Why was Mayweather held to such standards from certain posters?

[Santa_]

Hmm, lets see. Maybe because he calls himself The Best Ever???

[Dip_Slide]

lol at the same 15-20 dudes supporting mayweather in virtually ever scenario and every thread acting like they are objective. nobody is fooled! how can you take the bscene money team seriously when they side with floyd mayweather in every scenario like a f#cking yesman, or a cheerleader. it's the subjectivity that has made this place toxic.


some of the people in this thread think floyd is a top 5 ALL TIME fighter. to somebody who doesn't think you're a top 5 all timer, don't you think calling yourself TBE might rub you the wrong way? doesn't it sound disrespectful to the other men who have boxed before? at the very least you're not in the wrong for getting a bad taste in your mouth when a boxer starts to call HIMSELF TBE.



ali called himself the greatest of all time, but he went out and cemented a legacy as arguably the toughest matched fighter of all time, and his brain and body stopped working. also, if you think ali wasn't "held to a certain standard" or let's put it more planly "discriminated against," you just aren't familiar with the era.



floyd calls himself TBE. but it's health first. but boxing is a business. we fight for a prize, dummy. but i did everything in my power not to fight manny until he was clearly on the downside.


don't you see why some people might be rubbed the wrong way? i'm saying not that it needs to rub you the wrong way, but i am saying that you're a fanboy if you don't at least acknowledge the potential for a reasonable, objective fan to be rubbed the wrong way by a fighter who isn't the greatest of all time and claims that he is.


the fanboyism on bscene has to stop. floyd mayweather is not the best fighter of all time. i can't take 90% of this board seriously any more.

Yet he beat down Bradley a year later, Bradley btw is the same guy Pacquiao struggled with in 2012 when he was supposedly in his prime while Bradley was fighting for the first time at 147.

Hopefully you don't start with the shoulder excuse now.

[IMDAZED]

Yet he beat down Bradley a year later, Bradley btw is the same guy Pacquiao struggled with in 2012 when he was supposedly in his prime while Bradley was fighting for the first time at 147.

Hopefully you don't start with the shoulder excuse now.

Their arguments pretend Mayweather was ageless while everyone around him got old or fell off. There will always be an excuse and you can't blame them. It's human nature. Look at the the list of accomplishments people have raised in this thread:

• A 19-year career where he was champion for nearly 18 of them.
  
• Won titles in five divisions, beating 22 past or present champions without tasting defeat.
  
• Was the world's best fighter up until his retirement, closing out the last 10 years of his career facing a current champ in damn near every fight. The list of names on his dossier are insane.

If everyone was held to the standards Mayweather is held to -- apparently, calling himself the Greatest not after winning his first title but about 15 years into an ATG career is a reason? -- then they'd have to admit he deserves the least scrutiny and the most plaudits. There you have it.

[New England]

IMO you could easily argue Leonard has the better resume.

Aging Liston
Frazier
Foreman
Norton

Aging Hagler
Duran
Hearns
Benitez

Which four are better? In my eyes clearly Leonard's.

Ali has more fights and thus more depth but the quality goes with Leonard IMO.

you'll be basically the only person at any reasonable, objective table arguing that ray leonard's resume is better than ali's . he beat liston twice. frazier twice. norton twice. ali lost to frazier in arguably his biggest fight, and leonard lost to duran in his biggest.

leonard's resume drops right off, and your post actually alludes to that. it's really only when you take the exact slice you've taken of their resumes when they're comparable in any capacity .

ali was a physical phenom in the 60's, and in the 70's he'd slowed and was vulnerable, but he still went through an ungodly run of tough fights basically in succession. leonard just didn't fight long enough to pile up accomplishments that can compare to ali's. you can argue that ali is the best fighter of either decade, though i might shade duran in the 70's.

[New England]

Yet he beat down Bradley a year later, Bradley btw is the same guy Pacquiao struggled with in 2012 when he was supposedly in his prime while Bradley was fighting for the first time at 147.

Hopefully you don't start with the shoulder excuse now.

classic tactic of a fanboy to believe anybody who disagrees is a fanboy of the opposing party. i went to floyd - canelo, FFS, and i wasn't there to watch the red headed kid. cost me a lot of money, and was one of the more fulfilling experiences of my life.

shoulder doe



and manny never struggled with tim bradley. and he was badly depleted, damn near retirement, when floyd finally stopped crapping on the fight.


both sides delayted that fight. their careers / movement by the end were essentially a promotion towards that fight. if you disagree with that you're a fanboy. and yes, manny was much, much more deteriorated than floyd. again, refuse to believe that and you're a fanboy with no business evaluating the level of deterioration in a fighter. not saying floyd was 25 and prime, only that any swinging **** worth his salt can tell you that manny's career had taken a greater toll, and that he was more shopworn. he'd been out cold against marquez, and visibly slowing and losing his edge for years to any trained eye.

