Floyd Is Under Rated.

[squealpiggy]

To be regarded as the best you have to beat the best fighters of your said given generation and PBF has not done that.

No you don't. The world's most powerful military belongs to the United States, but the United States hasn't single handedly defeated the rest of the world's military powers to prove it.

[MaceTheAce]

I am a Hatton fan and enjoy his fighting style and personality, however I do marvel at Flloyds ability to not get in a fight and still win!
If and its a big IF Flloyd beats Hatton IMO it will be the biggest win of his career and all props to him.

[MaceTheAce]

No you don't. The world's most powerful military belongs to the United States, but the United States hasn't single handedly defeated the rest of the world's military powers to prove it.

I take it thats not a serious repost.

[squealpiggy]

"Reposte". And yes I'm pretty serious about it. Floyd has displayed enough skill and ability to be considered the best in the world, and short of a round-robin compeition involving every single fighter within two weightclasses of Mayweather you're never going to have anything definitive.

Pound for pound rankings, in fact even rankings within weight classes, are always subjective. Rating fighters is subjective, there's no getting away from that. And Floyd happens to be the highest rated currently active fighter. If rating someone as "the best in the world" is underrating them then my understanding of the English language is lacking.

[MaceTheAce]

"Reposte". And yes I'm pretty serious about it. Floyd has displayed enough skill and ability to be considered the best in the world, and short of a round-robin compeition involving every single fighter within two weightclasses of Mayweather you're never going to have anything definitive.

Pound for pound rankings, in fact even rankings within weight classes, are always subjective. Rating fighters is subjective, there's no getting away from that. And Floyd happens to be the highest rated currently active fighter. If rating someone as "the best in the world" is underrating them then my understanding of the English language is lacking.

The most powerful? is that why thousands of Americans lost there lives to a tiny army?

[tills9191]

Most people who know the fight biz (With the exception of a minority of trolling idiots) consider Floyd to be the best fighter, pound for pound, in the world. How the hell can "best in the world" equal "underrated"?

Well , in your response to your post.
He doesn't receive the status that he deserves.It's good that he's the p4p no1 fighter, however I'm willing to go as far as saying that he's an ATG, and that is a fact that is failing to sit well with the boxing public.

[tills9191]

The most powerful? is that why thousands of Americans lost there lives to a tiny army?

The USA needs to revise its military tactics.

[blacksky]

Floyd will never be an all time great. If he stayed at 130 he could have been one of the greatest of all time.

I believe his move up in weight has diminished his reputation as a fighter.

[blacksky]

The most powerful? is that why thousands of Americans lost there lives to a tiny army?

CHina has a much larger army than the USA I would say they are the most powerful.

however if we are going to discuss Iraq, the taliban aren`t an army.

[squealpiggy]

Well , in your response to your post.
He doesn't receive the status that he deserves.It's good that he's the p4p no1 fighter, however I'm willing to go as far as saying that he's an ATG, and that is a fact that is failing to sit well with the boxing public.

I think it's much more intelligent to reserve judgement on his status all-time until he has finished fighting. I wouldn't rate any fighter all time until they have retired and a couple of years reflection has passed.

CHina has a much larger army than the USA I would say they are the most powerful.

however if we are going to discuss Iraq, the taliban aren`t an army.

The Taliban are in Afghanistan. And while China has a larger army, in total Clauswitzian warfare which country do you think would confer the most damage? The strength of a military is not always related to your manpower. US technology and strategic ability is far beyond anybody else's.

Regarding Iraq, if the shackles were off and the United States was able to deploy full force against the Iraqi insurgency (total war) then American casualties would be down, Iraqi casualties would be way up. I'm not sure we want that kind of situation. The insurgency is effective because the Americans (and British) are following the rules of war. The insurgency is not.