is mayweather a coward??

[bdevils]

belts are belts today i got nothing against baldo but he was not the best welter.

Neither was Marg. Williams proved that.

[tredh]

You have to understand and I think you agree. How you win or how you lose in boxing can be and often is as important as the official descision of the bout.

No the only thing that hurts the way you win or lose is if it is controversial. Like Magic Johnson said "It doesn't matter if you lose by 20 pts or you lose by 1 pt its still a loss". Would it have made more sense for Carl Lewis to run slower in the Olympics to make the races closer just so it made the competition look better? **** that the competition needs to step they're **** up and get on his level. Some advice I got years ago " you can't get mad at somebody for not doing what you would in certain situations". It makes sense you can't get mad at PBF for fighting HIS STYLE of fight if that is what got him to where he is. If you fight different then that great thats what puts YOU in the best position to win NOT HIM. Why is that so hard to understand?

[bdevils]

i think he was the longest reigning welter when floyd came up i'm not sure,and all that the punisher revealed about margarito was that he is a slow starter.

A welter who won a vacant belt.

[tredh]

You think it's something personal? I'm telling you. Any fighter who pulled the antics of Mayweather inside the ring and was given the same accolades as him would face the same rightfull criticism.

Pernell Whitaker never received the same amount of critism

[joepal]

I'm not. I'm simply stating that the street goes both ways. People can't criticize Mayweather for some picked opposition and then not Pacquiao. I think MAB is a game opponent. I certainly wont pick him to win, but it wont be like Pac/Morales III or anything.

No, Pac's seeking the best and Mayweather "seeking" the best are two entirely different things. Pac's first fight at 126 was MAB, then JMM, and first at 130 was Morales. Floyd sought Gatti then Baldomir. Go figure.

[The Troll]

No the only thing that hurts the way you win or lose is if it is controversial. ?

Wrong. Taylor won every round easily against Ouma how of a performance was it though.

Mayweather won every round against Baldomir, not a great performance.

Hopkins won most of the rounds against Eastman

I can go on

Taylor Spinks

You obviously dont get the point.

[The Troll]

Pernell Whitaker never received the same amount of critism

He never got a disproportionatly hight amount of accolades to merit it.

[joepal]

No the only thing that hurts the way you win or lose is if it is controversial. Like Magic Johnson said "It doesn't matter if you lose by 20 pts or you lose by 1 pt its still a loss". Would it have made more sense for Carl Lewis to run slower in the Olympics to make the races closer just so it made the competition look better? **** that the competition needs to step they're **** up and get on his level. Some advice I got years ago " you can't get mad at somebody for not doing what you would in certain situations". It makes sense you can't get mad at PBF for fighting HIS STYLE of fight if that is what got him to where he is. If you fight different then that great thats what puts YOU in the best position to win NOT HIM. Why is that so hard to understand?

Oftentimes in boxing, as in life, a lot of emphasis is placed on HOW you do things. Bernard beating Wright sucks while Pavlik KOing Taylor is heaven-sent. Is this really so hard to understand?

[Dirt E Gomez]

No, Pac's seeking the best and Mayweather "seeking" the best are two entirely different things. Pac's first fight at 126 was MAB, then JMM, and first at 130 was Morales. Floyd sought Gatti then Baldomir. Go figure.

Once again though; you're going back years. Pac's had big fights. So has Mayweather. You can't simply handpick the ones you want to acknowledge though.

Mayeather's first opponent at 134 (after 1 w/ Augustus a few fights prior) was JLC, or hell; Oscar at 150? You're trying to pretend Pac's record is somehow larger than life while Mayweather's is purely padded and risk-free. Take of the blinders and acknowledge that neither's blows the other's out of the water. They've each had higher times and lower times.

[Ray Ray]

Once again though; you're going back years. Pac's had big fights. So has Mayweather. You can't simply handpick the ones you want to acknowledge though.

Mayeather's first opponent at 134 (after 1 w/ Augustus a few fights prior) was JLC, or hell; Oscar at 150? You're trying to pretend Pac's record is somehow larger than life while Mayweather's is purely padded and risk-free. Take of the blinders and acknowledge that neither's blows the other's out of the water. They've each had higher times and lower times.

Good point. I agree with your comparison.