Floyd is P4P #2 ever after SRR?

[Sugar Adam Ali]

The person who said that (Scott) didn't say anything about Mayweather so why would you apply it to Mayweather's opponents? This isn't a Mayweather Vs Oscar thread. All Scott was saying was Whitaker was well passed his best which he was.

I think Shane showed he could still punch pretty hard when he fought Floyd.

The difference is Floyd did what he was supposed to do and dominated a passed prime Shane whereas Oscar struggled badly with a passed prime Whitaker.

Who looked to be a better fighter,, pernel or shane,,, who looked like a p4p guy,,,
Who had beaten pernel??? remind me again who he clearly lost to before oscar,,, We all know that shane had lost many times

did you put tarver #1 p4p or top 3 when he iced roy jones who was the #1 fighter in the world,,,, if you did then you get blinded by one match,,
If khan somehow decisions mayweather, are you putting khan top 3 p4p

[Sugar Adam Ali]

I know why you made that point I was just wanting to make the point I was making in general because it is something I see all the time in these kinds of arguments.

Anyway to your post i'd say that one problem is the capacity for great fighters to make other fighters look very ordinary. Mayweather made Mosley look very ordinary even though Mosley looked very good indeed in his previous fight smashing Margarito to bits. Unless really clear evidence to the contrary (evidence relating to their preparation and such like) I tend to give the fighters the benefit of the doubt and therefore if Mosley looked bad against Mayweather it was because Mayweather is that good not because Mosley was bad.

I think I do agree though that the version of Whitaker that De la Hoya beat was better than the version of Mosley that Mayweather beat. Too often in these debates there is an all or nothing mentality, a fighter is either in his prime and therefore at his best or is past his prime and therefore is nothing much at all.

did you see mosely vs mora or manny or canelo,,, or even when he got beat by forrest twice, winky twice, cotto,,,

people give huge credit to floyd for the shane win,, it was a good win, big fight that people had wanted to see for years but to think it was some career legacy defining win is laughable,,,
Mosely had no legs,, didnt have any for about 5 years,, he got lucky that margs is a come forward punching bag, and shane still had power, but you basically needed to be a margs or mayorga to make shane look good,, as soon as he fought someone that could box, he got beat,, everytime,, forrest twice, winky twice, cotto, floyd, etc.... Outboxing an old shane is not that huge of an accomplishment considering he had been outboxed over half a dozen times prior to floyd doing it,,,

[IronDanHamza]

Who looked to be a better fighter,, pernel or shane,,, who looked like a p4p guy,,,
Who had beaten pernel??? remind me again who he clearly lost to before oscar,,, We all know that shane had lost many times

did you put tarver #1 p4p or top 3 when he iced roy jones who was the #1 fighter in the world,,,, if you did then you get blinded by one match,,
If khan somehow decisions mayweather, are you putting khan top 3 p4p

I think Floyd would have made that version of Whitaker look a lot worse than Oscar could manage.

That said, Mosley wasn't a good a win, although more people wanted to see it.

You seem to give credit for one, and none for the other.

I didn't but I and everyone else had him in the P4P list. And Khan would likely feature too if he dominated and stopped Mayweather.

If you destroy a Top P4P ranked guy and stop them then chances are you're going to be ranked in the Top P4P ranks.

[Humean]

did you see mosely vs mora or manny or canelo,,, or even when he got beat by forrest twice, winky twice, cotto,,,

people give huge credit to floyd for the shane win,, it was a good win, big fight that people had wanted to see for years but to think it was some career legacy defining win is laughable,,,
Mosely had no legs,, didnt have any for about 5 years,, he got lucky that margs is a come forward punching bag, and shane still had power, but you basically needed to be a margs or mayorga to make shane look good,, as soon as he fought someone that could box, he got beat,, everytime,, forrest twice, winky twice, cotto, floyd, etc.... Outboxing an old shane is not that huge of an accomplishment considering he had been outboxed over half a dozen times prior to floyd doing it,,,

