Floyd Mayweather is in my top 3 of all time let the hate begin!

[robertzimmerman]

Johnwoo8686,

Duran also got his ass beat above Welterweight. You say Floyd was huge at super featherweight but you could argue Leonard was huge at welterweight being 5'10 with a 74 inch reach. Yet Leonard got beat by a 5'7 former lightweight in Duran who suffered loss before and after the two of them faced each other.

Duran got beat above WW, by facing arguably the best JMW and MW of all time, whilst they were in the prime of their lives. And he gave Marvin a huge scare. Look at the size he was giving up.

Yes, Ray was a big, strong WW. But Floyd had a reach advantage over almost all of his opponents.

It's funny how people discredit Floyd for beating Canelo by saying he was too young at 23 yet you want to give Leonard credit for beating a 21 year old Benitez.

Ray knocked out Benitez who was a fine fighter, who went on to beat Duran, before moving up and pushing a prime Hearns.

Floyd had to drag Canelo down to a C-W, despite the fact that he was a JMW champ, and that he'd publicly stated that he didn't care what Canelo weighed because "skills paid the bills"

It was a great performance by Floyd, but Canelo hasn't beaten any elite fighters, and he was terrified of getting countered by Floyd.

Go and watch Ray's fight with Benitez.

You say Oscar was over the hill when Floyd fought him yet Oscar was the same age Hagler was when Hagler fought Leonard at 33/34. Oscar was a former gold medalist and a ten time champion in 6 weight classes while Hagler was a dominant champion in only one weight division. Pound for pound you can place Oscar above Hagler.

Again, where's the context?

You seem to enjoy quoting statistics.

How could Marvin replicate Oscar's weight jumping? Where else could he have gone? There was no SMW division back then. The jump up to LHW to fight the likes of Spinks who had to cut down from over 190 pounds was too big. Marvin used to weigh-in at 157 in the days of same day weigh-ins. You can't compare statistics like that. Oscar won titles in more divisions than Ray. So what? He wasn't better than Ray. Is Manny Pacquiao the greatest fighter of all time? Statistics don't allow for circumstances.

What I said about Oscar been faded was true.

Every fighter ages differently.

Yes, Marvin was certainly faded when Ray fought him. But Ray gets more credit for beating Marvin than what Floyd does for beating Oscar, because he was also faded and he hadn't fought for over 3 years.

[chrisJS]

Johnwoo8686,



Duran got beat above WW, by facing arguably the best JMW and MW of all time, whilst they were in the prime of their lives. And he gave Marvin a huge scare. Look at the size he was giving up.

Yes, Ray was a big, strong WW. But Floyd had a reach advantage over almost all of his opponents.



Ray knocked out Benitez who was a fine fighter, who went on to beat Duran, before moving up and pushing a prime Hearns.

Floyd had to drag Canelo down to a C-W, despite the fact that he was a JMW champ, and that he'd publicly stated that he didn't care what Canelo weighed because "skills paid the bills"

It was a great performance by Floyd, but Canelo hasn't beaten any elite fighters, and he was terrified of getting countered by Floyd.

Go and watch Ray's fight with Benitez.



Again, where's the context?

You seem to enjoy quoting statistics.

How could Marvin replicate Oscar's weight jumping? Where else could he have gone? There was no SMW division back then. The jump up to LHW to fight the likes of Spinks who had to cut down from over 190 pounds was too big. Marvin used to weigh-in at 157 in the days of same day weigh-ins. You can't compare statistics like that. Oscar won titles in more divisions than Ray. So what? He wasn't better than Ray. Is Manny Pacquiao the greatest fighter of all time? Statistics don't allow for circumstances.

What I said about Oscar been faded was true.

Every fighter ages differently.

Yes, Marvin was certainly faded when Ray fought him. But Ray gets more credit for beating Marvin than what Floyd does for beating Oscar, because he was also faded and he hadn't fought for over 3 years.

