Mayweather has to be the greatest cherrypicker ever 12 champions defeated in a row

It is true he has fought very, very good opposition but not the very best out there. ie Prime Pacman, or Cotto around 2006-07 and Margarito around the same time. There should have been a Mayweather-Pacquiao trilogy by now.

Only idiots think floyd dosnt cherry pick all his opponents since his comeback. he admitted it himself, why cant floyd fans just accept the fact hes an average fighter with a good cherry picking team behind him, just like broner. :nonono: :nonono:

I just googled. BLH and Espn had it 117-111 for Mosley. LA Times RBR had it 118-110 for Mosley. There were some for Mora, but more for Mosley and wider. Watch the fight and draw your own conclusions...

Waiting for Floyd fans to explain how Khan isn't a cherrypick Floyd hasn't signed the contract. He's ducking Khan, wtf are you saying.

Waiting for Floyd fans to explain how Khan isn't a cherrypick

Only idiots think floyd dosnt cherry pick all his opponents since his comeback. he admitted it himself, why cant floyd fans just accept the fact hes an average fighter with a good cherry picking team behind him, just like broner. Tyson fought bums, so what's your point.

Why are people laughing at the opponents? Those fighters were all top fighters in their division, people calling them bums etc don't know what they're talking about.

Name 1 fighter from 140-154 that would go thru Floyds last 10 opponets undefeated.

He's a great fighter but he's an even better cherry picker. This acutally sums it up very well. Mayweather does just enough to maintain his status on top but doesn't go out of his way to impress his critics. Mayweather seems to treat boxing like a business and I can't say I blame him after observing the negative way a large portion of boxers are treated when they no longer hold entertainment value to promoters or their tempermental fans.

1. According to who? I'm guessing this is your opinion? He is the Ring champ in both 147 and 154. He earned it according to The Ring's rules. http://r ingtv.craveonline.com/ratings/welterweight 2. You think a win over a non top 10 ranked fighter coming off a loss is good for a so called ATG coming off a loss? Rios is a very mediocre fighter and was only chosen for fans like you to be impressed by it. I'd have been impressed if he beat Alvarado, who was not top 10 at 147 but at least was coming off a win. RING belt means nothing in the long run. It's a glorified WBC Diamond belt...pretty much the same criteria. I see anyone who isn't a lineal champ but has a belt as a titleholder. As for number 2, any fighter coming up in weight shouldn't have a ranking in his new weight class, so yes Rios had no ranking there. I'm not sure why you've put so much weight on this. The way Pacquiao won this, and the fighter himself, was a good win for me given Pacquiao was coming off a KO loss. Obviously, if Mayweather fought Rios it would be a terrible fight as Mayweather is top of the sport. If Mayweather was coming off a KO loss, Id think its a good fight. I seem to have a different view than you, as I don't hold Pacquiao and Mayweather to the same standard, given their positions in the sport. It's not as if Pacquiao is back at the top just yet..

Cotto, a fighter revered on here it seems, has beaten one fighter who was a current champion in his entire career. Floyd's beaten four current champions in his last five fights. Now that is sad. That statement was not a dig at Cotto, but the truth. Much respect for his accomplishments. No one ever mentions that, but Cotto is a grand champion who takes on all comers(and loses), but never beats the current champion for his belt. Except, Yuri Foreman. Oh how the so-called elite accomplishments pale in comparison. As for Mayweather, I hope he keeps cherry-picking opponents. One day, Bob might let FMJ cherry pick Manny. What a day that will be. After he wins, I am sure it will be screamed to the heavens that FMJ tricked us all again. What a amazing magician FMJ his. The master of illusion. No substance at all.:poke: LOL

1. According to who? I'm guessing this is your opinion? He is the Ring champ in both 147 and 154. He earned it according to The Ring's rules. http://r ingtv.craveonline.com/ratings/welterweight 2. You think a win over a non top 10 ranked fighter coming off a loss is good for a so called ATG coming off a loss? Rios is a very mediocre fighter and was only chosen for fans like you to be impressed by it. I'd have been impressed if he beat Alvarado, who was not top 10 at 147 but at least was coming off a win. Huh, apparently that was under Ring's laughable new rules. He was promoted to champ after Guerrero?! That's the guy without a real top 10 welter win, and last "legit" title at 130, vs Klassen http://******.craveonline.com/blog/178797-ring-ratings-update-mayweather-is-ring-welterweight-champ

Only idiots think floyd dosnt cherry pick all his opponents since his comeback. he admitted it himself, why cant floyd fans just accept the fact hes an average fighter with a good cherry picking team behind him, just like broner.

1. Mayweather is a titleholder at 147, and the lineal champ at 154. 2. As for your second paragraph, you want to hold Pacquiao and Mayweather to the same standards then? I thought the Rios win was good for someone coming off a KO loss. But I guess we have different views if you want him on the same pedestal as Mayweather. 1. According to who? I'm guessing this is your opinion? He is the Ring champ in both 147 and 154. He earned it according to The Ring's rules. http://r ingtv.craveonline.com/ratings/welterweight 2. You think a win over a non top 10 ranked fighter coming off a loss is good for a so called ATG coming off a loss? Rios is a very mediocre fighter and was only chosen for fans like you to be impressed by it. I'd have been impressed if he beat Alvarado, who was not top 10 at 147 but at least was coming off a win.