I am not maintaining that the Mosley win was something truly great but can we ignore that Mosley smashed Margarito up pretty bad in his previous fight knocked out Mayorga in the previous fight to that, before that lost a good battle with Cotto, two Vargas wins? Losing to Forrest twice and Winky Wright twice is not evidence of truly lacking quality to me as these were really high quality fighters when Mosley fought them. Does anyone look good fighting Mora? Mora is the classic spoiler who makes everyone look bad. Pacquiao is Pacquiao hardly a disgrace getting smashed up badly by him. All in all it was a good win for Mayweather, he dominated a guy who was still of high quality although not of his highest quality. Mayweather outboxed him better than anyone else did. Now if Mayweather had beaten and dominated an earlier version of Mosley then that would have been a great win.

[joseph5620]

did you see mosely vs mora or manny or canelo,,, or even when he got beat by forrest twice, winky twice, cotto,,,

people give huge credit to floyd for the shane win,, it was a good win, big fight that people had wanted to see for years but to think it was some career legacy defining win is laughable,,,
Mosely had no legs,, didnt have any for about 5 years,, he got lucky that margs is a come forward punching bag, and shane still had power, but you basically needed to be a margs or mayorga to make shane look good,, as soon as he fought someone that could box, he got beat,, everytime,, forrest twice, winky twice, cotto, floyd, etc.... Outboxing an old shane is not that huge of an accomplishment considering he had been outboxed over half a dozen times prior to floyd doing it,,,

As I said before, go back and look at Whitaker's three fights before Oscar. Look at Mosley's three fights before Mayweather. After that, honestly and objectively tell me who looked better.

I'm not talking about resumes or careers. But who looked better at this stage.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

And? He still didn't fight him.

And Ottke did fight the great Robin Reid and a lot of the other bums than Calzaghe defending his title against.

Pavlik was a fight that the world wanted to see when Calzaghe beat Hopkins. Of course he didn't fight him.

Maybe had pavlik not got blown out of the water by hopkins, or joe hadnt reitred we would have gotten to see this fight,, there was about a less than a year window when this fight could have actually happened, and that was after joe beat hopkins,,,, and then joe took the payday vs old roy,,,

Johnson another fight people wanted, he pulled out "injured" twice.

But he fought everyone!

Calzaghe didn't fight everyone. Not atleast by your standard on Mayweather.

When was there a huge demand to fight,,, i honestly dont remember much demand for joe vs johnson, was it early 2000s,, i dont remember much talk about a fight between them, and johnson only hit big after 04 when he beat jones and tarver,, by the way did you have johnson top 3 p4p after beating tarver and jones,, clearly you must have since shane was highly regarded after just one win vs margs, let alone 2 vs tarver and roy

No it wasn't a solid win.

Eubank hadn't won a legit fight years, wasn't ranked in the Top 10 at 168 and took the fight on a weeks notice. How is that a legit win?

It was considering that joe was young and untested,,, It wasnt like joe was making his 15th defense and been champ for years,, that was his first "name" opponent he had faced,, like i said its like morales 1 was a good win for danny because he was relatively untested and young

People wanted to see the Reid fight? What?

You say there was demand for the Reid fight (Laughable) so what about Mayweather-Mosley? There was huge demand for that fight.

Yet another clear double standard.

But people did,, from as far back as 97-98 when reid was champ but wouldnt fight joe,, and once joe became champ, he wouldnt fight reid but they finally made it happen years later when reid was past prime, though he did put up a good fight,, Maybe not a worldwide blockbuster of a fight, but it was a huge "domestic" fight,,, no doubt about that,, its not even arguable

So why does 130 not count for Mayweather?

Why do you keep saying "Outside of 130"?

Why outside of 130?

