**** it! Let's let the neutrals decide this. When does the decade ends? Who is FOTD?

[Maidana vs Rios]

they're multiplying...i think the planet is being taken over by idiot aliens hahaha

Our mathematically challenged compadres probably aren't old enough to know this song, but when they hear it I bet it'll have 'em scratching their heads for days!

[renren40]

i don't think so! Floyd's UD against Hoya is only talked about by their fans, hoya fans insisting that their fighter was robbed. And some fans even saying that it didn't live up to the hype as it was boring as fart!

But the boxing world and beyond will always talk about the annihilation of the ODH by this midget from South East Asia where everyone thought didn't have a slight chance against America's Golden Boy

British boxing fans weren't so perturbed about Hatton losing against Floyd because he put a good fight and were landing decent shots himself but the image of hatton lying in the canvass unconscious destroyed in two rounds by Pacquaio will haunt them forever!

not surprised ... more ignorant **** in the boxing forums ... midget from South East Asia? .... Is Barerra a midget? Is Morales a midget? Is Mayweather a midget? Pacquiao is approximately their height.

[nikeboix69]

of course one might say it's hard to label Mayweather a fighter as such since he spends most of his time in reverse gear trying to escape his opponent,

how about,

Boxer of the decade - Floyd 'Money' Mayweather
Fighter of the decade - Manny Pacquiao

I know which one I'd rather be labelled.

Yeah this one makes sense to me too. And lets not forget Floyd dodge and ducked (retirement) with his boxing skills in his boxing career too. Hehe JK

I think Allucard tried to make the distinction that Mayweather was P4P #1 longer. So how about fighter of the years awards.


2006 - Manny Pacquiao
2007 - Floyd Mayweather Jr.
2008 - Manny Pacquiao
2009 - Manny Pacquiao

If we were going with American Football analogy here wouldn't the Patriots be the unanimous Team of the decade.

[2120]

I am a fan of neither

and having a tough time deciding on how i will be rooting for come March 13

but pac is clearly the fighter of the decade

floyd had the opportunity to really cement his legacy when he came up to 147

the division was hot when he showed up

but his only wins over welters since he moved up were baldo and judah. baldo win was significant because he won the lineal title but thats it

floyd took the big money fight against hatton, oscar, and Marquez which is great for his bank account but they did not enhance his legacy any further

especially when they were more serious challenges in the weightclass he was champ at.

[cherokee]

not surprised ... more ignorant **** in the boxing forums ... midget from South East Asia? .... Is Barerra a midget? Is Morales a midget? Is Mayweather a midget? Pacquiao is approximately their height.

man, take it easy, this is what sports writers were saying at that time. pre and post dela hoya fight! And even *****s are saying the same. that this midget has no chance to beat floyd

[carts]

it all started with 0000 not 0001 s0 any idiot can understand that 2000 - 2009 is 10 years..

[Da Hammer]

Pac no doubt. What he did this decade was the stuff of legends!!!

[juandinamita]

'The Romans did not have a zero in their numbering system [thank heavens for the Arab merchants] so their calendar began with January 1 in the year 1. The decade, therefore, did not end until midnight between December 31,10 and January 1, 11. The addition of a couple of millenia changes nothing so the first decade of the second millenium does not end until December 31, 2010/January 1, 2011.'

'This is illustrated by the adoption of the birth of Christ as the initial epoch of the Christian calendar. This epoch was established by the sixth-century scholar Dionysius Exiguus, who was compiling a table of dates of Easter. An existing table covered the nineteen-year period denoted 228-247, where years were counted from the beginning of the reign of the Roman emperor Diocletian. Dionysius continued the table for a nineteen-year period, which he designated Anni Domini Nostri Jesu Christi 532-550. Thus, Dionysius' Anno Domini 532 is equivalent to Anno Diocletian 248. In this way a correspondence was established between the new Christian Era and an existing system associated with historical records. What Dionysius did not do is establish an accurate date for the birth of Christ. Although scholars generally believe that Christ was born some years before A.D. 1, the historical evidence is too sketchy to allow a definitive dating.

Given an initial epoch, one must consider how to record preceding dates. Bede, the eighth-century English historian, began the practice of counting years backward from A.D. 1 (see Colgrave and Mynors, 1969). In this system, the year A.D. 1 is preceded by the year 1 B.C., without an intervening year 0. Because of the numerical discontinuity, this "historical" system is cumbersome for comparing ancient and modern dates. Today, astronomers use +1 to designate A.D. 1. Then +1 is naturally preceded by year 0, which is preceded by year -1. Since the use of negative numbers developed slowly in Europe, this "astronomical" system of dating was delayed until the eighteenth century, when it was introduced by the astronomer Jacques Cassini (Cassini, 1740). '
year 0 has NEVER existed.
goddamn you fckn people are ******ed.

[KickedOuttaGQ]

Jan 1st 2000- to Jan 1st 2010...


Pac got it... That win over Cotto clinched it

Thats 10 years and a day...

January 1st, 2000 at 12:00:00 AM til December 31st, 2009 11:59:59 PM.

[RepublicaEnemy1]

'The Romans did not have a zero in their numbering system [thank heavens for the Arab merchants] so their calendar began with January 1 in the year 1. The decade, therefore, did not end until midnight between December 31,10 and January 1, 11. The addition of a couple of millenia changes nothing so the first decade of the second millenium does not end until December 31, 2010/January 1, 2011.'

'This is illustrated by the adoption of the birth of Christ as the initial epoch of the Christian calendar. This epoch was established by the sixth-century scholar Dionysius Exiguus, who was compiling a table of dates of Easter. An existing table covered the nineteen-year period denoted 228-247, where years were counted from the beginning of the reign of the Roman emperor Diocletian. Dionysius continued the table for a nineteen-year period, which he designated Anni Domini Nostri Jesu Christi 532-550. Thus, Dionysius' Anno Domini 532 is equivalent to Anno Diocletian 248. In this way a correspondence was established between the new Christian Era and an existing system associated with historical records. What Dionysius did not do is establish an accurate date for the birth of Christ. Although scholars generally believe that Christ was born some years before A.D. 1, the historical evidence is too sketchy to allow a definitive dating.

Given an initial epoch, one must consider how to record preceding dates. Bede, the eighth-century English historian, began the practice of counting years backward from A.D. 1 (see Colgrave and Mynors, 1969). In this system, the year A.D. 1 is preceded by the year 1 B.C., without an intervening year 0. Because of the numerical discontinuity, this "historical" system is cumbersome for comparing ancient and modern dates. Today, astronomers use +1 to designate A.D. 1. Then +1 is naturally preceded by year 0, which is preceded by year -1. Since the use of negative numbers developed slowly in Europe, this "astronomical" system of dating was delayed until the eighteenth century, when it was introduced by the astronomer Jacques Cassini (Cassini, 1740). '
year 0 has NEVER existed.
goddamn you fckn people are ******ed.

Are you historian bro? Or you just copy pasted this from Wikipedia. LOL