequisite of gaining Hall-of-Famer success is possessing an arrogant mentality, which doesn't go away just because of retirement.

There's never been another ATG that put down other ATGs careers as a reason to say their the best ever. I never heard Leonard say he's better than Robinson because Robinson lost 20 more times. I never heard Ali say he's better than Louis because Louis let white guys beat him. Only Floyd say dumb stuff like that. And it's against fighter he would've never fought if he was in their era. I have no doubt Ali would face any heavyweight.

The simple fact that Floyd constatly has to convince everyone in interviews and write essays, trying to prove to everyone he is an all time great, is all the evidence anyone needs to confirm the fact that he is not TBE and might not even be in the Top 10 of the best boxers.

Greatness is earned by the respect and acknowledgement of others, not yourself.
Why are boxers like Muhammed Ali and Sugar Ray Robinson considered the best? Because almost everybody consideres them the best.

Floyd is learning that when it comes to greatness, you can't manipulate and artificially create it like wealth.
Ultimately people can only be manipulated and blinded to a limited extent.

IKSRTFO wrote:

world ranked wrote:

IKSRTFO wrote:

No, because people will still be watching Ali fights. They do now. I doubt people will be watching Floyd fights 50 years from now on ESPN classic.

That Gatti, Corrales & Pacquaio fights all will played 50 years from now.

They don't even play these fights now. Corrales was 17 years ago and they don't play it at all.

Its still a fight that will be played on ESPN classic no matter how long ago it was. It plays now just like the Gatti fight has don't be a Floyd hater these are facts.

IKSRTFO wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:There's nothing wrong with fighter's believing that they're all-time-greats. A prerequisite of gaining Hall-of-Famer success is possessing an arrogant mentality, which doesn't go away just because of retirement.

There's never been another ATG that put down other ATGs careers as a reason to say their the best ever. I never heard Leonard say he's better than Robinson because Robinson lost 20 more times. I never heard Ali say he's better than Louis because Louis let white guys beat him. Only Floyd say dumb stuff like that. And it's against fighter he would've never fought if he was in their era. I have no doubt Ali would face any heavyweight.

I've watched Lennox Lewis explain his own belief about being the greatest heavyweight champion ever. And he was using his own mind-set (when interviewed by Sky Sports) to excuse Tyson Fury's arrogant out-of-ring behaviour.

I’m not suggesting for one second that I could tolerate an individual in my social circle that acted that way, but rightly or wrongly, world-class sportsmen have to possess a certain mind-set that they either cannot be beaten at all or at least they’re capable of defeating anyone.

Perhaps Floyd Mayweather Jr. takes things one step too far by articulating to the media what most world-class sportsmen keep to themselves, which I can appreciate rubs some people the wrong way, but it is this level of self-belief that took him to the very pinnacle of our beloved sport… regardless of whether or not you support his claims.

IKSRTFO wrote:

world ranked wrote:

IKSRTFO wrote:

They weren't in their prime neither.

No disagreement but you would gave those guys full credit if they beat Mayweather and wouldn't have blinked or said that he wasn't in his prime and that if Pacquaio would have won he would beat FLoyd at anytime in there careers but somehow that same logic doesn't apply when Floyd won.

Pacquiao wasn't in his prime when he fought Floyd neither so if he would've beat Floyd, it would be a past prime version of Pacquiao who had a longer career than Floyd has.

NEITHER was in there prime is the point and I feel you and others would have gave Pacquaio full credit for beating a past prime Floyd but Floyd gets no credit its bias.

Enlightened-One wrote:

IKSRTFO wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:There's nothing wrong with fighter's believing that they're all-time-greats. A prerequisite of gaining Hall-of-Famer success is possessing an arrogant mentality, which doesn't go away just because of retirement.

There's never been another ATG that put down other ATGs careers as a reason to say their the best ever. I never heard Leonard say he's better than Robinson because Robinson lost 20 more times. I never heard Ali say he's better than Louis because Louis let white guys beat him. Only Floyd say dumb stuff like that. And it's against fighter he would've never fought if he was in their era. I have no doubt Ali would face any heavyweight.

I've watched Lennox Lewis explain his own belief about being the greatest heavyweight champion ever. And he was using his own mind-set (when interviewed by Sky Sports) to excuse Tyson Fury's arrogant out-of-ring behaviour.

I’m not suggesting for one second that I could tolerate an individual in my social circle that acted that way, but rightly or wrongly, world-class sportsmen have to possess a certain mind-set that they either cannot be beaten at all or at least they’re capable of defeating anyone.

Perhaps Floyd Mayweather Jr. takes things one step too far by articulating to the media what most world-class sportsmen keep to themselves, which I can appreciate rubs some people the wrong way, but it is this level of self-belief that took him to the very pinnacle of our beloved sport… regardless of whether or not you support his claims.

Well said. He might believe it even if we don't.

IKSRTFO wrote:

montrealsuper wrote:Quack Quack Quack - floyd is the most protected fighter ever - boring style boring uninteresting talker and a low class person - his reign as face of boxing disgusted and drove away boxing fans and potential boxing fans to watch UFC - Go away fraud coward you stunk out boxing with your handpicking cowardice and ducking BS

While I disagree with all of that I agree with the bolded. Floyd took it easy at times but he did step it up at times alos. He's interesting to listen to. While he made a ton of money, I will say he's partly to blame for the exodus to UFC.

There's been no exodus to MMA. Just like there's been no exodus to Baseball. MMA is a great sport that stands on it's own. Boxing stands on it's own, it just depends on what you like and people like different sports for different reasons and there's a lot of Boxing fans in the world.