Floyd did better work at 130 than Calzaghe did in his entire career.

i count 130,,, i have clearly stated time and again that he had a great run at 130,, then the JLC fights, but then all went downhill from there,,, the difference between joe and floyd, is that joe started slowly and cherrypicked alot, but once he was established star at the end of his career he took the big challenges,,, Floyd started off great from 98-02 i have no complaints, but from 03 to today, and especially since he became the face of boxing, floyd has not taken the big fights or challenges,,

No, I and everyone else thought Shane was deserving a Top P4P spot after destroying a P4P ranked fighter in Margarito.

If a guy completely destroys and knocks out a Top P4P fighter whilst being the underdog of course he's going to be on the P4P list after that.

It's irrelevant because you're using one set of logic as reasoning for one fighter and then brushing it off for the next.

So tarver was p4p #3 or higher when he beat jones,, and was johnson the p4p great when he beat both tarver and jones,, You had johnson #2 or 3????

If khan decisions mayweather are you going to put him in top 5 p4p,, How about mayorga,, he beat p4p top 3 forrest by knockout,, did you have mayorga shooting up the ranks of p4p...
Im not brushing off logic, you are,, by using your logic, tarver, johnson, and mayorga would have all been top 3 or 4 p4p guys, using your exact logic,,,,

and once again,, i have asked you about 2 or 3 times,, post your p4p list that had shane #3 in spring of 2010,, I know you wont post, because it will show fighters that at the time should have been more highly ranked like serg and donaire, etc

So, everyone was wrong and ****** to have Shane that high, but, everyone was right with having Whitaker that high I assume?

Reoccurring theme here.

yeah pretty much everyone was wrong,,, Did shane look like a top 3 p4p fighter in that fight,,, ?I didnt rank him p4p before the fight because i thought he was old and shot with no legs,, only a punchers chance vs any top level boxers,,, and guess what I WAS RIGHT,, he looked nothing but old...
Just like i told everyone that dawson was damaged goods after ward fight, and everyone thought no way, it was the weight, and then boom ko1, just like i said serg is done after the murray fight,, just like i took donaire off my p4p lists vs rigo,, donaire is done at the elite level and vic pretty much proved that,,,,
Going by what other people say is about the dumbest thing you can go by,, i will go by critical thinking and judging everything independent of what the "public consensus" is..... THat is why i knew canelo isnt top level material and said floyd would win a wide UD,, and we got guys on here that still think canelo is a future great,,,
Ring ****zine tells me that broner is p4p but roman gonzalez and mikey garcia are not,,,Is that legit???

Where did I say the word "great"?

I said most had good wins prior which they did and why they were ranked at or near the top of the division.

ok, sorry, i used the word great instaed of good,,,
Put can you please name these good wins,,, berto, losing to baldomir,, etc,,, only shane had a good win,, trout was good for canelo, but it wasnt a great performance by any means,,
Basically guys like gatti and cotto and hatton were riding a wave of cherrypicks to make them look good and build them up, So the suckers think they are a legit threat,,, you know who has been on some good win streaks,,
cotto in 07, manny till 2012, tim now, etc,, williams in 07,, those guys had legit win streaks vs top guys during those years

Putting words in peoples mouths again, same thing you did with Joseph.

All I've disputed is your ridiculous view that Calzaghe challenged himself and Mayweather didn't. Which again, is absolutely ridiculous.

Here is the thing about joe and floyd,,, joe was never considered an elite fighter till the very end, and was never the main superstar let alone the biggest name in the sport,, FLoyd has been considered elite since 98 and for the past 7 years he is the face of boxing, much like oscar, srl, tyson, ali.. Joe challenged himself about as much as any guy with his skill level has,, floyd with his higher skill level and superstardom does get held to a higher standard than joe for a multitude of reasons,, The dude is p4p since 98, face of boxing since 07, yet his resume sucks big time for a guy with those credentials,, a guy like joe calzaghe doesnt possess those credentials and when compared to guys like him ie ottke,froch kessler , someone like that, joe has a really really strong resume
Now compare floyd to guys like him,, ali, srr, srl, oscar, tyson,,, his resume sucks compared to theirs except for maybe tyson who also had a weak resume after 88..

Mayweather is an ATG with a good resume, he's no where near the top ATG's but an ATG none the less.

