Originally Posted by Slightly Dazed
Wait, a proven vet needs to validate himself but the guys who have accomplished very little so far are assumed to be the best? Smells like bull****.
Um no. I'm saying Mayweather is assumed to be the best. I'm not assuming anyone is.
Trout has pretty much accomplished what Mayweather has at 154. There's nothing at all saying Mayweather could beat either Trout or Canelo, yet hes ranked above them.
So basically, you're all saying: Mayweather is only no.1 because of name recognition, and because hes only just done a little more than the others by facing Cotto? Not no.1 because of skill. Fair enough. Though I dispute that because Trout has done what Mayweather has done at this weight.
In all, the bottom line is, he isn't the best of the division until proven otherwise