Will Floyd ever reach his full potential or will that zero hold him back?

Jesus Christ how was this thread not deleted?

Best fighter either has fought probably goes to Shane...even if they fight each other (Although...I think Floyd is debatable as the best fighter they'd have fought..). The Floyd-Pac era is an era where they JUST missed the REALLY good fighters and had to settle for their shells..although one of these names is accused of doing it much later with no shame. I won't name any names, I'll let the insecure fanatics figure that one out.

Floyd is expected to win against pac, thats a plain fact and not a guessing game. Check any of the odds which were established with people willing to put their money on it. Floyd fought Mosley after Pac's team requested Mosley to fight at a 144 catchweight to give an advantage to Pac and after Mosley agreed they ignored it. Pac never fought the best welterweight while he was a welterweight. Floyd has, twice. Dont use my logic that its set in stone, its only a guideline. Every time a fight happens there is a favourite, dont mean you dont fight them. But im just saying Floyd needs to up his opponents and stop coasting. Pac would be the best fighter Floyd ever fought so dont try making Floyd dodge Pac now. Floyd might be bookies favourtie, but you cant excuse for people overating fighters sometimes like they would be doing in Floyds case, if he was Favourite against Pac. DLH was favourite against Pac and they got it wrong. DLH still fought Pac though, so if i hear one more time that Floyd shouldnt fight Pac as he might be favourite im going to assume im dealing with simpletons (no disrespect to simpletons intended) and ignore it. 4corners has said that a few times just like you, and i ignored him countless times. u can if you want because when you get down to it they're 2 different people with different careers. only the opponents are similar so what. he can say he thinks floyds win over oscar was crap and mannies wasnt because of the circumstances. that doesn't mean hes not objective. your just mad he doesn't agree with you. if you were objective you'd respect his opinion and move on. Thanks. Ive not hated Floyd once on this thread, on the contrary i have praised him. Ive hinted that Floyd could do better against Sergio than Floyd thinks he might do, but wondering whether Floyds zero will hold him back from reaching for the stars in the tail end of his career.

u can if you want because when you get down to it they're 2 different people with different careers. only the opponents are similar so what. he can say he thinks floyds win over oscar was crap and mannies wasnt because of the circumstances. that doesn't mean hes not objective. your just mad he doesn't agree with you. if you were objective you'd respect his opinion and move on. No, I'm not mad........This is a boxing forum, that's it. So you think it's okay and objective to talk s**T abotu one guy for doing something, but then to turn a blind eye to the guy you like doing the exact same thing???? Okay, your opinion, I can't change your mind. Lets move on.....

No, I'm being objective in pointing out the flaws of both and the great things both have done. All I was saying the whole time is that you can't talk s**t about a guy you dislike for doing something, but then turn a blind eye when the guy you like does something similar. I understand HUGH GRANT has a different opinion, but that doesn't mean his opinion on certain matters is bulls**t. For instance, Pac is the GOAT, but no one thinks Sugar Ray Leonard is the GOAT??? He said that, and it's relative to why people shouldn't take him serious. Both Manny and Floyd are ATG's, I am a fan of Floyd. I respect Manny as an ATG, one of the top two from this era, and one of the Top 30 fighters ever. Saying things like "Get off Floyd's balls", it's just immature bulls**t homie. I'm as objective a Floyd or Manny fan as you'll see. By having s**t like "Gayweather" on your sig, you prove your worth to an objective conversation about Floyd is NOTHING. Like I said both are great fighters. You have to be consistent with boxers, you can't trash one and not trash the other for the same thing. u can if you want because when you get down to it they're 2 different people with different careers. only the opponents are similar so what. he can say he thinks floyds win over oscar was crap and mannies wasnt because of the circumstances. that doesn't mean hes not objective. your just mad he doesn't agree with you. if you were objective you'd respect his opinion and move on.

just your opinion not a fact get over it. i say pac deserves more credit because he is a smaller man and came up from a much smaller division and beat them much better and he was the first EVER to do that. so where is your supposed great objectivity on that? Good for Pac for being small and going up in weight, good for him. He's not that much smaller than Floyd, remember that photo chart of both Manny and Floyd at the same ages??? The size thing is really played out at this point. He went up in weight and won titles in 8 weight classes, that's part of what makes Pac one of the Top 2 fighters in this era, and one of the Top 30 fighters of all-time. If you beat someone first and when the fight was clearly a better fight going in, than yes.....you deserve more credit than the guy who beat him after you. Pac deserves more credit for beating Cotto, because he did it first.