I agree totally,, ATG, but has one of the weakest resumes for a guy of his stature and skill level,,, only roy jones' is weaker..

I think it's abundantly clear that you're highly and unfairly critical of Mayweather whilst having clear double standards and give passes to others.

im not being unfairly critical of mayweather,,, i judge him by his status in the sport,,,
WHat is his status: best fighter of his generation, most skiller, p4p #1, the biggest draw in boxing, biggest payday, etc
When judging him by those standards i stick by everything i have said,,,
We are talking about ATG #2 in this thread, so yes the standard is very high,, If you think its unfair, then sorry, Im not going to change what i base ATGs especially #2

[IronDanHamza]

Maybe had pavlik not got blown out of the water by hopkins, or joe hadnt reitred we would have gotten to see this fight,, there was about a less than a year window when this fight could have actually happened, and that was after joe beat hopkins,,,, and then joe took the payday vs old roy,,,

Perhaps your memory is short.

People wanted to see Pavlik-Calzaghe before Pavlik fought Hopkins. Calzaghe fought shot Roy Jones instead.

Again, further stating he didn't fight "everyone". And there's a long list of guys he missed.

When was there a huge demand to fight,,, i honestly dont remember much demand for joe vs johnson, was it early 2000s,, i dont remember much talk about a fight between them, and johnson only hit big after 04 when he beat jones and tarver,, by the way did you have johnson top 3 p4p after beating tarver and jones,, clearly you must have since shane was highly regarded after just one win vs margs, let alone 2 vs tarver and roy

When the fights were signed perhaps? He pulled out twice with "Injuries".

And I never said there was "huge" demand. Where did I say that? Putting words in my mouth again.

And why would I have Johnson in my Top 10 P4P for beating Jones coming off a loss?

After the Tarver win he was on the cusp of being a P4P quality guy but then he lost the rematch.

A little different from dominating and knocking out a Top P4P guy whilst being an underdog.

Bad comparison.

It was considering that joe was young and untested,,, It was like joe was making his 15th defense and been champ for years,, that was his first "name" opponent he had faced,, like i said its like morales 1 was a good win for danny because he was relatively untested and young

No, it wasn't.

Morales was in the Top 10 at 140, had had fights at 140, had won legit fights and had legit fights at 140 during that time.

Eubank wasn't in the top 10, hadn't won a legit fight in years and took the fight on a weeks notice.

Another bad comparison, just not the same.

But people did,, from as far back as 97-98 when reid was champ but wouldnt fight joe,, and once joe became champ, he wouldnt fight reid but they finally made it happen years later when reid was past prime, though he did put up a good fight,, Maybe not a worldwide blockbuster of a fight, but it was a huge "domestic" fight,,, no doubt about that,, its not even arguable

No really, it wasn't.

Decent domestic fight, at best.

At the time it happened, it wasn't a big fight at all.

i count 130,,, i have clearly stated time and again that he had a great run at 130,, then the JLC fights, but then all went downhill from there,,, the difference between joe and floyd, is that joe started slowly and cherrypicked alot, but once he was established star at the end of his career he took the big challenges,,, Floyd started off great from 98-02 i have no complaints, but from 03 to today, and especially since he became the face of boxing, floyd has not taken the big fights or challenges,,

So why do you keep saying "Other than 130"?

I don't understand why you keep acting like it doesn't exist, it does.

All Mayweather does it keep fighting top ranked fighters something Calzaghe barely did ever in his career.

So tarver was p4p #3 or higher when he beat jones,, and was johnson the p4p great when he beat both tarver and jones,, You had johnson #2 or 3????

If khan decisions mayweather are you going to put him in top 5 p4p,, How about mayorga,, he beat p4p top 3 forrest by knockout,, did you have mayorga shooting up the ranks of p4p...
Im not brushing off logic, you are,, by using your logic, tarver, johnson, and mayorga would have all been top 3 or 4 p4p guys, using your exact logic


and once again,, i have asked you about 2 or 3 times,, post your p4p list that had shane #3 in spring of 2010,, I know you wont post, because it will show fighters that at the time should have been more highly ranked like serg and donaire, etc

Already explained why they're most of those are examples.

