The Official Floyd Mayweather is the best boxer of this era period...

[Dupac]

Me and Du used to be on ESPN message boards back then arguing about Hatton. I know what the world thought and its easy to discredit after the fact.

shit was a warzone back then.... espn.com 13th round....there was a whole army of hatton fans that were talking about how he was going to destroy floyd.....

niggaz were adamantly saying castillo beat floyd and hatton destroyed him,,,

 

[The Lonious Monk]

monk if ur on the side of the argument that Floyd didnt fight anyone and u discredit his resume then u better do the same for Manny who beat them after Floyd.... Floyd can argue I exposed them or softened them up.... HATTON WAS UNDEFEATED when Floyd sent him in that turnbuckle..... Mosley was still dangerous after beating Margarito when Floyd beat him and was not there for a check like he was for Manny (Mosley wanted to fight Manny instead of Floyd and they wanted a catch weight of 145 and Roach said he was too good yet he fought him with none after he looked bad losng to Floyd)... Floyd beat Oscar at 154 with all types of stipulations while Manny fought a weight drained with iv marks in his arm Oscar (cam out of Roachs own mouth) Manny doesn't deserve the same credit if u look at it from the proper perspective

I didn't say Floyd didn't fight anyone. Ya'll kill me with these strawman arguments. And yes, I don't give Manny anymore credit for beating those guys than Floyd did. And your argument that Floyd exposed them and made them easy for Manny to beat doesn't make sense. Exposing someone means you reveal their weaknesses for others to capitalize on. That would apply here if Manny fought any of those guys like Floyd did, but Manny's style is far different. Floyd may very well have exposed them, but Manny didn't follow his gameplan when he fought them.

You guys are arguing circles. Either Floyd beat these dudes in their prime and therefore they were still big threats when Manny beat them, or Floyd beat them when they were falling off and they had fallen even farther by the time that Manny got them. But these attempts ya'll are making to try and make it seem like Floyd fought them at the height of their capability and Manny fought them when they were bums even though Manny only fought them a year later is crazy.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

you know what that is, as much as we talk about Manny having a machine, Floyd has his own and a lot is self promotion but Floyd became a fan favorite no matter how we slice it nor how many people do actually hate him. We also need to factor in that people around the sport to respect & appreciate what he does in the ring.

Difference with manny is his technique, skill level, opponent cherry picking/being protected and the behind the scenes bullshit that makes him looked at as mostly hype. Manny is the great white hype, only he's Phillipino.

Even journalists that hate Floyd dont just blindly pick against him, thats foolish & ruins their credibility, instead they talk about "possibilities" or "what ___ needs to do" etc etc. It works against Floyd in that he's proven every fighter wrong that the next guy hyped esp for those that follow the Guerrero, Canelos etc we know their flaws &slim chances beforehand. So the Ortiz type fights are predicted in 2011 with all of Floyds accolades&history and its really just about that outside chance.

Take 2011 Ortiz vs 2005-06 Floyd and every writer would be foaming at the mouth about how Ortiz might murder him in the ring.

The cherry picking argument doesn't work to well when most of his big fights are also Floyd's big fights. Yes, the majority of Manny's wins are against cans and people that he was guaranteed to crush. The same goes for the resumes of most big boxers. Actually, most of what you said in this post applies to all big name fighters. With Floyd it's just a little more prevalent because he's got such a love it or hate it kind of personality.

 

[Dupac]

this post-prime thing bus me....cuz you eventually have to question.......when is floyd's prime?

i mean people act like he's the exact same fighter he's been his entire career...

just because he's an amazing talent and has a extremely strong skillset, doesn't mean 147 was his prime...

i thik his prime was from 130-140...

once he moved to 147, he was normally the smaller man, and wasn't able to ocmpletely MONSTER dudes.. btu still was fast enough and technical enough to completely outclass them...

so you can't completely dump on his opponents when it's obvious that floyd fought them at times when the fights were still extremely profitable....people wanted to see floyd and they wanted to see the fighters he was fighting put hands on him......