He should beat Sergio at 154, it'd be even better at 160, Ive always said that. Those would be great wins. But I can already hear the whole "He should have beat him at 160" if he beats him at 154. I answered your question about that awhile ago. Not a Floyd fanatic, a realist. Floyd deserves more credit for De La Hoya, Hatton, and Mosley. Why??? Because he did it first and they were CLEARLY better fights going in when Floyd them. Pac deserves more credit for Cotto. Why??? Because he did it first. You are still the same non objective poster, and the same clown that said Pac is the GOAT, and that no one thinks Ray Leonard is the GOAT. And you're still the same guy that Red K'd me in revenge because I said you take a swipe at Floyd in almost every single post that you wrtie on here. You can't escape that. Pac and Floyd are both ATG's. I'm a fan of Floyd, I hate some of the fights he's done, Bruseles and Mitchell for example. I'm not a fan of Manny Pacquiao, but I respect him as an ATG fighter and one of the two best in his era, and one of the Top 30 fighters of all-time. And I hate some of the fights he's done, Margarito-Mosley-Marquez in 11' at 144 for example. I see greatness in both, you can't, I feel sorry for you. just your opinion not a fact get over it. i say pac deserves more credit because he is a smaller man and came up from a much smaller division and beat them much better and he was the first EVER to do that. so where is your supposed great objectivity on that?

Hugh Grant was exposed as a troll years ago....

My original thread was only trying to make Floyd be the best he can be, yet you come across so defensive. SSM was the WW champ so of course Floyd has to fight him without any special bravery medals if Floyd is a WW. But SSM lost 5 times so wasnt going to be favourite against Floyd. SSM was expected to test FLoyd of course, cos Floyd isnt seen as some kind of superman. If you arent going to answer my questions, dont reply back to me. There is nothing wrong with this thread, its not a troll thread, your troll radar is off course. Floyds isnt expected to win against Pac. He is seen as favourite against Pac by many, but the fact that it is a competive fight that anything could potentially happen that is what makes it intriguing. If floyd was expected to blow Pac away then the interest in the fight wouldnt be what it is. Pacs the best fighter Floyd would have fought anyway so its going in the right direction for Floyd for sure. Floyd is expected to win against pac, thats a plain fact and not a guessing game. Check any of the odds which were established with people willing to put their money on it. Floyd fought Mosley after Pac's team requested Mosley to fight at a 144 catchweight to give an advantage to Pac and after Mosley agreed they ignored it. Pac never fought the best welterweight while he was a welterweight. Floyd has, twice.

so what dude u think you're objective or something. you're totally biased for mayweather. if you were objective at all you'd understand the guy has a different opinion then you. doesn't matter if you think hes wrong u don't decide what means what in boxing. u got your opinion thats it. get off mayweathers balls. No, I'm being objective in pointing out the flaws of both and the great things both have done. All I was saying the whole time is that you can't talk s**t about a guy you dislike for doing something, but then turn a blind eye when the guy you like does something similar. I understand HUGH GRANT has a different opinion, but that doesn't mean his opinion on certain matters is bulls**t. For instance, Pac is the GOAT, but no one thinks Sugar Ray Leonard is the GOAT??? He said that, and it's relative to why people shouldn't take him serious. Both Manny and Floyd are ATG's, I am a fan of Floyd. I respect Manny as an ATG, one of the top two from this era, and one of the Top 30 fighters ever. Saying things like "Get off Floyd's balls", it's just immature bulls**t homie. I'm as objective a Floyd or Manny fan as you'll see. By having s**t like "Gayweather" on your sig, you prove your worth to an objective conversation about Floyd is NOTHING. Like I said both are great fighters. You have to be consistent with boxers, you can't trash one and not trash the other for the same thing.

