Comments Thread For: Mayweather Aims To Produce More Champions, Has No Interest in Exhibition Offers

[aboutfkntime]

[QUOTE=Boxing-1013;n31218993]

I disagree. I think my criteria - how you do overall against the non-elite guys - is very important. It shows an elite level imo to never struggle against 10+ guys like that. That is the bulk of any fighter's resume anyway (fights against solid/non-elite boxers), and very few do it as well as GGG in those fights.

There is stuff to critique him for as well. Just keep it within reason and you probably will find me joining in with it.

that is total garbage... you were a moron for saying it, and you are a even bigger moron for attempting to defend it

pure ignorance

no sport ranks competitors based on how they do against average / mediocre opposition... ESPECIALLY boxing

you pulled that garbage out of our ass simply because Golovkin does not have 1 signature win on his resume

insisting that Golovkin is up there with Duran was shockingly ignorant

you are just a silly fanboy






...

[Boxing-1013]

[QUOTE=aboutfkntime;n31219227]

that is total garbage... you were a moron for saying it, and you are a even bigger moron for attempting to defend it

pure ignorance

no sport ranks competitors based on how they do against average / mediocre opposition... ESPECIALLY boxing

you pulled that garbage out of our ass simply because Golovkin does not have 1 signature win on his resume

insisting that Golovkin is up there with Duran was shockingly ignorant

you are just a silly fanboy






...

I've always had the same criteria. The reason why valuing those wins is important in boxing, is because very few guys face 'great' fighters in their primes/at their best weight.

Take right now for example - how many truly 'great' fighters are there right now? Canelo, Crawford, Fury probably, Usyk probably, maybe Loma, Inoue maybe, GGG was for me but he's almost 40. There isn't a long list, and only 2 of those are really in the same weight region as far as being able to fight each other.

There are guys like Ali who have a number of fights vs great fighters or close to it, and even he was roughly 50/50 in those types of fights. And he's the GOAT.

95% of any boxer's resume however, is made up of how you do vs the good but not great fighters.

I've studied boxing for a long time man, lol. That's just how it is. Not trying to be patronizing, but I encourage you to study some more boxing history and do some research for yourself. Study the resumes of past fighters and see what you come up with.

---

Also, when I rate fighters, I rate them based on what I see/saw. Not what some judges saw. The only really close fight for me for GGG was vs Sergei. He beat Canelo twice in my eyes, and many others. Canelo is currently number 1 pfp, and GGG was 35+ in those fights.

I would think an honest man can see the argument that GGG is a top fighter. GGG had great activity, great power with almost everything he threw, was almost impossible to hurt, and almost impossible to outwork. What's there to really hate on? But, if you disagree, well you are entitled to your opinion as well. I just call it like I see it, and I keep my criteria consistent.

I rate Crawford highly for many of the same reasons I rate/d GGG highly.

[sicko]

Mayweather really does have the Resources to create some SUPERSTARS, I actually would like to see him commit to doing. All the Focus is on Tank but he does need to start building up more stars and featuring them on Tank Undercard. I do like Malik Warren and Jalil Hackett I do think both have star potential but Mayweather and Ellerbe seem to only really care about Tank

[aboutfkntime]

I've always had the same criteria. The reason why valuing those wins is important in boxing, is because very few guys face 'great' fighters in their primes/at their best weight.

Take right now for example - how many truly 'great' fighters are there right now? Canelo, Crawford, Fury probably, Usyk probably, maybe Loma, Inoue maybe, GGG was for me but he's almost 40. There isn't a long list, and only 2 of those are really in the same weight region as far as being able to fight each other.

There are guys like Ali who have a number of fights vs great fighters or close to it, and even he was roughly 50/50 in those types of fights. And he's the GOAT.

95% of any boxer's resume however, is made up of how you do vs the good but not great fighters.

I've studied boxing for a long time man, lol. That's just how it is. Not trying to be patronizing, but I encourage you to study some more boxing history and do some research for yourself. Study the resumes of past fighters and see what you come up with.

---

Also, when I rate fighters, I rate them based on what I see/saw. Not what some judges saw. The only really close fight for me for GGG was vs Sergei. He beat Canelo twice in my eyes, and many others. Canelo is currently number 1 pfp, and GGG was 35+ in those fights.

I would think an honest man can see the argument that GGG is a top fighter. GGG had great activity, great power with almost everything he threw, was almost impossible to hurt, and almost impossible to outwork. What's there to really hate on? But, if you disagree, well you are entitled to your opinion as well. I just call it like I see it, and I keep my criteria consistent.

I rate Crawford highly for many of the same reasons I rate/d GGG highly.

that is total garbage... if you do not have truly great wins, you will not be ranked as a truly great fighter... genuine ATG is determined by resume only

WHO did you beat, with consideration given to when/how... nothing else matters...

how high was the mountain they had to climb?... how high was the ceiling on their ability/performance?... that is the definition of greatness

many fighters had less opportunities because they fought in a weak era, but... hard luck for them... you do not drop the bar to "what-if's", or for any other reason

your criteria is garbage, and childishly silly

NO genuine historian would agree with you... they would all dismiss your silly logic, most would laugh

I don't think you have any feel for this game at all, especially considering those awful comments that I quoted earlier... you have certainly never boxed

I DARE YOU, to write to the breadman mailbag and insist that Golovkin is just as great as Duran... I DARE YOU !!

write to bread, tell him that Golovkin is just as great as Duran... and then tell him why, using the criteria you mentioned above

I DARE YOU !!






...

[Boxing-1013]

that is total garbage... if you do not have truly great wins, you will not be ranked as a truly great fighter... genuine ATG is determined by resume only

WHO did you beat, with consideration given to when/how... nothing else matters...

how high was the mountain they had to climb?... how high was the ceiling on their ability/performance?... that is the definition of greatness

many fighters had less opportunities because they fought in a weak era, but... hard luck for them... you do not drop the bar to "what-if's", or for any other reason

your criteria is garbage, and childishly silly

NO genuine historian would agree with you... they would all dismiss your silly logic, most would laugh

I don't think you have any feel for this game at all, especially considering those awful comments that I quoted earlier... you have certainly never boxed

I DARE YOU, to write to the breadman mailbag and insist that Golovkin is just as great as Duran... I DARE YOU !!

write to bread, tell him that Golovkin is just as great as Duran... and then tell him why, using the criteria you mentioned above

I DARE YOU !!






...

We will just have to agree to disagree man, not getting anywhere here.

[Thuglife Nelo]

Mayweather aims to say “I’m the face of boxing” at every Tank fight! Lol

[aboutfkntime]

We will just have to agree to disagree man, not getting anywhere here.

you are totally full of shlt

you know that garbage you posted is nonsense

you post that nonsense here, so why not send that nonsense to breadman for validation ?

he would laugh and call you an idiot... that's why

GTFOH






...

[Boxing-1013]

you are totally full of shlt

you know that garbage you posted is nonsense

you post that nonsense here, so why not send that nonsense to breadman for validation ?

he would laugh and call you an idiot... that's why

GTFOH






...

Breadman is not my go-to for boxing advice, lol. That you cite him as the arbiter of boxing truth is pretty funny, lol.


But yeah just gonna have to agree to disagree here man. You feel your way, I feel mine.

[aboutfkntime]

Breadman is not my go-to for boxing advice, lol. That you cite him as the arbiter of boxing truth is pretty funny, lol.


But yeah just gonna have to agree to disagree here man. You feel your way, I feel mine.

FACT: you had a golden opportunity to present your fanboy bullshlt to someone credible

FACT: you declined

GTFOH clownboy






...