Again it’s fighter of the decade not fighter of half the decade

Pac wasn't going to budge from the ''I need to be informed 2 weeks in advance before giving blood'' stance. You will never acknowledge this because it would destroy your image of Pac. And Pac was fine with NOT FIGHTING MAY. It was May who made the fight eventually happen. Oh, just remembered, you ducked my response to your “may is older doe” lol

I'm not making excuses. I'm saying that if - IF - the fights Floyd had in the last decade matched up with the fights others had in the last decade, then it doesn't matter if he only fought for 5 of those years. Discounting a fighter for only fighting part of the decade is nonsense. All that matters is what they achieved within that decade. If you want to say that what he achieved If people don't believe Floyd should be FOTD, that should be because of what he achieved compared to what others achieved. It shouldn't be based on the faulty reasoning that he only fought for part of the decade, so must be disqualified. His achievements are limited by only fighting for half of the decade. That makes it harder for him to be FOTD. It doesn't outright disqualify him though. A lot of what your saying is correct. People make blanket statements on.both sides. Some say how can Pac be Fotd if he got koed and lost to horn? Again blanket statements. But I don't think floyd can do in 6 years with 3 of those years only fighting once a year can compete with pac and nel o who for parts of decade was competing sometimes 4,3 and 2 times a year at the very least.

Floyd s did so much less than his peers so don't make excuses. I'm not making excuses. I'm saying that if - IF - the fights Floyd had in the last decade matched up with the fights others had in the last decade, then it doesn't matter if he only fought for 5 of those years. Discounting a fighter for only fighting part of the decade is nonsense. All that matters is what they achieved within that decade. If you want to say that what he achieved in those 5 years doesn't equal what some other fighters achieved - that's a totally different discussion, and you could probably make some good points. That's just weighing up his achievements from 2010-2019 against the achievements of others from 2010-2019, which is what we should be doing. If people don't believe Floyd should be FOTD, that should be because of what he achieved compared to what others achieved. It shouldn't be based on the faulty reasoning that he only fought for part of the decade, so must be disqualified. His achievements are limited by only fighting for half of the decade. That makes it harder for him to be FOTD. It doesn't outright disqualify him though.

What about if they decided to work out who the fighter of the century was? "Oh no, you didn't fight for all of 1900-1999, you don't qualify." Floyd s did so much less than his peers so don't make excuses. Trying to be Fotd for having 2 big names in cv, but not great wins? Pac s too small, too much wear and tear. Bradley and horn beat pac and they aren't great wins so how can floyds automatically be? Pac sacrificed his body to be great, so.many fughts. If you then come along and beat pac it don't automatically make it a great win, for bradley, horn or floyd. Jmm win over pac was a great win. Everyone else fights 10 years so why would Floyd think it's good idea to fight 6 years. Nobody who wants to be fighter of century fights 100 years though. So they are all as qualified as each other. Anyone who really wanted to be Fotd would keep diary clear to try fight 10 years or achieve as much as their peers in that time frame. No evidence of Floyd having Fotd worthy resume

What about if they decided to work out who the fighter of the century was? "Oh no, you didn't fight for all of 1900-1999, you don't qualify."

Since when did that time frame became similar? How about you go for a minute over an hour. It's the exact same logic. If someone doesn't fight for a full year, how can they be fighter of the year? If someone doesn't fight for a full decade, how can they be fighter of the decade? By your reasoning, only people who have fights in November or December can win fighter of the year.

Pac wasn't going to budge from the ''I need to be informed 2 weeks in advance before giving blood'' stance. You will never acknowledge this because it would destroy your image of Pac. And Pac was fine with NOT FIGHTING MAY. It was May who made the fight eventually happen. It’s clear now you weren’t here before. Pac agreed to drug testing Way back in 2010. But you’re not reading the news. Like i said why did floyd’s “i’ll never work with arum disappeared?” And why he wouldn’t renegotiate after the first negotiation and put all the road blocks? Pac sent koncz to negotiate as well Where was he when Hbo was summoning them? He was busy taking long vacations. You’re not even answering my questions. Yes i admit team pac ruined the first negotiation with their 14 day cut off but what about the years after that? Nah they of course floyd already wanted the fight 6 years later. Boohoo

So if a fighter wins massive fights in January, March and June, then doesn't fight for the rest of the year - they can't win FOTY? Does a fighter have to fight in December to win FOTY? Now apply those same arguments to FOTD, and you will see that it makes no sense to disallow Floyd from consideration. Since when did that time frame became similar? How about you go for a minute over an hour.