4corners you are being a floyd fanatic again by talking about how much credit Pac or Floyd should be getting for common opponents. Of course you want Floyd to get more credit for every win, being the floyd fan you are. But is that zero stopping Floyd from reaching his full potential, why do u keep drifting off topic? He could beat Sergio at 154 perhaps. Hed get more credit for beating Sergio at 160. Will the fear of losing the zero stop him from 160? corey spinks wasn't scared off jermain taylor and he was a bigger middleweight on a better winning streak. does floyd have the heart that corey has? doubt it.

You thought Oscar was going to win??? Roach admitted Oscar was done at 147 and couldn't fight there anymore, but it was a great win. But Floyd beating Oscar at 154, crap win. Gotcha.... Floyd beating Oscar at 154 was far far far better than Pac beating him at 145, it's not even close. So Floyd beating a past prime-still good Cotto at 154 isn't a good win, but Pac beating a past prime-still good Cotto as well at 145 was a great win??? You're not objective, you're f**king delusional. Floyd damaged Hatton and KO'd him into the ring post, I guess we shouldn't give Pac credit for beating Hatton now. But nope, you give him credit for that win, and rightfully so, but then say Cotto is damaged after Pac beat him in 09'. But nope, he wasn't damaged after Margarito beat him, only after Pac did. Gotcha...... In that case, Ali shouldn't credit for beating Joe Frazier twice, because Foreman "damaged him".......And Ali shouldn't get credit for beating Patterson, because Liston "damaged him"......Get the f**k outta here, it's so hard to not just tell you how I really feel, because I don't want to get banned from here. I'm trying to be a little nice and kind to you man, but it's hard with the s**t you spit on here, because honestly you sound delusional. And Margarito wasn't damaged after Shane KO'd him......And Shane was a bad fight when Floyd fought him, but a good fight when Manny did......And Pac fighting JMM at 144 was a good fight, but Floyd whupping him there was a cherry pick...... YOU'RE NOT OBJECTIVE, YOU'RE A DOUBLE STANDARD AT IT'S FINEST. You are still the same clown that said Pac is the GOAT and that no one thinks Ray Leonard was the GOAT. And you're still the same guy that Red K'd me in revenge because I pointed out that you take a swipe at Floyd in almost every single post you do. so what dude u think you're objective or something. you're totally biased for mayweather. if you were objective at all you'd understand the guy has a different opinion then you. doesn't matter if you think hes wrong u don't decide what means what in boxing. u got your opinion thats it. get off mayweathers balls.

You're stomping Hugh Grant's as.s like crazy..:spank: I'm starting the think he likes it. no hes not the other guy is making perfect sense. you're a floyd homer certified bum licker cheer leading from the side lines

4corners you are being a floyd fanatic again by talking about how much credit Pac or Floyd should be getting for common opponents. Of course you want Floyd to get more credit for every win, being the floyd fan you are. But is that zero stopping Floyd from reaching his full potential, why do u keep drifting off topic? He could beat Sergio at 154 perhaps. Hed get more credit for beating Sergio at 160. Will the fear of losing the zero stop him from 160? So manny lost his "0" at the begining of his career to a bunch of nobodies....was that his full potential? Just curious....