hatton and oscar are huge examples of this...

many critics felt oscar was too big, and many thught hatton was rough enough to hurt him...

it can easily be said for mosely and shane that all of their best days wer behind them....floyds best days were from 130-140...so one can argue floyd's been post prime himself since his 30th birthday in 2007

 

[The Lonious Monk]

this post-prime thing bus me....cuz you eventually have to question.......when is floyd's prime?

i mean people act like he's the exact same fighter he's been his entire career...

just because he's an amazing talent and has a extremely strong skillset, doesn't mean 147 was his prime...

i thik his prime was from 130-140...

once he moved to 147, he was normally the smaller man, and wasn't able to ocmpletely MONSTER dudes.. btu still was fast enough and technical enough to completely outclass them...

so you can't completely dump on his opponents when it's obvious that floyd fought them at times when the fights were still extremely profitable....people wanted to see floyd and they wanted to see the fighters he was fighting put hands on him......

hatton and oscar are huge examples of this...

many critics felt oscar was too big, and many thught hatton was rough enough to hurt him...

it can easily be said for mosely and shane that all of their best days wer behind them....floyds best days were from 130-140...so one can argue floyd's been post prime himself since his 30th birthday in 2007

You can make that argument, and I won't say you're wrong. Floyd has definitely proven himself to have more longevity that most of his competition. That's a different discussion though.

 

[perspective@100]

You can make that argument, and I won't say you're wrong. Floyd has definitely proven himself to have more longevity that most of his competition. That's a different discussion though.

How is this a different discussion? If he is beating cats on the downward side of his own career that only lets you know how much better he is. Your whole arguement is based on him not fighting people in their prime when in fact he is years past his own prime. When he was in his prime he beat the established names. He was supposed to lose so many fights but dominated. Floyd from age 20 to 30 was the best boxer in every weight class he was in.

When Floyd finally does take an L, I hope it wont matter in your eyes because he is well passed his prime and the fight should not count.

But your arguement was not against Floyd to begin with right? Just making a case for the Klitschko brothers. I know you saw that vid I posted. They are not on Floyds level either.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

You can make that argument, and I won't say you're wrong. Floyd has definitely proven himself to have more longevity that most of his competition. That's a different discussion though.

How is this a different discussion? If he is beating cats on the downward side of his own career that only lets you know how much better he is. Your whole arguement is based on him not fighting people in their prime when in fact he is years past his own prime. When he was in his prime he beat the established names. He was supposed to lose so many fights but dominated. Floyd from age 20 to 30 was the best boxer in every weight class he was in.

When Floyd finally does take an L, I hope it wont matter in your eyes because he is well passed his prime and the fight should not count.

But your arguement was not against Floyd to begin with right? Just making a case for the Klitschko brothers. I know you saw that vid I posted. They are not on Floyds level either.

It's a different discussion because saying someone managed to fight at a high level for a longer time than someone else is not the same as saying that person was a better fighter at their peak. Clearly, Manny's time in prime condition was a lot shorter than Floyd's. So there is no question that Floyd is superior there. That said, you can't say for sure that Floyd would have won 2 years ago just because Manny fell of faster.

And in my opinion Floyd is still in his Prime. There is a difference between prime and peak. Prime just means when that person is capable of offering a high level of competition. Floyd can still do that. Peak means that the person is at the height of their capability. Floyd might not be there. If Floyd loses a fight now that everyone thinks he should win, then yes it's still a knock against him because he's shown that he can still compete at a level above everyone. Now two or three years from now when he doesn't seem to be himself at all, no I would not hold a loss against him in the same regard.

 

[perspective@100]

It's a different discussion because saying someone managed to fight at a high level for a longer time than someone else is not the same as saying that person was a better fighter at their peak. Clearly, Manny's time in prime condition was a lot shorter than Floyd's. So there is no question that Floyd is superior there. That said, you can't say for sure that Floyd would have won 2 years ago just because Manny fell of faster.