Exactly no 168 and a huge undisputed champ at 175 who was an all-time great and even won the heavyweight title. What could Hagler do but dominate a great middleweight division. Oscar unified once ever and that was at 154 but he wasn't even the undisputed #1 and only became champ because Tito left the division. If Oscar had turned pro after say the 1972 or 1976 Olympics he'd have never won a title at lightweight (Duran), or junior welter (Benitez, Pryor) or 147 (Benitez, Hearns, Leonard) or 154 (same dudes plus McCallum) or 160 Hagler. He'd probably be a 0 time world champion at 0 weights. I'm also basing that on the best of Oscar. Yet Oscar being washed up (and arguably beating Floyd) is this amazing victory better than Hearns or Hagler? Wow.

Only Floyd fans thinks Oscar is better than Hagler. Even Oscar himself would laugh at that.

[robertzimmerman]

Then how is pacquiao scared of needles? He isn't scared of needles he just doesn't want to have his blood taken, that means they were caught in a lie of pedquiao being scared of needles.

That is the first of many many of lies



Manny and bob arum declined to fight and backed out of the fight even though floyd agreed to everything including a ridiculous multi million dollar weight penalty if he came in overweight. .

THAT IS A FACT. FLOYD SIGNED HIS PART TO FIGHT BUT NOT MANNY.





Manny wanted a 30 day cutoff, floyd didnt want to have any cutoff like true Olympic drug testing is supposed to be. Meaning they can take your blood any time without notifying you when they would stop. That doesn't mean they will automatically take your blood the day of the day before the fight.

FLOYD OFFERED 14 DAYS CUTOFF. MANNY DECLINED AND BACKED OUT OF THE FIGHT. THAT IS MANNY's FAULT.

FREDDIE ROACH EVEN SAID IT WAS THEIR FAULT THE FIGHT DIDN"T HAPPEN IN MARCH 2010.

You can't blame floyd



Nope, he said he agreed to any drug testing demands in 2011. Yet in other interviews said he had a problem with it being random, wanted a cutoff date and didn't want to work with USADA because it wasn't by the commission.

This is all on video LOL




At no point did floyd say they had a contract prepared, they just wanted a simple "yes" so they can move forward with negotiations. This happened in 2012 and guess what? BOB never tried to negotiate.

You still haven't addressed the blatant duck Bob arum did in 2012 though.

Bob arum never sent an official counteroffer, he never tried to negotiate, he already planned for manny to fight marquez, bradley, and possibly cotto for may 5th.





Defend the blatant duck Bob arum did in 2012.
He wanted manny to fight on may 5th, already had opponents lined up with mayweather's name nowhere to be found.

Mayweather's gets his sentenced push back and publicly calls out Pacquiao for may 5th and guess what arum does?

1. Claims that pedquiao can no longer fight on may 5th

2. Claims they need time to build a stadium in vegas

3. Claims manny needs time to heal from a cut

4. Releases a name of potential fights for manny with no floyd in sight.

5. Claims manny should be the A side and deserves more than a 50/50 split.

Stop defending bob arum, he's conned every single boxing fan with these "negotiations"

Youre clearly losing this debate, you have no chance.

The only thing that you've got right is that I've got no chance.

You're damn right.

I've got ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE WHATSOEVER of having an objective debate with you.

I was willing to give you a chance against my better judgement, but you clearly don't want one.

You've even pathetically referred to Manny as: "Pedquaio"

So why do you even deserve a moment more of my time?

I should have just ended the debate there and then


You have purposely ignored the Morales incident.

You have purposely ignored the fact that Manny didn't have to agree to anything, as the demands came from Floyd and not a commission.

You have purposely ignored several aspects of the timeline that doesn't suit your argument.

The best part, is where you have purposely pretended that my comments regarding Floyd's IV were never written.


You are a JOKE!


"Floyd never said that, Floyd never did that"

"Manny was lying, Arum was lying"

You're probably typing this up whilst wearing your "TBE" cap and your "TMT" t-shirt.


Seeing as though you've wasted my time, maybe you can clear up the IV incident?


Floyd famously walks around just above his fight night weight.

He boasts of that fact.

He's a gym rat even when he hasn't got a fight lined up.

He's always in shape all throughout the year.

He was only 3.5 pounds out at the 30 day point.

By the time the weigh-in had come, all the work had been done like usual.