A lot of writers do not cover the WBO as a world title, such as those from Yahoo sports. It has a standing as a world title, but not as equal as the other three. If someone has unified the WBA/WBC/IBF, you'll probably find a ton of writers will count this as undisputed. Even if you see this another way, as many do including yourself, it's hard to call something a legit world title if its not globally recognised. As much as I support many things the IBF do and the people it has, it also suffers the same, but on a much smaller scale than the WBO. I personally only see three world titles - the Super WBA, the WBC and IBF titles, and only 1 world champion in the lineal champion per division, if there is one. I have no problem with people recognising WBO. As for the Hall of Fame question, I see your point. But The WBHOF has prevented it's bigger brother from reform. It's HOF that recognises titles, but because of competition, they are unable to reform. I hated the introduction of the WBHOF, but I won't question its standing in the boxing world, even if its big brother gets more coverage. Maybe we'll have to agree to disagree :D Okay, newer titles take time to gain acceptance and the WBO is well past that point IMO. The IBF even more so, even if not recognized in Japan till recently. The WBA is probably the worst behaved, despite being the oldest. There's always holdovers who won't recognize WBO for historical reasons or whatever, but the important thing is it's recognized by the other 3 as a peer. I couldn't even find the WBHOF class on 2012 on google. Along the way found Florida, Connecticut, Minnesota HOF class of 2012, but no WBHOF. Definitely not on the same level

Floyd needs to grow some balls and fight the best.. http://www.thedirty.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/11.jpg http://allhiphop.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/floyd-mayweather-curtis-50-cent-jackson-shantel-fiance-the-jasmine-brand.jpg?w=470&h=350

TBH I thought Shane got a gift by getting a draw...I thought he lost and at one stage thought if Mora put a bit more on his punches, he could have done some damage. I just googled. BLH and Espn had it 117-111 for Mosley. LA Times RBR had it 118-110 for Mosley. There were some for Mora, but more for Mosley and wider.

Well it's a fact that Floyd doesn't really get the credit he deserves. He is forcefully the champ in two different weight classes, as well as #1 P4P, his status was forcefully achieved by him. But trust me, journalists would love nothing more than to replace Mayweather with a fighter who beat mediocre big names. It happened with Pac when he beat shot versions of DLH, Mosley, Margarito, and good wins against Hatton, Cotto and Clottey. Pacquiao got way more credit for a similarly identical resume. Pacquiao is 'back" by beating Brandon Rios at 147 where he wasn't ranked in the top 10 and was coming off a loss. Mayweather on the other hand, would get insulted for fighting Maidana who is ranked in the top 10 at 147 and just defeated a champion to earn his WBA title, and just momentarily got rid of a big mouth that people hated and he was underdog against. Mayweather is a titleholder at 147, and the lineal champ at 154. As for your second paragraph, you want to hold Pacquiao and Mayweather to the same standards then? I thought the Rios win was good for someone coming off a KO loss. But I guess we have different views if you want him on the same pedestal as Mayweather.

Well it's a fact that Floyd doesn't really get the credit he deserves. He is forcefully the champ in two different weight classes, as well as #1 P4P, his status was forcefully achieved by him. But trust me, journalists would love nothing more than to replace Mayweather with a fighter who beat mediocre big names. It happened with Pac when he beat shot versions of DLH, Mosley, Margarito, and good wins against Hatton, Cotto and Clottey. Pacquiao got way more credit for a similarly identical resume. Pacquiao is 'back" by beating Brandon Rios at 147 where he wasn't ranked in the top 10 and was coming off a loss. Mayweather on the other hand, would get insulted for fighting Maidana who is ranked in the top 10 at 147 and just defeated a champion to earn his WBA title, and just momentarily got rid of a big mouth that people hated and he was underdog against.

So who are the recent WBHOF inductees? Only IBHOF inductions are publicized. How did it gain so much legitimacy if it was a vanity project from 1980 with no permanent site? It's not like another one was needed. More belts are not needed either, but they have a reason, the sanctioning fees. No HOF induction fee How's the WBO not as recognized? It wasn't, but it's on equal standing in the US and Europe. We're not talking Japan. Like you said, they just recognized the IBF. It meets the basic criteria: you win a WBO belt, you get removed from all the other rankings. They don't do that for IBO and the fringe titles. A lot of writers do not cover the WBO as a world title, such as those from Yahoo sports. It has a standing as a world title, but not as equal as the other three. If someone has unified the WBA/WBC/IBF, you'll probably find a ton of writers will count this as undisputed. Even if you see this another way, as many do including yourself, it's hard to call something a legit world title if its not globally recognised. As much as I support many things the IBF do and the people it has, it also suffers the same, but on a much smaller scale than the WBO. I personally only see three world titles - the Super WBA, the WBC and IBF titles, and only 1 world champion in the lineal champion per division, if there is one. I have no problem with people recognising WBO. As for the Hall of Fame question, I see your point. But The WBHOF has prevented it's bigger brother from reform. It's HOF that recognises titles, but because of competition, they are unable to reform. I hated the introduction of the WBHOF, but I won't question its standing in the boxing world, even if its big brother gets more coverage. Maybe we'll have to agree to disagree :D