Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Measured Against All Time: “Sugar” Shane Mosley

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Measured Against All Time: “Sugar” Shane Mosley

    By Cliff Rold - “Sugar” Shane Mosley is a star in the world of Boxing, but the cruel winds of fate probably kept him from being more. There’s no way to know for sure. Star power and the affections of the public are fickle commodities. A punch or point though, here or there, and it might have different for the Southern California native. [details]

  • #2
    Good Read BPP
    thats my boy SSM
    I think he is a great fighter and lock in for HOF but an ALT I dont know but I would love to see him beat margs then cotto and dust off Floyd then Pac!!!!
    hahaha I know wishfull thinking

    Comment


    • #3
      so mosley and delahoya arent all time greats but calzaghe is? no one should take this guy seriously if he's easily fooled by calzaghe's flimsy but undefeated record. should shane stay at lightweight and defend his title against 21 bums then he would be an all time great?

      Comment


      • #4
        Another good read Cliff. It's always amusing to read some of the comments on various forums and the level of idiocy that is out there. People stating that Calzaghe only faced '21 bums' are cearly clowns who are beyond educating. Look forward to the next article.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by daggum View Post
          so mosley and delahoya arent all time greats but calzaghe is? no one should take this guy seriously if he's easily fooled by calzaghe's flimsy but undefeated record. should shane stay at lightweight and defend his title against 21 bums then he would be an all time great?
          Good point. The level of competition Mosley faced in his 8 lightweight title defenses trump Calzaghe's first 16. I have no beef with none of the other articles, but the Calzaghe one reeks of favoring the undefeated record.

          Though Calzaghe deserves props for staying focused against all the bums he faced before Lacy, that doesn't merit him an ATG label. Rold really needs to fix that to lend some credence to this.
          Originally posted by Keysor View Post
          Another good read Cliff. It's always amusing to read some of the comments on various forums and the level of idiocy that is out there. People stating that Calzaghe only faced '21 bums' are cearly clowns who are beyond educating. Look forward to the next article.
          It's 16 bums with 5 good fighters mixed in still is not deserving of ATG status.

          Comment


          • #6
            what separates mr. rold from most other boxing writers is the historical perspective he injects in his articles... keep it up cliff...

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by daggum View Post
              so mosley and delahoya arent all time greats but calzaghe is? no one should take this guy seriously...
              I agree. he's pointing out who shane hasn't fought as if it counts against him, but Shane's never stopped fighting the best. Is he implying that Shane should've fought more frequently so he could fit more people in?

              "Measured against all time"? nah, "measured by ROLD"






              [Content is Protected, Please Register For Free To Unlock This Content]

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by daggum View Post
                so mosley and delahoya arent all time greats but calzaghe is? no one should take this guy seriously if he's easily fooled by calzaghe's flimsy but undefeated record. should shane stay at lightweight and defend his title against 21 bums then he would be an all time great?
                Well Mosley and Oscar aren't ATG's. He's not lying. Cliff is a little biased when it comes to Joe C. though.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by anonymousboxing View Post
                  I agree. he's pointing out who shane hasn't fought as if it counts against him, but Shane's never stopped fighting the best. Is he implying that Shane should've fought more frequently so he could fit more people in?

                  "Measured against all time"? nah, "measured by ROLD"
                  Not at all. What I stated plainly was that he could've dramatically improved his overall standing with better foes at Lightweight. I give credit for fighting the best, but the better fighters are supposed to.

                  And I'm not biased in favor of Calzaghe as much as see things different on the subject then some of you. I think his accomplishments stand on their own merits.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I noted it was a tall order at the end of the piece, but Mosley is in position to change from near great to something more right now. Amazing performance tonight.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP