Fighter of the Decade? Manny or Floyd?

[THE REED]

Im holding my vote until after Pac vs. Floyd has happened.

Agreed........

[El Chicano]

Judging from the poll results, Floyd should be more than happy with a 60/40 split in Manny's favor.

[..David..]

floyd maywhaat?

[joartcc5]

Currently there are 13 idiots who voted for a coward.

I suggest to the people who has yet to vote to not add urself in the list of 13 morons.

[Left Hook Tua]

Depending on which logic you follow, 2001 was the start of the current decade, not 2000. Hence, 2001-2010 is a full decade. Likewise year 1AD-10AD. Prior to that, it's 1BC-10BC and so on.

Don't ask me why they skipped year 0. It just ain't there - only retroactively.

i don't know what it should be or historically but i think the most common one is you count the 0 as the start and the 9 as the last.

example:

1950's = 1950-1959

it would be weird to count it as 1951-1960.

1950 wouldn't be in the 50's and 1960 would be counted as 1950's.

[Left Hook Tua]

Currently there are 13 idiots who voted for a coward.

I suggest to the people who has yet to vote to not add urself in the list of 13 morons.

12.

i clicked the wrong one by accident.

[Pullcounter]

125 pac

13 gayweather

bwhahahahahahahah!!!

[oaba09]

And we have a landslide

[Left Hook Tua]

125 pac

13 gayweather

bwhahahahahahahah!!!

12!

i clicked the wrong option by accident!

[PittyPat]

i don't know what it should be or historically but i think the most common one is you count the 0 as the start and the 9 as the last.

example:

1950's = 1950-1959

it would be weird to count it as 1951-1960.

1950 wouldn't be in the 50's and 1960 would be counted as 1950's.

True. But since things haven't been widely standardised across the world (people only go by whatever convention they've been brought up with), there'll always be a certain level of dubiousness as to how it should be done.

Obviously the most common way is to assume a year 0 and go from there (hence 2000 being the start of the current decade, 2010 beginning the new one, and so on), but if one really stops to think about the whole year 0/1AD/1BC thing... then everything kinda makes less sense overall.

So I guess the best thing to do is not to think about it at all and go with the masses. I only brought it up here because it seemed as though people were all but neglecting the concept of a decade beginning from 1 and ending with the 10 (i.e. 1991-2000). Certain idiots, then, had to take it further and onto a personal level. *shrug*