Why are Mayweather

First of all man, Floyd didn't lose and isn't making excuses. Get that straight. If he were to lose (and that's a pretty big fu(king IF) he might make excuses. But save the agitated rants about him losing and then making excuses about it until he actually loses and then makes an excuse about it. So you haven't been watching his fights lately (or you haven't seen the ones prior to his move up to 147) or the behind the scenes specials about his complaints that his body is breaking down

Being bigger is ALWAYS an advantage dude. Get it through your head. All else equal, the bigger guy will win. No all else is never equal which is why the bigger guy does not always win. But let's use DLH-Mayweather as an example. Mayweather was better. He was faster, more skilled and younger. DLH had the size and power advantage. So, that made it a closer fight than it would have been otherwise. If they'd been the same size Mayweather probably would have KO'd DLH. But it definitely helped DLH that he was bigger. Just not enough to make up for the fact that Mayweather is just a much better boxer than him. Valuev... Enough said.. no?

Vitali came back after almost a 4 year lay off... Seregi Lyachovich came back after 16 months and fought the best fight of his career... there are countless others Vitali is noticeably slower though as well. He still is good enough to beat everyone out there but he has lost a bit in those 4 years.

You still owe me green karma.:nono: its been done, you got your karma, thats how much of a nice guy i am

What the hell is wrong with you? You've got a really big amount of unjustified hate in you that's just not healthy. thank you sir, im ****ing retarded, you sound uncomfortable or something, dont be , its not like if ima murder you if thats what youre thinking, sorry for making you uncomfortable , relax maybe ill stab youre ass from my computer some other day, you scary little........................LOL,nyahaha:boxing:

You can miss me with the "take away" crap because the fact is, fighters have their attributes and they don't get taken away. That alone nullifies any ridiculous point you're trying to make, which is speaking in absolutes about the bigger guy always having the advantage. You really should try reading the article to get actual insight from real fighters. Plus, learn some reading comprehension. I said being bigger is AN ADVANTAGE. I didn't say that the bigger guy always has the advantage in the fight. There's a big difference between those two and if you can't understand what it is then you're not qualified to call anyone else moronic.

Not surprising at all. Floyd fans on parade.

You can miss me with the "take away" crap because the fact is, fighters have their attributes and they don't get taken away. That alone nullifies any ridiculous point you're trying to make, which is speaking in absolutes about the bigger guy always having the advantage. You really should try reading the article to get actual insight from real fighters. Dude, Read my posts. Did you think I was saying that the bigger guy should always win a fight against a smaller guy just because he's bigger??? WTF??? Have you even read what I've been saying? I said that being bigger is an advantage. Just like being faster is an advantage. Being more experienced is an advantage. Being in better shape is an advantage. None of those things in and of themselves will decide a fight, but they all ALWAYS help your chances.

Again, its sometimes an advantage, not always. Speaking in absolutes is moronic. Let me ask this too; where you impressed by Roy Jones' win over John Ruiz and if you were what impressed you the most about it?

Plus, I bet you those same fighters who say they liked fighting bigger slower fighters wouldn't say they like fighting bigger fighter who're the same speed. Because if you take the speed advantage away from them I'll bet you any amount of money all of a sudden they wouldn't want to fight those big guys, which is my point. Being bigger in and of itself is always an advantage. You can miss me with the "take away" crap because the fact is, fighters have their attributes and they don't get taken away. That alone nullifies any ridiculous point you're trying to make, which is speaking in absolutes about the bigger guy always having the advantage. You really should try reading the article to get actual insight from real fighters.

Again, its sometimes an advantage, not always. Speaking in absolutes is moronic. Being bigger is ALWAYS an advantage. Not believing that is what's moronic. If you got two fighters who are the same skill level, same foot speed, same hand speed, same experience, same age, same reflexes, same endurance, same heart, same dedication to training, but one of them was bigger the bigger guy would win. The ONLY reason why bigger guys don't always win fights is because there are so many other factors to consider that can influence the outcome of fights. But if two people are in shape and decide to fight being bigger is going to help you out. It doesn't hurt you.

Being bigger is not always better. There are boxers on record in Ring magazine as saying they liked to fight bigger fighters because they were slower and easier to hit. I don't have the issue in front of me, but it is there. Now, who should I believe, a blogger or an actual experienced fighter? Plus, I bet you those same fighters who say they liked fighting bigger slower fighters wouldn't say they like fighting bigger fighter who're the same speed. Because if you take the speed advantage away from them I'll bet you any amount of money all of a sudden they wouldn't want to fight those big guys, which is my point. Being bigger in and of itself is always an advantage.