The problem has been with the Boxing Establishment not creating a mechanism to get the most interesting and logical fights done in a timely manner. Fights die on the vine. The time to do May-Pac was 2009 when it was hotter than Hell -- not when both boxers are past their best and Pacquiao isn't able to fight because that was the training camp when his long suffering rotator cuff injury finally suffered a significant break.. He needed to fake his way through the rest of training camp and the fight -- because the prognoses was immediate surgery and 9 months of healing and rehab for the injury.. and Floyd was going to retire in September and there goes his 200 million dollars.. Had this fight been forced sooner that would have been avoided and we have a good fight ... And Floyd and Pacquiao should have fought Keith Thurman, Terence Crawford, and Kell Brook instead of Andre Berto, Tim Bradley, and Jesse Vargas.

Now you have the same specter with GGG-Canelo.. That fight is not going to be made until Golovkin shows signs of deterioration... In fact there's many GGG fights that haven't been made starting with Sergio Martinez.. If you're going to have a sport, the best match-ups should get done.

Kalan wrote:

IKSRTFO wrote:

montrealsuper wrote:Quack Quack Quack - floyd is the most protected fighter ever - boring style boring uninteresting talker and a low class person - his reign as face of boxing disgusted and drove away boxing fans and potential boxing fans to watch UFC - Go away fraud coward you stunk out boxing with your handpicking cowardice and ducking BS

While I disagree with all of that I agree with the bolded. Floyd took it easy at times but he did step it up at times alos. He's interesting to listen to. While he made a ton of money, I will say he's partly to blame for the exodus to UFC.

There's been no exodus to MMA. Just like there's been no exodus to Baseball. MMA is a great sport that stands on it's own. Boxing stands on it's own, it just depends on what you like and people like different sports for different reasons and there's a lot of Boxing fans in the world.

The problem has been with the Boxing Establishment not creating a mechanism to get the most interesting and logical fights done in a timely manner. Fights die on the vine. The time to do May-Pac was 2009 when it was hotter than Hell -- not when both boxers are past their best and Pacquiao isn't able to fight because that was the training camp when his long suffering rotator cuff injury finally suffered a significant break.. He needed to fake his way through the rest of training camp and the fight -- because the prognoses was immediate surgery and 9 months of healing and rehab for the injury.. and Floyd was going to retire in September and there goes his 200 million dollars.. Had this fight been forced sooner that would have been avoided and we have a good fight ... And Floyd and Pacquiao should have fought Keith Thurman, Terence Crawford, and Kell Brook instead of Andre Berto, Tim Bradley, and Jesse Vargas.

Now you have the same specter with GGG-Canelo.. That fight is not going to be made until Golovkin shows signs of deterioration... In fact there's many GGG fights that haven't been made starting with Sergio Martinez.. If you're going to have a sport, the best match-ups should get done.

That is really well said. I could be wrong, but it feels to me as though the haggling in the past had a great deal to do with splitting money, whereas now a dynamic of trying to "time" fights by waiting for a fighter to slip, or playing other angles like pushing for catch weights is something that has really started to happen far more often just in recent years. I know there are examples of it in the past, but it seems like the prevalence of those types of tactics has really risen sharply within the last 15-20 years.

I respect the hell out of any fighter that gets in the ring, but it saps my strength as a fan when a fighter doesn't seem to want to fight the best version of an opponent, but would rather try to outsmart him outside the ring by angling for every advantage he can find. Sure, I wouldn't want to fight some of these guys, but then again, I am not a world class fighter.

Kalan wrote:

IKSRTFO wrote:

montrealsuper wrote:Quack Quack Quack - floyd is the most protected fighter ever - boring style boring uninteresting talker and a low class person - his reign as face of boxing disgusted and drove away boxing fans and potential boxing fans to watch UFC - Go away fraud coward you stunk out boxing with your handpicking cowardice and ducking BS

While I disagree with all of that I agree with the bolded. Floyd took it easy at times but he did step it up at times alos. He's interesting to listen to. While he made a ton of money, I will say he's partly to blame for the exodus to UFC.

There's been no exodus to MMA. Just like there's been no exodus to Baseball. MMA is a great sport that stands on it's own. Boxing stands on it's own, it just depends on what you like and people like different sports for different reasons and there's a lot of Boxing fans in the world.

The problem has been with the Boxing Establishment not creating a mechanism to get the most interesting and logical fights done in a timely manner. Fights die on the vine. The time to do May-Pac was 2009 when it was hotter than Hell -- not when both boxers are past their best and Pacquiao isn't able to fight because that was the training camp when his long suffering rotator cuff injury finally suffered a significant break.. He needed to fake his way through the rest of training camp and the fight -- because the prognoses was immediate surgery and 9 months of healing and rehab for the injury.. and Floyd was going to retire in September and there goes his 200 million dollars.. Had this fight been forced sooner that would have been avoided and we have a good fight ... And Floyd and Pacquiao should have fought Keith Thurman, Terence Crawford, and Kell Brook instead of Andre Berto, Tim Bradley, and Jesse Vargas.

Now you have the same specter with GGG-Canelo.. That fight is not going to be made until Golovkin shows signs of deterioration... In fact there's many GGG fights that haven't been made starting with Sergio Martinez.. If you're going to have a sport, the best match-ups should get done.

There is an exodus from mainstream fans who used to watch boxing now watching MMA. They got tired of buying Floyd PPVs hearing about the hype and not knowing too much about him and seeing a slew of boring fights. I've apologized for many of fight parties I've hosted on behalf of a Mayweather fight.