So:

How was he so severely dehydrated, that he required an IV, which should have been carried out at a hospital, as it should have been classed as a medical emergency??


You think that Manny was a dirty cheat and you refer to him as: "Pedquiao"

Yet the Mayweather's went to court and had to apologise and pay a fine, because they had no evidence of any wrongdoing.


This is how ******ED you are:


Manny:

Zero evidence of any wrongdoing = He's a dirty cheat.


Floyd:

Needs an emergency IV on his sofa = No problem.


Either address the BS IV scandal, or go away and fantasise about having a threesome with Floyd and Leonard Ellerbe.

[GhostofDempsey]

Not even in my top 50 all-time....let the hate begin!

[robertzimmerman]

Exactly no 168 and a huge undisputed champ at 175 who was an all-time great and even won the heavyweight title. What could Hagler do but dominate a great middleweight division. Oscar unified once ever and that was at 154 but he wasn't even the undisputed #1 and only became champ because Tito left the division. If Oscar had turned pro after say the 1972 or 1976 Olympics he'd have never won a title at lightweight (Duran), or junior welter (Benitez, Pryor) or 147 (Benitez, Hearns, Leonard) or 154 (same dudes plus McCallum) or 160 Hagler. He'd probably be a 0 time world champion at 0 weights. I'm also basing that on the best of Oscar. Yet Oscar being washed up (and arguably beating Floyd) is this amazing victory better than Hearns or Hagler? Wow.

Only Floyd fans thinks Oscar is better than Hagler. Even Oscar himself would laugh at that.

This is an outstanding post.

It was a pleasure to read.

I agree with everything that you've written.

I was a huge fan of Oscar's back in the 90's, but you're right.

The keyword here, is: 'context'

All things considered, Ray's win over Benitez was better than Floyd's win over Canelo.

It doesn't matter that Ray lost at WW and Floyd didn't. Look at who they both fought.

I've got to give Floyd huge credit though, because he was a fine fighter and he had great longevity.

[mcdonalds]

You have purposely ignored the Morales incident.

You have purposely ignored the fact that Manny didn't have to agree to anything, as the demands came from Floyd and not a commission.

You have purposely ignored several aspects of the timeline that doesn't suit your argument.

I didn't ignore any of that.
1. Floyd offered a cutoff date of 14 days and guess what?

MANNY DECLINED AND PULLED OUT OF THE FIGHT

2. In 2011 manny said he was willing to agree with drug testing and had no problem with it

MANNY THEN CONTRADICTED HIMSELF BY SAYING HE STILL HAD A PROBLEM WITH RANDOM DRUG TESTING, WANTED A CUTOFF, AND DIDN'T WANT TO DO IT BECAUSE IT WASN'T BY THE COMMISSION.

WOW SO THATS ANOTHER LIE

3. In 2012 floyd wants to fight on may 5th

BOB ARUM DOESN"T WANT TO NEGOTIATE AND MAKES EXCUSES AS TO WHY MANNY CAN'T FIGHT.

BUT I THOUGHT MANNY WAS AVAILABLE FOR MAY 5TH MR. ARUM?

You are a JOKE!

"Floyd never said that, Floyd never did that"

"Manny was lying, Arum was lying"

Everything I said is factual, Instead of complaining like a little Btch why don't you try and prove me wrong.

Everything I said is pulled from interviews and is supported by evidence. EVERYTHING

Now prove me wrong, youre the one with the incorrect timeline.

Seeing as though you've wasted my time, maybe you can clear up the IV incident?



Either address the BS IV scandal, or go away and fantasise about having threesome with Floyd and Leonard Ellerbe.

Nice strawman, this is a debate about the negotiations with pacquiao and mayweather.

You're clearly losing that argument so now you're trying to shift the argument to be about something else.

Either prove my factual statements about the negotiations wrong or don't respond at all.

[robertzimmerman]

I didn't ignore any of that.
1. Floyd offered a cutoff date of 14 days and guess what?

MANNY DECLINED AND PULLED OUT OF THE FIGHT

2. In 2011 manny said he was willing to agree with drug testing and had no problem with it

MANNY THEN CONTRADICTED HIMSELF BY SAYING HE STILL HAD A PROBLEM WITH RANDOM DRUG TESTING, WANTED A CUTOFF, AND DIDN'T WANT TO DO IT BECAUSE IT WASN'T BY THE COMMISSION.