Certain fighters who are skilled and very fast might like to fight bigger slower guys. That makes perfect sense. But do you think that let's use Pacquiao for example instead of Mayweather. Do you think that if Pacquiao were 5'10" retained his speed even while adding 15 lbs of pure muscle wouldn't be a better fighter? Dude this is exactly why we have different divisions. Look at Roy Jones. Do you think his win over John Ruiz impresses people because people thought John Ruiz was anywhere near as skilled as Roy Jones? No. John Ruiz fu(king sucks and always has. What impresses people is the fact that Roy Jones was able to make up for the huge size advantage by uses his speed and skill to beat a much bigger guy. But that doesn't mean that being bigger isn't an advantage. It's always an advantage. Again, its sometimes an advantage, not always. Speaking in absolutes is moronic.

he hasnt come back either and if he were, hed probably fight Hatton again so dumbass Hatton can get knocked out by a ring pole again, no way is Floyd ever gonna fight anyone dangerous and No..............No.....................floyd cannot beat Sugar Ray Robinson(Told you that before your Floyd cheering ass states this) What the hell is wrong with you? You've got a really big amount of unjustified hate in you that's just not healthy.

Being bigger is not always better. There are boxers on record in Ring magazine as saying they liked to fight bigger fighters because they were slower and easier to hit. I don't have the issue in front of me, but it is there. Now, who should I believe, a blogger or an actual experienced fighter? Certain fighters who are skilled and very fast might like to fight bigger slower guys. That makes perfect sense. But do you think that let's use Pacquiao for example instead of Mayweather. Do you think that if Pacquiao were 5'10" retained his speed even while adding 15 lbs of pure muscle wouldn't be a better fighter? Dude this is exactly why we have different divisions. Look at Roy Jones. Do you think his win over John Ruiz impresses people because people thought John Ruiz was anywhere near as skilled as Roy Jones? No. John Ruiz fu(king sucks and always has. What impresses people is the fact that Roy Jones was able to make up for the huge size advantage Ruiz had by using his speed and skill to beat a much bigger guy. But that doesn't mean that being bigger isn't an advantage. It's always an advantage.

another pbf appreciation thread being dedicated by the same obsessed fans disguising themselves as haters! Almost made it thru the day without one!

First of all man, Floyd didn't lose and isn't making excuses. Get that straight. If he were to lose (and that's a pretty big fu(king IF) he might make excuses. But save the agitated rants about him losing and then making excuses about it until he actually loses and then makes an excuse about it. he hasnt come back either and if he were, hed probably fight Hatton again so dumbass Hatton can get knocked out by a ring pole again, no way is Floyd ever gonna fight anyone dangerous and No..............No.....................floyd cannot beat Sugar Ray Robinson(Told you that before your Floyd cheering ass states this)

Being bigger is ALWAYS an advantage dude. Get it through your head. All else equal, the bigger guy will win. No all else is never equal which is why the bigger guy does not always win. But let's use DLH-Mayweather as an example. Mayweather was better. He was faster, more skilled and younger. DLH had the size and power advantage. So, that made it a closer fight than it would have been otherwise. If they'd been the same size Mayweather probably would have KO'd DLH. But it definitely helped DLH that he was bigger. Just not enough to make up for the fact that Mayweather is just a much better boxer than him. Now, if you're curious as to what issue it is, its the issue detailing the DLH Pacquiao announcement. There is an article dedicated to the smaller man beating the bigger man. Being bigger is not always better. There are boxers on record in Ring magazine as saying they liked to fight bigger fighters because they were slower and easier to hit. I don't have the issue in front of me, but it is there. Now, who should I believe, a blogger or an actual experienced fighter?

So, the bigger, heavier guy always wins right? Not necessarily. Because sometimes being the smaller, speedier man is an advantage as well. Again, being bigger and heavier, isn't always an advantage. Being bigger is ALWAYS an advantage dude. Get it through your head. All else equal, the bigger guy will win. No all else is never equal which is why the bigger guy does not always win. But let's use DLH-Mayweather as an example. Mayweather was better. He was faster, more skilled and younger. DLH had the size and power advantage. So, that made it a closer fight than it would have been otherwise. If they'd been the same size Mayweather probably would have KO'd DLH. But it definitely helped DLH that he was bigger. Just not enough to make up for the fact that Mayweather is just a much better boxer than him.

nah , just focused on you for a couple of hours(im at work for couple more hours on a computer deskjob) by the way, i know youre not exactly a floyd fan(yacht thread), but floyd cant come off with that stupid excuse if he loses cause a long layoff, he chose to have a layoff, if this was true, you have to blame gay ass floyd on that, its not true though, floyd is still in his ******y ass prime so still, no excuse, even with layoff floyd didnt dehabilitate his body like legendary Roy Jones did floyd was just taking a layoff , training and getting butt****ed I dont wanna hear any excuses either.... I was just commenting on how a layoff will damper ones timing... which is one of Floyds best weapons... for offense and defense... What I said wasnt something just a fan would say... it is true.