Willie Pep and Floyd Mayweather

[Benny Leonard]

Yeah, we invented the language, mate. You just took the "u"s out of everything to make it quicker to order doughnuts.

LOL

What drunk invented the language?

Silent letters, words that don't sound like they spell, WTF.


Witty bastards trying to play a trick on us.


oh well, at least we were smart enough to wear blue, not red, during the war.

[Guest]

LOL

What drunk invented the language?

Silent letters, words that don't sound like they spell, WTF.


Witty bastards trying to play a trick on us.


oh well, at least we were smart enough to wear blue, not red, during the war.

LOL, I give you that one. Though we had to give you half a chance, right?

[squealpiggy]

Can you answer me this, who has hand picked their opponents more Floyd or Calzaghe and Hatton combined??

I'm talking about 2 fighters against 1 here.

I'm not sure what Calzaghe and Hatton have to do with a discussion about Mayweather and Pep.

Fact is that Pep was a sfighter, he had an illustrious career, he was supremely skilled defensively but he was still entertaining to watch. His skill left opponents looking silly, but it was his aim to beat them, not to humiliate and belittle them. Floyd Mayweather does himself no favours with his mouth. Pep is regarded as among the greatest of all time but he never said that he was. Floyd on the other hand has taken it upon himself to attack the legacies of some beloved heroes of the sport and then wonders why people don't take it well. Don't kill the holy cow! It's ridiculous, first Leonard, then Robinson... He seems intent on making himself disliked.

Of course this has no bearing on his actual skill. But when he's setting the bar for himself that high he has to fulfill expectations. If he was really that good then other people would say he is better than Ray Leonard. But if he's saying he's better than Sugar Ray Robinson then cruising to a UD against Carlos Baldomir then there's obviously going to be some disappointment there.

Willie Pep fought everyone. I think that the key difference between the moder era and the one of the glory days is that a boxer who loses now is set back in their career for years. Back then there was no shame in losing and nobody used an undefeated record as their main selling point. Put it this way, if Floyd Mayweather were to lose against De La Hoya then many people will take great pleasure in the result (myself included). Mayweather will be "exposed". He was "never as good as we thought". Same thing as if Hatton were to lose against Castillo. The Cyberfools would have a field day with LMAO PWN. Same thing as if Cotto wins. An undefeated contender who gets beaten by a champion faces an uphill struggle for big fights. In the past almost everyone lost at least once, some people several times, and it did nothing to detract from their greatness. And this is true today. Floyd has his fans, as does Hatton, as does Cotto. But they are just not liked as much as fighters with defeats such as De La Hoya or Lewis, who can be seen to have overcome diversity.

My personal opinion? Floyd cannot be considered the greatest of all time until we see how he responds to losing. The greatest of all time doesn't retire undefeated, because we can never judge how they cope with having to come back.

[Benny Leonard]

LOL, I give you that one. Though we had to give you half a chance, right?

Look, I am an English soldier

LOL. We knew to leave out the bottles and pass on your blankets.

[Benny Leonard]

squealpiggy;2176105]I'm not sure what Calzaghe and Hatton have to do with a discussion about Mayweather and Pep.

Fact is that Pep was a sfighter, he had an illustrious career, he was supremely skilled defensively but he was still entertaining to watch. His skill left opponents looking silly, but it was his aim to beat them, not to humiliate and belittle them. Floyd Mayweather does himself no favours with his mouth. Pep is regarded as among the greatest of all time but he never said that he was. Floyd on the other hand has taken it upon himself to attack the legacies of some beloved heroes of the sport and then wonders why people don't take it well. Don't kill the holy cow! It's ridiculous, first Leonard, then Robinson... He seems intent on making himself disliked.

Floyd does leave fighters looking silly. He also knocks people out, or at least had that ability back in the lower weight divisions.

I wonder, have you ever heard of Ali?
Ali humiliated people, talked bad about past "Greats", and said he was "The Greatest"

Of course this has no bearing on his actual skill. But when he's setting the bar for himself that high he has to fulfill expectations. If he was really that good then other people would say he is better than Ray Leonard. But if he's saying he's better than Sugar Ray Robinson then cruising to a UD against Carlos Baldomir then there's obviously going to be some disappointment there.

It is a bit much to say you are the best, but what do you expect him to do?

In my opinion, both Sugars, maybe all three (since we can include Shane), would beat Floyd. Floyd never fought someone like Tommy Hearns either. Hearns would of beaten Floyd.

And you can't blame Floyd for "cruising to a UD" over Baldomir. What did Pep do?