And in my opinion Floyd is still in his Prime. There is a difference between prime and peak. Prime just means when that person is capable of offering a high level of competition. Floyd can still do that. Peak means that the person is at the height of their capability. Floyd might not be there. If Floyd loses a fight now that everyone thinks he should win, then yes it's still a knock against him because he's shown that he can still compete at a level above everyone. Now two or three years from now when he doesn't seem to be himself at all, no I would not hold a loss against him in the same regard.

I'm sorry but Floyd is no where near his prime. He saw his peak years ago. Floyd used to be able to use his legs to keep people out of punching distance vs him now having to shoulder roll for counters. He used to be able to hit and run where now he just uses his skills instead of pure athleticism.

His skill set is higher than most but he is no where close to prime.

You can't manipulate the definition of prime so your semantics make sense.

Definition of prime=of the highest quality; excellent; a time of greatest vigour

Being less athletic means he is not in his prime. Also, Floyd has had only 2 knockout wins since 2005. Previous to that he averaged a ko every other fight.

Definition of Peak= the point of highest activity, achievment, or intensity...

{Floyd fought 10 times in 97'} {7 times in 98' } {3 times in 99'} each year after that only one or two times except 2005 where he fought 3 times that year.

By definition of those words and numbers (numbers don't lie) Floyd Peaked and left his prime in 2005.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

It's a different discussion because saying someone managed to fight at a high level for a longer time than someone else is not the same as saying that person was a better fighter at their peak. Clearly, Manny's time in prime condition was a lot shorter than Floyd's. So there is no question that Floyd is superior there. That said, you can't say for sure that Floyd would have won 2 years ago just because Manny fell of faster.

And in my opinion Floyd is still in his Prime. There is a difference between prime and peak. Prime just means when that person is capable of offering a high level of competition. Floyd can still do that. Peak means that the person is at the height of their capability. Floyd might not be there. If Floyd loses a fight now that everyone thinks he should win, then yes it's still a knock against him because he's shown that he can still compete at a level above everyone. Now two or three years from now when he doesn't seem to be himself at all, no I would not hold a loss against him in the same regard.

I'm sorry but Floyd is no where near his prime. He saw his peak years ago. Floyd used to be able to use his legs to keep people out of punching distance vs him now having to shoulder roll for counters. He used to be able to hit and run where now he just uses his skills instead of pure athleticism.

His skill set is higher than most but he is no where close to prime.

You can't manipulate the definition of prime so your semantics make sense.

Definition of prime=of the highest quality; excellent; a time of greatest vigour

Being less athletic means he is not in his prime. Also, Floyd has had only 2 knockout wins since 2005. Previous to that he averaged a ko every other fight.

Definition of Peak= the point of highest activity, achievment, or intensity...

{Floyd fought 10 times in 97'} {7 times in 98' } {3 times in 99'} each year after that only one or two times except 2005 where he fought 3 times that year.

By definition of those words and numbers (numbers don't lie) Floyd Peaked and left his prime in 2005.

You might be right. He may not be in his prime, but your dictionary definition doesn't apply here. We're talking about boxing here. In boxing it's perfectly possible for someone to not be in peak condition but still be in the prime of their careers. Hell, some fighters have arguably gotten better after aging and gaining experience in place of athleticism. Prime is about ability to win not necessarily physical conditioning. That said, since Floyd has never lost, I guess you're right, he could still be out of his prime despite still being undefeatable by the current competition.

 

[perspective@100]

You might be right. He may not be in his prime, but your dictionary definition doesn't apply here. We're talking about boxing here. In boxing it's perfectly possible for someone to not be in peak condition but still be in the prime of their careers. Hell, some fighters have arguably gotten better after aging and gaining experience in place of athleticism. Prime is about ability to win not necessarily physical conditioning. That said, since Floyd has never lost, I guess you're right, he could still be out of his prime despite still being undefeatable by the current competition.

I actually agree with you. I just think Floyd had more power in punching at different angles using his legs when he was younger. I do believe he has gained experience and wisdom in the ring though, and his skill set is hard to gauge considering he has been at a high level of skill even before he turned pro.