[New England]

Leonard's Wins over Hearns, Duran, Benitez and Hagler are better than Ali's four best wins.

Why do you take it personal? Do you know Muhammad Ali? Ali endorsed Leonard and Tyson..why wouldn't he like Floyd?

Pacquiao
Maidana
Cotto
Mosley
Marquez
Hatton
De La Hoya
Castillo
Corrales
Hernandez

The fact you try to insult that resume is pathetic

take it personal?

the first thing you said to me was that i was being nostalgic and ranting


not exactly the friendliest connotation.



never once have i "insulted" floyd mayweather's rsume. so don't get your panties twisted

i am a floyd mayweather fan. paid a lot of money to see him fight.

i'm just realistic, practical, and i call fanboyism when i see it. and the guys who are in every mayweeather trhead supporting him are the fanboys, and the guys who go case by case and fighter by fighter, like myself, are objective.

[IronDanHamza]

you'll be basically the only person at any reasonable, objective table arguing that ray leonard's resume is better than ali's . he beat liston twice. frazier twice. norton twice. ali lost to frazier in arguably his biggest fight, and leonard lost to duran in his biggest.

leonard's resume drops right off, and your post actually alludes to that. it's really only when you take the exact slice you've taken of their resumes when they're comparable in any capacity .

ali was a physical phenom in the 60's, and in the 70's he'd slowed and was vulnerable, but he still went through an ungodly run of tough fights basically in succession. leonard just didn't fight long enough to pile up accomplishments that can compare to ali's. you can argue that ali is the best fighter of either decade, though i might shade duran in the 70's.

You can also argue that Ali wasn't the fighter of either decade whereas it's pretty hard to argue Leonard wasn't the fighter of the 80's.

Leonard's best wins are better then Ali's best wins though.

Foreman Frazier Liston and Norton aren't even close to Duran, Hearns, Hagler and Benitez. The latter 4 are ATG's, most of which Top 50.

Ali's got the quantity, but quantity doesn't always mean better. Loads of people have quantity over Leonard but what Leonard has is probably the most quality packed into a small resume in the history of the sport.

How many fighters have 4 top 50 ATG's on their resume and 3 in their prime? Not many.

Plus, we're including names like Foster, Chuvalo, Moore, Cooper etc who are hardly exceptional wins.

Kalule is a better win than any of Ali's outside of the top 4.

Either way both Ali and Leonard are around the Top 10-15 mark for me.

[Chuckguy]

Larry sees that GGG is dominating the boards so he decides to make a bumweather thread and give him shine with a topic that he has posted like a million times already. Great job Larry.
Why don't you update us on your kids instead of this crap

[New England]

You can also argue that Ali wasn't the fighter of either decade whereas it's pretty hard to argue Leonard wasn't the fighter of the 80's.

Leonard's best wins are better then Ali's best wins though.

Foreman Frazier Liston and Norton aren't even close to Duran, Hearns, Hagler and Benitez. The latter 4 are ATG's, most of which Top 50.

Ali's got the quantity, but quantity doesn't always mean better. Loads of people have quantity over Leonard but what Leonard has is probably the most quality packed into a small resume in the history of the sport.

How many fighters have 4 top 50 ATG's on their resume and 3 in their prime? Not many.

Plus, we're including names like Foster, Chuvalo, Moore, Cooper etc who are hardly exceptional wins.

Kalule is a better win than any of Ali's outside of the top 4.

Either way both Ali and Leonard are around the Top 10-15 mark for me.

you're counting names, not wins. ali beat frazier 2x, liston 2x, norton 2x, foreman. that's 7 fights. so no, kalule is not a better win than whichever win you place as 5th best on that list. at least, you're not going to get a lot of people who agree with you.

the kalule win doesn't separate itself much over the "pack" of contenders that ali beat. and when you consider that he lined them up basically for 2 decades, back to back, and leonard spent a lot of time retired, i don't think the disucussion needs to be carried on much further. again, 154 was still a transitionary, young weight class at the time of leonard / kalule's career, and HW boxing was arguably the most popular sport in the states during ali's.

[New England]

also, do you really think wilfred benitez is a top 50 all time great? accomplished and great fighter, sure, but top 50? i typically don't see him in a solid top 50 list.