WOW SO THATS ANOTHER LIE

3. In 2012 floyd wants to fight on may 5th

BOB ARUM DOESN"T WANT TO NEGOTIATE AND MAKES EXCUSES AS TO WHY MANNY CAN'T FIGHT.

BUT I THOUGHT MANNY WAS AVAILABLE FOR MAY 5TH MR. ARUM?



Everything I said is factual, Instead of complaining like a little Btch why don't you try and prove me wrong.

Everything I said is pulled from interviews and is supported by evidence. EVERYTHING

Now prove me wrong, youre the one with the incorrect timeline.



Nice strawman, this is a debate about the negotiations with pacquiao and mayweather.

You're clearly losing that argument so now you're trying to shift the argument to be about something else.

Either prove my factual statements about the negotiations wrong or don't respond at all.

Ha!

You should be on stage.


The complete timelines are still available online.

Again, go and match up everything that's been discussed.


A straw man argument?

Oh my.

Floyd had an emergency IV due to been supposedly severely dehydrated = "A straw man argument"

Manny refusing to bow down to all of Floyd's demands after being publicly slandered = "Pedquaio...."


You can't give me an answer can you?

You just want it to disappear.


I've already answered all of your points.

I keep referring you to the complete timelines, instead of just quoting the snippets that suit.


It's okay, we'll move on.

Because by not answering, you've actually given me a crystal clear answer regarding Floyd's scandal.

[mcdonalds]

Ha!

You should be on stage.


The complete timelines are still available online.

Again, go and match up everything that's been discussed.


A straw man argument?

Oh my.

Floyd had an emergency IV due to been supposedly severely dehydrated = "A straw man argument"

Manny refusing to bow down to all of Floyd's demands after being publicly slandered = "Pedquaio...."


You can't give me an answer can you?

You just want it to disappear.


I've already answered all of your points.

I keep referring you to the complete timelines, instead of just quoting the snippets that suit.


It's okay, we'll move on.

Because by not answering, you've actually given me a crystal clear answer regarding Floyd's scandal.

So you claim the timeline is online but you can't prove me wrong. That's interesting

Point out anything that i said and actually answer all of my points because you haven't already and are just talking in circles.


Instead you're admitting defeat with strawman arguments.

[JJRod]

Let's argue Floyd is p4p 3 best boxer to live, tbh from super feather to light middle there are few fighters in history that would beat him on his best nights.
Also I think he has beaten more world champs than any fighter in history. But I could be wrong on that.

He's been the best fighter I've seen in my lifetime.

[robertzimmerman]

So you claim the timeline is online but you can't prove me wrong. That's interesting

Point out anything that i said and actually answer all of my points because you haven't already and are just talking in circles.


Instead you're admitting defeat with strawman arguments.

If I can't prove you wrong, then why do I keep referring you to the timelines that are still online?

Are you too lazy to look, or is it because you know that you'll look like the biased fool that you are?


I've admitted defeat with a strawman argument?

Your posts have gotten weaker and weaker, and now all that's left is the nonsense above.


Manny was racially abused by the Mayweather's.

His reputation was tarnished without a shred of evidence.

Yet you think he was a dirty cheat because he wouldn't initially agree to all Floyd's demands?

Yes?

To you, he was guilty.


Floyd was caught out with an IV, but on his sofa instead of a hospital, for supposedly been severely hydrated, despite the fact that he never had an issue in any other fight, he only had to lose 3.5 pounds in a whole month, and it's a known masking agent.

Yet to you, it was nothing.

What does that say about you?


You've had 5 opportunities to come up with an answer, yet the only answer you can muster, is that it's a straw man argument?

Ha!

If Manny had been caught with an IV under those circumstances, then it would only have taken you 5 seconds to answer, never mind 5 posts.


Floyd being caught with an IV has a lot more substance to it than a hate fuelled rant by Floyd Snr.

If you don't realise that, then you've got serious issues.

You can't ride with one whilst ignoring the other.

It's pathetic.