Pea, Roy or Floyd?

[C.Y.]

Wait huh, we've gone from comparing Pea and Floyd to bringing in Pac and Hop? That's irrelevant to this argument. Why'd you bring it up?

And the age argument IS irrelevant, every fighter, in fact every human being ages differently and reach their primes at different ages. Mayweather was at his absolute peak at 30, a better fighter than when he was 25. Whitaker, because so much of his style was based on reflexes and pure speed, much like Ali and RJJ, peaked much earlier, in his early 20s. Age is irrelevant comparing fighters.

You can talk about longevity and yes, May beats Whitaker in that department but it helps fighting once or twice a year with modern pharmaceuticals at your disposal.

And the reason I mentioned their respective best opponents is to compare these guys fighting at their very best against the very best, it's not my fault Mayweather didn't fight a great fighter till he was 30. But it's how the best are always compared: best v best.

Funny post

[wmute]

what makes these kinds of comparisons tough for me is that whitaker's ******* addiction caused his prime to end earlier just like toney's abuse of his body by overeating and then dehydration, so many fights where he was out of shape and dehydrated, ruined their records while Floyd and RJJ were smart enough to avoid those disadvantages. on the other hand, only Pea never tested positive for PEDS. jones and whitaker had the more amazing reflexes and natural ability, and I like the poster that said Roy had the most heart

What PEDs did Mayweather and Jones test positive for?

[gamesworn]

Floyd won, but let's not act like he totally dominated Pacquiao.

He didn't. He out landed him and didn't look nearly as good as he should have against a guy with no jab and the ability to cut off the ring.

Which is why I cringe when people mention Pac as his greatest win.

Dominating prime Toney, beating prime and undefeated JCC > outpointing post KTFO Pacquiao.

Hehe, Floyd Fans. They want to feel that Mayweather schooled Pacquiao.

In fact Pacquiao won the best round in the whole fight. So many close rounds that could have gone either way. The only reason Mayweather won some of those close rounds is because he was the champion that night and Pacquiao didn't do enough to steal the rounds. Lets not forget that Pacquiao was not just fighting Mayweather there but he was fighting against the corruption in boxing (NSAC, USADA, Referee and Judge).

Back to Topic
Roy Jones career is just like Mayweather. So many fights that could have happened but it didn't. The biggest difference in their careers is Roy had better wins while Floyd had the consistency. If you consider Pernell's draw to Chavez as a win then Pernell had the best win. If not, then Roy Jones had the best wins.

They all have multiple defences in their titles so their equal here.

Roy and Pernell unified the important alphabet title at their time while Floyd didn't (missing IBF title).

ATG Wins
Pernell - Chavez* (Undefeated, Nearing Post-Prime?, Robbery) and Nelson (Prime)
Roy - Hopkins (Near Prime), Toney (Prime, Dehydrated and Unprepared? /Not Jones Fault), Tito (Shot)
Floyd - Pacquiao (Post-Prime, Corruption), DLH (Post-Prime), Marquez (Prime, 1st time in WW and Cheated on Scale/ Mayweather's Fault)

My Rankings
If we consider the Draw and Lose of Pernell to Chavez and Ramirez as wins then,
1. Pernell
2. Roy Jones Jr.
3. Mayweather

If Not,
1. Roy Jones Jr.
2. Mayweather
3. Pernell

[wmute]

Hehe, Floyd Fans. They want to feel that Mayweather schooled Pacquiao.

In fact Pacquiao won the best round in the whole fight. So many close rounds that could have gone either way. The only reason Mayweather won some of those close rounds is because he was the champion that night and Pacquiao didn't do enough to steal the rounds. Lets not forget that Pacquiao was not just fighting Mayweather there but he was fighting against the corruption in boxing (NSAC, USADA, Referee and Judge).

Back to Topic
Roy Jones career is just like Mayweather. So many fights that could have happened but it didn't. The biggest difference in their careers is Roy had better wins while Floyd had the consistency. If you consider Pernell's draw to Chavez as a win then Pernell had the best win. If not, then Roy Jones had the best wins.

They all have multiple defences in their titles so their equal here.

Roy and Pernell unified the important alphabet title at their time while Floyd didn't (missing IBF title).

ATG Wins
Pernell - Chavez* (Undefeated, Nearing Post-Prime?, Robbery) and Nelson (Prime)
Roy - Hopkins (Near Prime), Toney (Prime, Dehydrated and Unprepared? /Not Jones Fault), Tito (Shot)
Floyd - Pacquiao (Post-Prime, Corruption), DLH (Post-Prime), Marquez (Prime, 1st time in WW and Cheated on Scale/ Mayweather's Fault)

My Rankings
If we consider the Draw and Lose of Pernell to Chavez and Ramirez as wins then,
1. Pernell
2. Roy Jones Jr.
3. Mayweather

If Not,
1. Roy Jones Jr.
2. Mayweather
3. Pernell

Sometimes you can recycle the same comment.

Sure. You probably meant to write "cannot be challenged".