If a fighter dominates and stops a fighter who is a Top P4P guy, as an underdog, they're going to feature on the P4P list just like Mosley deservedly did. Especially someone with the pedigree of Mosley.

I don't keep my lists but I and everyone else thought that was legit at the time.

It's already been broken down in past posts why they shouldn't have been above him.

yeah pretty much everyone was wrong,,, Did shane look like a top 3 p4p fighterin that fight,,, ?I didnt rank him p4p before the fight because i thought he was old and shot with no legs,, only a punchers chance vs any top level boxers,,, and guess what I WAS RIGHT,, he looked nothing but old...
Just like i told everyone that dawson was damaged goods after ward fight, and everyone thought no way, it was the weight, and then boom ko1, just like i said serg is done after the murray fight,, just like i took donaire off my p4p lists vs rigo,, donaire is done at the elite level and vic pretty much proved that,,,,
Going by what other people say is about the dumbest thing you can go by,, i will go by critical thinking and judging everything independent of what the "public consensus" is..... THat is why i knew canelo isnt top level material and said floyd would win a wide UD,, and we got guys on here that still think canelo is a future great,,,
Ring ****zine tells me that broner is p4p but roman gonzalez and mikey garcia are not,,,Is that legit???

You keep bringing up Ring ****zine. What does Ring ****zine have to do with this?

Again, missing my point.

You're saying everyone was wrong for Mosley. Yet, not for Whitaker?

You're using one line of thinking for Whitaker, then another for Mosley, thus my point.

You can revise history all you want but at the time Mosley was considered a Top P4P fighter and the fight was considered to be a dangerous fight and one that everyone wanted to see at that time.

Here is the thing about joe and floyd,,, joe was never considered an elite fighter till the very end, and was never the main superstar let alone the biggest name in the sport,, FLoyd has been considered elite since 98 and for the past 7 years he is the face of boxing, much like oscar, srl, tyson, ali.. Joe challenged himself about as much as any guy with his skill level has,, floyd with his higher skill level and superstardom does get held to a higher standard than joe for a multitude of reasons,, The dude is p4p since 98, face of boxing since 07, yet his resume sucks big time for a guy with those credentials,, a guy like joe calzaghe doesnt possess those credentials and when compared to guys like him ie ottke,froch kessler , someone like that, joe has a really really strong resume
Now compare floyd to guys like him,, ali, srr, srl, oscar, tyson,,, his resume sucks compared to theirs except for maybe tyson who also had a weak resume after 88..

So challenges are based off how skilled you are?

Here's what it boils down to, you said Calzaghe took more challenges than Mayweather in their careers, that is flat out wrong and laughable.

That's really all it boils down to.

im not being unfairly critical of mayweather,,, i judge him by his status in the sport,,,
WHat is his status: best fighter of his generation, most skiller, p4p #1, the biggest draw in boxing, biggest payday, etc
When judging him by those standards i stick by everything i have said,,,
We are talking about ATG #2 in this thread, so yes the standard is very high,, If you think its unfair, then sorry, Im not going to change what i base ATGs especially #2

Yeah you are.

You're saying Calzaghe challenged himself as opposed to Mayweather.

You're saying one thing is ok for one fighter and not ok for Mayweather.

That's pretty clearly unfair criticism all over this thread.

The TS said Mayweather is #2 P4P, you're not debating with the TS. Everyone you're debating with have stated Mayweather isn't close to #2 P4P so I don't know why you keep bringing that up.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

I think Floyd would have made that version of Whitaker look a lot worse than Oscar could manage.

That said, Mosley wasn't a good a win, although more people wanted to see it.

You seem to give credit for one, and none for the other.

I didn't but I and everyone else had him in the P4P list. And Khan would likely feature too if he dominated and stopped Mayweather.