Thanks. Have a great upcoming BDay :) Thank you :luvbed:

Show me :dunno: Let's see what you're talking about Now before you say ''do it yourself'' or ''don't be a troll'' Take a few minutes and articulate what you are trying to convey. Assume I'm an idiot and need to see both of their opponents names in front of me....... When was the last time Floyd beat a fighter the caliber of Thurman or Bradley? In their weight class **

I picked Pac I believe. Feel free to look it up. How much weight would Pac demand Nelo lose before accepting the challenge ? I'm guessing 145 :lol1: I guess May gets no credit for beating Pac because of that ''injury'', yes ? In any event, you didn't answer the question; Does 2 truly great wins and no losses in 5 yrs > 1 very good win, a couple of bad losses and a robbery over 10 years ?!?!?!? Very simple Y/N question. Explaining your answer not required Look at their resumes. Pacquiao fought better competition. :omfg:

He found time to beat Pac and Nelo though :( Those wins > anything Pac did this decade. But Pac filled up his decade with shabby opponents (when he wasn't getting robbed and slept). So the question remains, can 2 great wins in say 2 years, while never losing Be better than what Pac did in 10 years ? Catchweight at 152** don't mention that, why? Who did you pick between Pac Thurman? Or should I look up your posts ?

Plus Floyd retired like 5 times then fought 2 MMA fighters. Pacquiao is fighting real fighters and Floyd's fighting anime characters from Japan.

It has to be Pac. How many of you thought Thurman was going to beat him?

Can't argue with most of this byut the ''May put off fighting 'prime' Pac''....May is older than Pac. And if you fail to believe in FACTS (it was Pac who WAS afraid of needles, NOT May). And if you believe that, then why wasn't he afraid of SCHEDULED needles ??? He was all gung-hoE when there was a cut off, but not RANDOM. Pls explain that Can’t believe you’re one on the guys who says “may is older doe” thought you’re better than that. Every fighter every style ages differently. Pac’s offensive style alone gives him a higher wear and tear rate than Floyd. His style is a young man’s game. It’s like comparing a jumpshooter to a dunker in basketball ofcourse the dunker will lose his legs first while the shooter can last longer given he gets lesser contact every game. a 40 year old lewis will be better than a 38 year old tyson. Or 47 yr old hopkins be better than a 40 year old roy jones. History has proven that offensive style fighters ages faster than defensive ones and there’s a long list for that. Mayweather’s style when he rose into weightclasses became conservative.. at 38 he still fights the same way he did when he was 30, compare the oscar fight to his fight with canelo or maidana 2. while pac at 36 ain’t even close to his prime version. Pac already agreed shortly after the first negotiation about the drug test. Tell me why it can’t be renegotiated like every other fight?? Like I said he sent koncz to floyd’s camp, if you’re avoiding a fight why would you do that.. every post interview floyd was still like “let him agree with the test” and every commentators were “were pretty sure it’s not about the test anymore”. Or “he has marquez problems”. That’s just ridiculous. Or “i’ll never work with arum” Floyd’s demands all went out of the window when the time was right. And that was 6 years later. Floyd beat a past prime pac. And if pac won i’d say the same too.

So if a fighter wins massive fights in January, March and June, then doesn't fight for the rest of the year - they can't win FOTY? Does a fighter have to fight in December to win FOTY? Now apply those same arguments to FOTD, and you will see that it makes no sense to disallow Floyd from consideration.

I will break this down in numbers (10+10+10+10+10)/10 = 5 (2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2)/10 =2 Floyd accomplished more in the first half of the decade than his competitors. People know this as were not putting active journeymen up for the award.

Ask why he don’t fight margarito he said he has 5 losses but then he proceeded to fight baldomir who has like 12 losses at that time Baldomir was the reigning lineal, Ring Magazine, and WBC welterweight champion of the world coming off back to back wins over Arturo Gatti and Zab Judah when Floyd Mayweather fought him. Margarito was never lineal champion of anything. He had one shot at a lineal title and Shane Mosley knocked him out.

the fact that Mayweather achieved more in 5 years, than Pacquiao achieved in 10 years... has shoved a huge truckload of sand up some pac-gina's lol

The first time I said this it went unnoticed so I'll try again. Michael Jordan played 6 and a half seasons in the 90s. Are we not gonna say he's the best NBA player of the 90s or give it to Patrick Ewing who played the entire 90s? I don't follow basketball, but the question is simple... what player achieved the most in the 90's... ? if Jordan achieved more, then it does not matter how long he played