We are discussing fights which are important to Pea, Roy and Floyd's career. How they looked. Whether the result was fair etc. Some fights are close and debatable (Floyd-Castillo 1, Pea-Oscar). Some are so wrong they are not even debatable (Pea-JC, probably Pea-Ramirez 1 but I have not seen that one in ages). Finally, some are correct decisions, which idiots like to debate because they cannot accept the outcome, which is more common with recent fights (May-Pac). It seems neither Dan, Dazed, or me feel like dignifying your statement on the fight as a legit opinion. You will have to deal with it.

But I have to add that your comment on fighting corruption in boxing is truly hilarious. One of the "best" I ever heard in this subforum.

[gamesworn]

Sometimes you can recycle the same comment.



But I have to add that your comment on fighting corruption in boxing is truly hilarious. One of the "best" I ever heard in this subforum.

Ok Floyd won fair and square if that's what you want to believe.

There were so many divas in boxing history but Floyd took it to another level.

I don't know what's so hilarious in my corruption statement. Pacquiao before getting in the ring got sabotage by NSAC and USADA and the same time Floyd can cheat all he wants. Oh I'm pretty sure Bayless and Moretti have additional paycheck before that fight too.lol

This May-Pac fight shows how deep the corruption in boxing. Even one commissioner in NSAC resigned because of this.

For Pacquiao vs Mayweather
Did I say Pacquiao won the fight? I'm just trying to say that no one dominates in that fight. There were 8 close rounds that could have gone either way. Both fighter looks ****. This myth of Mayweather putting a masterclass on Pacquiao was funny as hell and the same time he cheated too.

Edit: Yes we cannot change the outcome of a particular fight. But if you cheated just to get that win. Then the value of that win takes a hit too. Which I think is important in ranking these 3 fighters.

[billeau2]

Ok Floyd won fair and square if that's what you want to believe.

There were so many divas in boxing history but Floyd took it to another level.

I don't know what's so hilarious in my corruption statement. Pacquiao before getting in the ring got sabotage by NSAC and USADA and the same time Floyd can cheat all he wants. Oh I'm pretty sure Bayless and Moretti have additional paycheck before that fight too.lol

This May-Pac fight shows how deep the corruption in boxing. Even one commissioner in NSAC resigned because of this.

For Pacquiao vs Mayweather
Did I say Pacquiao won the fight? I'm just trying to say that no one dominates in that fight. There were 8 close rounds that could have gone either way. Both fighter looks ****. This myth of Mayweather putting a masterclass on Pacquiao was funny as hell and the same time he cheated too.

It was said by some that if one questioned Aristotelian physics and threw something to demostrate the cocept of "drag" they were branded as a heretic by the church during medieval times...your dealing with the same level of ignorance and insecurity when holding an opinion that this fight really determined nothing and could have gone either way. Some people cannot allow this opinion to be held even though more than a few believe this.

It reminds me of the cult of Roy where anyone who questioned Roy's infallability was subject to harrasment. Then Roy got clocked and it was "well he was weight drained...." or..."well he was slowing down."

People who usually have better judgement have a need to make sure that, despite film as evidence, people do not think that this was a close fight.

[ShoulderRoll]

Whitaker vs Ramirez 1 was actually a fairly close fight. The result wasn't an atrocious robbery on the same scale that Whitaker-Chavez was.

Pernell made it tougher than it had to be due to his annoying tendency to completely stop punching for long stretches of time. This was the same thing that cost him the De La Hoya fight in my opinion.

[IronDanHamza]

Whitaker vs Ramirez 1 was actually a fairly close fight. The result wasn't an atrocious robbery on the same scale that Whitaker-Chavez was.

Pernell made it tougher than it had to be due to his annoying tendency to completely stop punching for long stretches of time. This was the same thing that cost him the De La Hoya fight in my opinion.

Yeah but what about the fact Ramirez landing basically nothing the entire fight?

Whitaker did take long spells doing little but he was still at the very least landing jabs throughout. Ramirez was landing nothing.

I struggle to give him a round. I gave Chavez some rounds.

[Scott9945]

Yeah but what about the fact Ramirez landing basically nothing the entire fight?

Whitaker did take long spells doing little but he was still at the very least landing jabs throughout. Ramirez was landing nothing.

I struggle to give him a round. I gave Chavez some rounds.

The first Whitaker-Ramirez fight was an awful decision, one of the very worst that I've ever seen. I was shocked hearing the decision while watching it live.

The Chavez fight was closer (but not close) and at least that was only a draw.

[ShoulderRoll]

Yeah but what about the fact Ramirez landing basically nothing the entire fight?

Whitaker did take long spells doing little but he was still at the very least landing jabs throughout. Ramirez was landing nothing.

I struggle to give him a round. I gave Chavez some rounds.

Whitaker won that fight. But when there is low punch output judges a lot of times lean toward the guy who is pressing forward, even if his aggression is ineffective.

Can't let that happen if you're Sweet Pea. Especially when you are so clearly superior to the other guy.