Why is Mayweathers resume so thin compared to other fighters in the last 15 years ?

[The Gambler1981]

Who said about "boiling a fighter down to JUST a resume"? Im arguing that it is the most important factor when judging a fighters career, not the only one.

Swayed or not swayed I don't here you making an argument against my rationalization, only putting it down.

You can think whatever way you want, I am not trying to change your point of view, I am just telling you why I view it as flawed.

Look at fighters whatever way you want by all means.

[JAB5239]

You can think whatever way you want, I am not trying to change your point of view, I am just telling you why I view it as flawed.

No, you are telling me why it is flawed because of this... "Boiling a fighter down to just a resume is an over simlified view of their career. I consider it poor analysis of ones career".....I never said that, you did.

Seems to me you like to make judgements but not answer quesions.

Look at fighters whatever way you want by all means.

I do. I look at their careers the right way.

[The Gambler1981]

I do. I look at their careers the right way.

That shows why your reasoning is flawed. There is no right way to look at a subjective question, and judging fighters against others that they never fought is amongst the most subjective things that can be done in boxing, especially when done accross eras.

Thanks for the laugh.

[M.I Truth ?]

I have already explained why I disagree with that point, he is only a disapointment if you match him to some mythical unreachable goal. When looked at through the prism of reality, compared to his peers he did very well.

You can only test your skills unless someone makes you test them and he fought more then enough good/very good/semi great/great fighters for him to prove his worth.

He is just a man and I do not judge him to some special standard, I judge him against other men (generally from his own era because cross era comparisions just add another layer of fog to an already very subjective topic).

This was extremely well said. I don't think anyone intentionally sets the bar higher when they talk about about Floyd but its done anyway. Best resume? No. Good one? Yes. Funny thing is a fight with Cotto and Pac would cause many people to retract a lot of negativity. I want to see both fights therefore I don't mind when people **** the drum.

[BOSSHOGG]

because he was skerd

[cortdawg25]

if floyd resume is so flimsy....who at 130 he could have fought and didn't? there is not many if any? at 135 he could have fought Casamoyer, Freitas, stevie johnson, but he jumped up and fought the best of the divisionin Castillo twice. the best at 140 was Hatton after the kostya win, hatton openly admitted he was not ready. the # 3 fighter of that divison at the time was cotto and he was considered too green by his promoter Bob Arum. the others at 140 were Maussa and Harris. at 147 he fought the previous undisputed WW champ in Zab and then fought his conqueror in Baldomir, the lineal WW champ. He then faced Hatton, P4p top 5 fighter in his last fight at 147. At 154 he fought the legendary Oscar who just came off a huge KO win over the rough and hardhitting Mayorga. Let alone Oscar weighing 163 lbs the night of the fight, small ring, and reyes puncher's gloves, and all the $$$.


at 154, that was a 1 and done fight. at 147, he could have Cotto or margacheato. But margarito was a nobody who hadn't fought anybody. And Cotto was still a green fighter who didn't step to the elite prospect until after the mosley win. Mosley had a toothache.



So who else could he have fought and at what weight?

[JAB5239]

That shows why your reasoning is flawed. There is no right way to look at a subjective question, and judging fighters against others that they never fought is amongst the most subjective things that can be done in boxing, especially when done accross eras.

The right way is to take everything into consideration and then determine the most important factors. I guess thats just a bit over your head though.

Thanks for the laugh.

You're the only one being laughed at kid. But thanks for ducking those question in post 56. Seems that is becoming your forte'.

[The Gambler1981]

You're the only one being laughed at kid. But thanks for ducking those question in post 56. Seems that is becoming your forte'.

If you say so, but I do not care if people do not agree with me. I am fine with my opinion and do not need others to justify it.

What question? All I see is stuff I have already answered many times in this thread pick a post of mine and read it, it responds to what you are saying.

[FRANKGWJ]

trying to understand your point, if Floyd did like Bernard Hopkins and fought smaller fighters coming up in weight then he would be considered great.

Bernard Hopkins fought
Kelly Pavlik 160 lb catch weight of 170
Joe Calzaghe lost
Winky Wright 147 lb moved up to 170
Antonio Tarver
Jermain Taylor Twice
Oscar De La Hoya 147 lb moved up to 170
Felix Trinidad 147 lb moved up to 170
Glen Johnson
Roy Jones Jr lost

so to quote the author if Floyd beat Barrera, Morales and Pac, then he is great.

You are wrong. Winky Wright moved up from 154 and so did Oscar and Tito. Plus B-Hop moved up from 160lb to 175lb. Taylor struggled to stay at 160lb Kelly is stuggling to maintain the 160lb wait limit. So to say B-Hop fight smaller fighters is a stretch. As you can see neither Oscar or Tito can fight at the 147lb limit plus 154 is not the big of a weight difference to 160lb.

[JAB5239]

If you say so, but I do not care if people do not agree with me. I am fine with my opinion and do not need others to justify it.

Ok, if you say so. Seems to me if you really believed this though you wouldn't be here arguing with people about it.

What question? All I see is stuff I have already answered many times in this thread pick a post of mine and read it, it responds to what you are saying.

Whatever. Excuses, excuses.