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

[The Gambler1981]

Joe Calzaghe looked good against Tocker Pudwill but I sure wouldn't use that as the main reason for calling him a great fighter.

Jeff Lacy is a better example because he was actually thought of as a decent fighter. He gets **** on after the fact though right?

Lacy (a good fighter that held a strap at one point) has more in common with most Mayweather opponents then Pudwill (a never was).

[JAB5239]

[QUOTE]

Listen, a resume is a start but you yourself called it the bottom line. The bottom line implies there is no more to be done, a resume is an imcomplete picture that without added information is almost useless in the gread scheme of things.

"It all comes down to who you beat when determining how great you were or were not. Not the end all, but certainly the bottom line."

Hmmm, does that look familiar? NOT the end all. I repeat, NOT the end all. Bottom line though, resume is the foundation and most important factor in comparing one fighters place in history against anothers.

I never said resume was not important but that it was only part of the picture. I think you are a fool because you fail to understand something that I have clearly stated to you in replies like 15 times.

Oh Im sorry, you stated that the fighter himself is the most important thing in determining how he compares to other fighters. I ask you....for the upteenth time....how do you guage one fighter against another without resumes?

Like I said before ignorence is bliss~.

And like I said, you're obviously the expert in that department.

[Deja_Vous]

Calzaghes resume ****s on them all.

You mean it gets ****ted on.

[The Gambler1981]

[QUOTE=JAB5239;4928354]

And like I said, you're obviously the expert in that department.

I never said I looked at fighters without resumes, so I do not see why that is important point. I have said since the start, that is it a good start. It is not the most important part though, it is one of the key parts, but without the knowledge it is just a list of names and numbers.

Continue on thinking you actually have a point on this matter with me, I have told you why I think the way I do, I do not care to try and change your views but your views are that of a foolish man, who can only look at things in some black and white view.

Whatever though it is subjective, so even if I think your views are flawed (I never called you wrong, like you did to my views) I can only point out why I think those views are flawed. There is no right or wrong, and that is why I find this whole thing laughable and think you are a fool.

[JAB5239]

[QUOTE]

I never said I looked at fighters without resumes, so I do not see why that is important point. I have said since the start, that is it a good start. It is not the most important part though, it is one of the key parts, but without the knowledge it is just a list of names and numbers.

"I ask you....for the upteenth time....how do you guage one fighter against another without resumes?"

Can you answer this question or not? No matter what you do when comparing fighters, you NEED their resumes. THAT is why it is the most important factor when comparing different fighters. If you have nothing to build upon, how can you even begin to make a historical comparison? Game over.

[The Gambler1981]

[QUOTE=JAB5239;4928420]

"I ask you....for the upteenth time....how do you guage one fighter against another without resumes?"

Can you answer this question or not? No matter what you do when comparing fighters, you NEED their resumes. THAT is why it is the most important factor when comparing different fighters. If you have nothing to build upon, how can you even begin to make a historical comparison? Game over.

It does not matter, it can be a key factor but that does not mean it is the most important.

If you think that is the point, whatever you are ever more of a fool then I thought.

[JAB5239]

[QUOTE=The Gambler1981;4928430]

It does not matter, it can be a key factor but that does not mean it is the most important.

If you think that is the point, whatever you are ever more of a fool then I thought.

Ok, so you should be able to answer the question from my previous post with no problem then. I'll be waiting, and we'll find out who the real fool is.

Tick tock, tick tock.......hurry up!!

[The Gambler1981]

If you have true knowledge about a fighter you do not need a resume because all the stuff that a resume includes would be invovled in that comprehensive knowledge.

If you watch the fights, know the results first hand you can come to a much more complete conclusion about a fighter then just the list of names and numebers on a resume. Knowledge is the key factor to me, sorry that we will never agree~.

Talking and comparing across era is a flawed idea anyways, it implies everything is equal when there are vast differences in the way the game was played (both inside and outside the ring).

[The Gambler1981]

[QUOTE=JAB5239;4928448]

Ok, so you should be able to answer the question from my previous post with no problem then. I'll be waiting, and we'll find out who the real fool is.

Tick tock, tick tock.......hurry up!!

Whatever, I do not care about your bull**** loaded question.

Look in the mirror, it will be faster~.

[cortdawg25]

[quote=jab5239;4928420]

"i ask you....for the upteenth time....how do you guage one fighter against another without resumes?"

can you answer this question or not? No matter what you do when comparing fighters, you need their resumes. That is why it is the most important factor when comparing different fighters. If you have nothing to build upon, how can you even begin to make a historical comparison? Game over.

look man, everything in a fighters resume is subjective...it's conditional too.


Just asks yourself what makes a fighters resume good. Other good fighters right. Then what made those good fighters good fighters. And it goes on an on. That is what grustler is saying when he says subjective. It depends on what fighters you value.


If you want to really compare fighters, then u compare accomplishments like 5 division champ, undefeated fighter thru the ranks. Top fighter of his generation, # of title fights, things like that.