Willie Pep fought everyone. I think that the key difference between the moder era and the one of the glory days is that a boxer who loses now is set back in their career for years. Back then there was no shame in losing and nobody used an undefeated record as their main selling point. Put it this way, if Floyd Mayweather were to lose against De La Hoya then many people will take great pleasure in the result (myself included). Mayweather will be "exposed". He was "never as good as we thought". Same thing as if Hatton were to lose against Castillo. The Cyberfools would have a field day with LMAO PWN. Same thing as if Cotto wins. An undefeated contender who gets beaten by a champion faces an uphill struggle for big fights. In the past almost everyone lost at least once, some people several times, and it did nothing to detract from their greatness. And this is true today. Floyd has his fans, as does Hatton, as does Cotto. But they are just not liked as much as fighters with defeats such as De La Hoya or Lewis, who can be seen to have overcome diversity.

My personal opinion? Floyd cannot be considered the greatest of all time until we see how he responds to losing. The greatest of all time doesn't retire undefeated, because we can never judge how they cope with having to come back.

Really? Marciano gets by just fine with his 49-0

Oh, Alexander the Great went undefeated, seems most historians agree he was the "Greatest"

[K-DOGG]

"What I want is to do the best I can, make all the money I can, without getting hurt. To me, it's the art of self-defense."

this is what pep said (courtesy of Asian Sensation article), how is it that no one calls or called him a ***** or a girl?

I presume you're asking this of the ones who consistantly critisize the proponents of the finter points of the sport.

[squealpiggy]

I wouldn't consider Marciano one of the greatest of all time. He was the greatest of his time because he beat everyone around and didn't duck anyone, but of all time? He may not have done so well in the late 60s early 70s or in the 1920s to the 1940s. And I still stick with my assertion that a fighter cannot reach greatness until he has tasted defeat.

As for calling themselves the Greatest, Ali was something of an anomoly. He could tell people he was the greatest with a certain charm and intelligence. He also crucially did not butcher holy cows. He said he was the greatest and that noone was better but he didn't say that Dempsey lost to a blown up Middleweight, or that Joe Lewis had nothing on him. And Ali was good but he wouldn't top my list of greatest fighters, even greatest heavyweights. Ali got away with claiming greatness by not actually verbally attacking fighters already considered to be the greatest.

And you can't blame Floyd for "cruising to a UD" over Baldomir. What did Pep do?

Pep fought back, as all the old school fighters did. He beat fighters in their backyard by decisions when nobody beat fighters in their hometowns by decision. He was that good. Floyd could have knocked out Baldomir, and he didn't. He didn;t press the action, he played it safe. Can we knock him for doing so? Not really. But the greatest of all time should have knocked Baldomir out.

[Benny Leonard]

squealpiggy;2176166]I wouldn't consider Marciano one of the greatest of all time. He was the greatest of his time because he beat everyone around and didn't duck anyone, but of all time? He may not have done so well in the late 60s early 70s or in the 1920s to the 1940s. And I still stick with my assertion that a fighter cannot reach greatness until he has tasted defeat.

I don't consider Marciano the "Greatest" either, but his Legacy is tied with his 49-0 record.

In my opinion, Marciano would of lost to a number of Heavyweights in history.

As for calling themselves the Greatest, Ali was something of an anomoly. He could tell people he was the greatest with a certain charm and intelligence. He also crucially did not butcher holy cows. He said he was the greatest and that noone was better but he didn't say that Dempsey lost to a blown up Middleweight, or that Joe Lewis had nothing on him. And Ali was good but he wouldn't top my list of greatest fighters, even greatest heavyweights. Ali got away with claiming greatness by not actually verbally attacking fighters already considered to be the greatest.

For Ali, the man does seem to get the edge as the "Greatest" in the modern history of the sport; considering that most of his big wins, which were huge threats, came after his exile (which resulted some declined ability), that is amazing.
His wins outweigh his losses. One can only imagine if he had not gone into exile and never lost that ability. Of course, he most likely would of stuck around longer than he should have anyway, so...

Pep fought back, as all the old school fighters did. He beat fighters in their backyard by decisions when nobody beat fighters in their hometowns by decision. He was that good. Floyd could have knocked out Baldomir, and he didn't. He didn;t press the action, he played it safe. Can we knock him for doing so? Not really. But the greatest of all time should have knocked Baldomir out.

"Nobody beat fighters in their hometowns", that's a bit overstated. I would think the black fighters of their day would of had a harder time with the judges, which they did, then good old Willie Pep.

When was the last time Baldomir "My Skull is the Size of a Heavyweight" Baldomir was knocked out?

Pep certainly wouldn't have knocked Baldomir out.

[FrankJack]

someone wouldn't happen to have any Willie Pep fights would they? I've never seen or been able to find any fights of his.

[Benny Leonard]

someone wouldn't happen to have any Willie Pep fights would they? I've never seen or been able to find any fights of his.

youtube took them off, except for one video.