Are many of us hypocrites?

**HeartAttack** · 05-26-2007, 02:49 AM

No one has ever doubted Mayweather; skills. Its his abrasive personality of how he is always the victim and how he is unwilling to press a fight. Mayweather has skills that any fighter would envy, he lacks power but makes up for it with technique. Mayweather just isn't a fan-pleasing fighter in style or persona. I like watching him fight, but I'm not everybody.

**Njord777** · 05-26-2007, 02:50 AM

Originally posted by orltroy

No one has ever doubted Mayweather; skills. Its his abrasive personality of how he is always the victim and how he is unwilling to press a fight. Mayweather has skills that any fighter would envy, he lacks power but makes up for it with technique. Mayweather just isn't a fan-pleasing fighter in style or persona. I like watching him fight, but I'm not everybody.

I've been here a year or so now and I've seen many posters doubt Floyd's resume....and look at who he had fought when he was where Pavlik is now. So why is Kelly Pavlik so amazing when he hasn't faced anywhere near the same level of opposition? Other than his ability to ****.

**-Antonio-** · 05-26-2007, 02:55 AM

Its funny because Floyd gets criticized for what he did after he was 31-0.

**Njord777** · 05-26-2007, 03:02 AM

Originally posted by -Antonio-

Its funny because Floyd gets criticized for what he did after he was 31-0.

So you think at 31-0 Floyd was a shining star with the sky being the limit? Better opposition faced and more skills? That it was since that time that he slipped?

**-Antonio-** · 05-26-2007, 03:09 AM

Im just saying that most of the hate stems from what he has done after 135.

**Welter_Skelter** · 05-26-2007, 03:16 AM

It SHOULD only be about the boxing... If it was.. Floyd would be the Biggest STAR in the sport..

However it's not just about the BOXING is it??

**HeartAttack** · 05-26-2007, 03:28 AM

Originally posted by Njord777

I've been here a year or so now and I've seen many posters doubt Floyd's resume....and look at who he had fought when he was where Pavlik is now. So why is Kelly Pavlik so amazing when he hasn't faced anywhere near the same level of opposition? Other than his ability to ****.

Welter is right. The truth is boxers and other athletes are entertainers. Fans pay money to buy a jay-Z album, watch a Brad Pitt movie, see Cirque de Soleil, or watch a ballgame live. So fans pay to see a product and judge the product or show on how well they were entertained. Mayweather doesn't entertain most people in the ring with his style. Couple that with the fact not many people can relate to a kid who was brought up fairly well with a family and opportunity and a "gift" and see him come out as a crying whiny little brat. A lot of people had piss-poor fathers, so what deal with it. Plus Mayweather is about as ****** as Carrottop so his persona is rejected as well. I like Mayweather as a fighter and as a person in the sport. I have been critical of how he ignores what the fans feel are great fights and then wonders why he doesn't get respect for the other fights. Listen if fans demand you fight Antonio Margarito, then he will get more props for beating Mrgarito than he thinks. The man is talented and should be respected, but its the total package of what he is selling that no-one is buying.

**Hitman932** · 05-26-2007, 03:52 AM

Originally posted by Njord777

I've been here a year or so now and I've seen many posters doubt Floyd's resume....and look at who he had fought when he was where Pavlik is now. So why is Kelly Pavlik so amazing when he hasn't faced anywhere near the same level of opposition? Other than his ability to ****.

i wonder about this threads intentions....

first of all 31-0 is an arbitrary way to judge.

julio caesar chavex jr. is 31-0 and he is 21 and never beaten anyone of any significance.

furthermore its obvious that mayweather followed the most significant victory of his career (castillo 2) by fighting a string of 6 piece of **** matchups (sosa, ndou, corley, bruseles, gatti, mitchell) the only guys that these jokes could beat up are each other

nobody claims floyds resume was weak before 135, only as idiot would do such

but the fact of the matter is that pavlik has just won the most significant fight of his life... if he now rested on his laurels and proceeded to fight 6 straight opponents who carried no real weight and stood no real chance of winning he would be the most harshly criticized fighter in the history of this site.

**Njord777** · 05-26-2007, 03:52 AM

When was it that boxing switched from a true sport to entertainment like circus and wrestling? I mean, don't get me wrong- I agree people want to be entertained...but aren't boxing fans, the ones entertained by the sport, supposed to enjoy boxers boxing and not just knocking people out? Golf fans enjoy golfers who play well- not just those that get hole in ones. Tennis fans enjoy watching the entire match....not just the winning set. Boxing has always been a brutal sport, but a sport all the same. Isn't the shift from pure competition and athleticism, to this entertainment aspect part of the cash/money generation of boxers?

Not many people disagree that Floyd is the most skilled boxer fighting right now. So why is it that we can sit back and argue that his style is not entertaining? Is that the fault of the boxer, or the boxing fan? Because Floyd moves, counters, rolls- his defense is superb and he fights from angles. I don't think he's the boxing messiah by any means. Not even as good as he suggests he is, but if he boxes so well why is that not enough? Why do we suggest men like Kelly Pavlik, men with holes in their defense and flaws in their technique are more entertaining? Just because they can knock a guy out...

My point in the matter was that back when Mayweather had the same record Pavlik had now I don't think people were quite foaming at the mouth in the same way; despite his better resume. He could do it all back at 130....all that he does now plus stop his opponents. Why is it that rather than a fervent demand to see him drop in weight people simply attack him?

Floyd is not my favorite boxer...I simply use him as an example. People are jumping on Kelly Pavlik's bandwagon in droves...much the same way people did for Miranda after he handled Gibbs and almost stopped Green. Many have now switched trains at the station and are now riding the Pavlik express to Youngstown. Just because of his power, really.

To be big in boxing today you need to be able to knock people out. If you can't, you can't be big stuff. It's entertainment, right? So we need a ready, easy to access highlight real of one brilliant knock out after the other set to fast rap. A guy who threatens to eat your kids and then knocks out out. We value the Gatti brawlers, Tyson power hitters, and even meat heads like Briggs over pure boxers like Mayweather. I just thought I'd point out that Mayweather was once where Pavlik was, with a much better resume, and yet when the knock outs stopped, slowly, the fans turned on him. Pavlik can fight a string of bums from here...if he knocks them out he'll be on easy street. I know everyone is going to say if he fights bums from here the fans will turn on him...but I think he could take on Green, then maybe a Lacy....etc. and people would still call him the most entertaining middleweight if he could stop them. Despite those fighters having lost recently.

Are many of us hypocrites?