If you destroy a Top P4P ranked guy and stop them then chances are you're going to be ranked in the Top P4P ranks.

I will agree that floyd would have handled that pernel better than oscar did,
As in terms of destroying a p4p guy and that makes you p4p worthy, then people are blinded by one fight,,,
Do you rank jhonny gonzalez in your p4p list,, he just destroyed an unbeaten p4p guy in 1 round,,,,
You probably dont, and why, because you know it was just one fight and gonzalez has been beaten multilpe times, and you know he isnt p4p material,, good fighter but not p4p,,, its the same with shane after his win vs margs,, good fighter, great win, but he was clearly beaten many times in his prime let alone late in his career

I am not maintaining that the Mosley win was something truly great but can we ignore that Mosley smashed Margarito up pretty bad in his previous fight knocked out Mayorga in the previous fight to that, before that lost a good battle with Cotto, two Vargas wins? Losing to Forrest twice and Winky Wright twice is not evidence of truly lacking quality to me as these were really high quality fighters when Mosley fought them. Does anyone look good fighting Mora? Mora is the classic spoiler who makes everyone look bad. Pacquiao is Pacquiao hardly a disgrace getting smashed up badly by him. All in all it was a good win for Mayweather, he dominated a guy who was still of high quality although not of his highest quality. Mayweather outboxed him better than anyone else did. Now if Mayweather had beaten and dominated an earlier version of Mosley then that would have been a great win.

i agree with alot your saying,, but the vargas wins i dont count as p4p caliber wins,,, vargas was completely shot and damaged goods,,,
ANd yes i get what your saying about the competition,, but have you ever thought that maybe winky, forrest, cotto, manny, floyd are p4p guys and shane since 02 has not been p4p caliber,,, he has had one big win vs margs since 02,, the rest or decent wins vs solid fighter like collazo and mayorga but nothing fantastic,, he got a gift in the oscar rematch,, So against top level p4p caliber fighters in his whole career, shane was 3-7 and really should be 2-8,,, have you ever thought that maybe shane is a gatekeeper for the p4p rankings

As I said before, go back and look at Whitaker's three fights before Oscar. Look at Mosley's three fights before Mayweather. After that, honestly and objectively tell me who looked better.

I'm not talking about resumes or careers. But who looked better at this stage.

WHo looked better,, pernel when he fought oscar, or shane when he fought floyd,,, Im not worried about anything else,, who looked better at fight night in the big fights

[IronDanHamza]

I will agree that floyd would have handled that pernel better than oscar did,
As in terms of destroying a p4p guy and that makes you p4p worthy, then people are blinded by one fight,,,
Do you rank jhonny gonzalez in your p4p list,, he just destroyed an unbeaten p4p guy in 1 round,,,,
You probably dont, and why, because you know it was just one fight and gonzalez has been beaten multilpe times, and you know he isnt p4p material,, good fighter but not p4p,,, its the same with shane after his win vs margs,, good fighter, great win, but he was clearly beaten many times in his prime let alone late in his career

Gonzalez doesn't have the pedigree Shane has and isn't as good as Shane was then.

And someone beating Gonazlez now would be a very good win.

Also, catching Mares cold is less impressive than domianting and stopping Margarito.

[Humean]

Eubank wasn't in the top 10, hadn't won a legit fight in years and took the fight on a weeks notice.

You say that like Eubank was some nobody. He had fought Collins two years previously in a super middleweight fight that he narrowly lost. He starts to fight at light heavyweight, has one light heavyweight fight in 1996 and another in early 1997. He was preparing for a fight at light heavyweight against another fighter when he took the Calzaghe fight at a weeks notice, he made weight and hardly looked out of shape. There is a counter balance to these claims about 'only a weeks notice' and that is that the fighter fighting the fighter who takes it on a weeks notice has been preparing, particularly with sparring and strategy, for a different opponent. Also this was Calzaghe's first world title fight and he won it very clearly. Calzaghe beat a damn good version of Eubank.