My logic is flexible. Im talking about whether Floyds zero is holding him back from certain challenges that will enhance his legacy that is all. Is that zero stopping him from taking fights that he should take. Hes not the FOTD so hasnt he got something to prove? I cant pick on Pac, as not too long ago he was underdog against DLH so that was a big fight and on the basis of that fight he has been favourite against everyone. Pac beating the Cottos of this world are the icing on the cake as these are names Floyd ducked and Floyd probably hasnt fought anyone as good as Cotto. So dont have a go at Pac now just cos he was the favourite. People are playing catch up with pac anyway, so he can do as he pleases for now. it already happened in 2007 5 years ago. its done that's why hes called a cherry-picking sucker and coward on national tv. yes history will repeat

Dang, 4corners....this battle was EPIC!!! LOL 4cornerskid by tko in the 6th...

I'm done with this clown, seriously. Conversating with HUGH GRANT defeats the purpose of even conversating with someone in the first place. It's POINTLESS.

4corners you are being a floyd fanatic again by talking about how much credit Pac or Floyd should be getting for common opponents. Of course you want Floyd to get more credit for every win, being the floyd fan you are. But is that zero stopping Floyd from reaching his full potential, why do u keep drifting off topic? He could beat Sergio at 154 perhaps. Hed get more credit for beating Sergio at 160. Will the fear of losing the zero stop him from 160? He should beat Sergio at 154, it'd be even better at 160, Ive always said that. Those would be great wins. But I can already hear the whole "He should have beat him at 160" if he beats him at 154. I answered your question about that awhile ago. Not a Floyd fanatic, a realist. Floyd deserves more credit for De La Hoya, Hatton, and Mosley. Why??? Because he did it first and they were CLEARLY better fights going in when Floyd them. Pac deserves more credit for Cotto. Why??? Because he did it first. You are still the same non objective poster, and the same clown that said Pac is the GOAT, and that no one thinks Ray Leonard is the GOAT. And you're still the same guy that Red K'd me in revenge because I said you take a swipe at Floyd in almost every single post that you wrtie on here. You can't escape that. Pac and Floyd are both ATG's. I'm a fan of Floyd, I hate some of the fights he's done, Bruseles and Mitchell for example. I'm not a fan of Manny Pacquiao, but I respect him as an ATG fighter and one of the two best in his era, and one of the Top 30 fighters of all-time. And I hate some of the fights he's done, Margarito-Mosley-Marquez in 11' at 144 for example. I see greatness in both, you can't, I feel sorry for you.

Why does he have to go to 160 to reach his full potential? He is pretty much maxxed out at 147 as it is. Hes a small welterweight. If he can beat Sergio at 160 but doesnt attempt it, he is shortchanging himself. Not saying he can beat him though of course.

You thought Oscar was going to win??? Floyd beating Oscar at 154 was far far far better than Pac beating him at 145, it's not even close. So Floyd beating a past prime-still good Cotto at 154 isn't a good win, but Pac beating a past prime-still good Cotto as well at 145 was a great win??? You're not objective, you're f**king delusional. Floyd damaged Hatton and KO'd him into the ring post, I guess we shouldn't give Pac credit for beating Hatton now. But nope, you give him credit for that win, and rightfully so, but then say Cotto is damaged after Pac beat him in 09'. But nope, he wasn't damaged after Margarito beat him, only after Pac did. Gotcha...... And Margarito wasn't damaged after Shane KO'd him......And Shane was a bad fight when Floyd fought him, but a good fight when Manny did......And Pac fighting JMM at 144 was a good fight, but Floyd whupping him there was a cherry pick...... YOU'RE NOT OBJECTIVE, YOU'RE A DOUBLE STANDARD AT IT'S FINEST. You are still the same clown that said Pac is the GOAT and that no one thinks Ray Leonard was the GOAT. And you're still the same guy that Red K'd me in revenge because I pointed out that you take a swipe at Floyd in almost every single post you do. 4corners you are being a floyd fanatic again by talking about how much credit Pac or Floyd should be getting for common opponents. Of course you want Floyd to get more credit for every win, being the floyd fan you are. But is that zero stopping Floyd from reaching his full potential, why do u keep drifting off topic? He could beat Sergio at 154 perhaps. Hed get more credit for beating Sergio at 160. Will the fear of losing the zero stop him from 160?