Comments Thread For: Top 25 Fighters of the 00’s Part III: The Top Ten

[mcdoodledoo]

no no no.
lets reorder the last few.......
in at no. 5 we have hopkins. losses to taylor dont forget and looked whats happened to him three times in last couple of years!
did nothing unexpected to either tarver or pavlik.
no 4. pacman. ok, its true...he did beat all the over the hill mexicans except one, on two occasions..you know who it is.
the "jump" makes little difference to his status in my mind as he moved through lighweight to beat a guy the mallignaggi just beat and he has only had 5 ko,s! on to oscar, did anyone see the weigh in? oscar looked a mess and roach new then it would be a piece of piss beating an over the hill weight drained fighter with no hunger left.
then theres our very own ricky hatton, i honestly felt sick when he was knocked out but, in the back of my mind i knew he would lose....why? i will tell you, he has been in many wars and has always been waaaay to easy to hit and i had previously predicted a one sided points victory to pacman as ricky was now 40+ fights and nearing the end anyway.
miguel cotto is/was the only fighter many thought would win considering many of the facts. he was strong,powerful,a very good tecnical fighter,patient but, as in a few fights prior to this he has shown major weakness, corley nearly had him,so did torres,so did mosley,so did judah,so did the other guy?(olympics?) roach saw all of this and knew if speed got through it would kill.
i have two points i would like to make here,
1. in the whole fight pacman took powershots like they were jabs and in the fianl session he ate it like it was his favourite food! of this i am suspect.
2. to end on a positive note i would say that if there were nothing to hide in this fight then i would say it was excellent win over a great fighter at a bigger weight but, it is only "one" real significant win.
no. 3. juan manuel marquez.
its simple, he beat paciaou twice and has chased him throught the weights to put it to paper but, pacman has avoided it.
marquez i think, in his wisdom took the fight with floyd but knew he would lose but never really losing. i think he is just bating pacman for the trilogy.
i mean, lets face it..pacman did lose to him in both fights so if pacman gets number 4 spot then jmm gets number three for beating him(twice).
number.2. the great welshman. joe calzaghe.
unbeaten! end of.
number 1. floyd is the man for sure.
it is arguable that floyd may have avoided certain people but, it was never fear of losing the fight. it was or is purely money.i dont think we will ever see what he can really do. dazzling speed,superoir boxing skill, etc, nobody even close.
i had trouble putting a fellow couintryman in second place but, i just had to.
p.s. pacman is good but, not this good. sorry.

Contender for the worst post of the decade. There's some terrible posts on these forums and this is one of the worst. You haven't even got some of your facts right.

[MIT.Engineer]

What only 4 pages. ***** butthurt? They are ducking this

[hanzoh74]

mayweather > Pacquiao

yeah in terms of beating women, ducking tough competition, overbloating former featherweights and superlightweights and blowing the biggest fight of the century!! HANDS DOWN its XyloFloyd by a mile

[hanzoh74]

no no no.
lets reorder the last few.......
in at no. 5 we have hopkins. losses to taylor dont forget and looked whats happened to him three times in last couple of years!
did nothing unexpected to either tarver or pavlik.
no 4. pacman. ok, its true...he did beat all the over the hill mexicans except one, on two occasions..you know who it is.
the "jump" makes little difference to his status in my mind as he moved through lighweight to beat a guy the mallignaggi just beat and he has only had 5 ko,s! on to oscar, did anyone see the weigh in? oscar looked a mess and roach new then it would be a piece of piss beating an over the hill weight drained fighter with no hunger left.
then theres our very own ricky hatton, i honestly felt sick when he was knocked out but, in the back of my mind i knew he would lose....why? i will tell you, he has been in many wars and has always been waaaay to easy to hit and i had previously predicted a one sided points victory to pacman as ricky was now 40+ fights and nearing the end anyway.
miguel cotto is/was the only fighter many thought would win considering many of the facts. he was strong,powerful,a very good tecnical fighter,patient but, as in a few fights prior to this he has shown major weakness, corley nearly had him,so did torres,so did mosley,so did judah,so did the other guy?(olympics?) roach saw all of this and knew if speed got through it would kill.
i have two points i would like to make here,
1. in the whole fight pacman took powershots like they were jabs and in the fianl session he ate it like it was his favourite food! of this i am suspect.
2. to end on a positive note i would say that if there were nothing to hide in this fight then i would say it was excellent win over a great fighter at a bigger weight but, it is only "one" real significant win.
no. 3. juan manuel marquez.
its simple, he beat paciaou twice and has chased him throught the weights to put it to paper but, pacman has avoided it.
marquez i think, in his wisdom took the fight with floyd but knew he would lose but never really losing. i think he is just bating pacman for the trilogy.
i mean, lets face it..pacman did lose to him in both fights so if pacman gets number 4 spot then jmm gets number three for beating him(twice).
number.2. the great welshman. joe calzaghe.
unbeaten! end of.
number 1. floyd is the man for sure.
it is arguable that floyd may have avoided certain people but, it was never fear of losing the fight. it was or is purely money.i dont think we will ever see what he can really do. dazzling speed,superoir boxing skill, etc, nobody even close.
i had trouble putting a fellow couintryman in second place but, i just had to.
p.s. pacman is good but, not this good. sorry.

Thank god ur not a sports writer coz if u are then boxing will be in deep ****

[IMDAZED]

Calzaghe over Hopkins?

Geezus Christ.

I predicted Joe would be #4 but I couldn't even imagine that hogwash. Guess I was wrong.

[MIT.Engineer]

Fighter of the deCade

[Chups]

mayweather should have a vagina next to his name because that's what he is. or a picture of him ducking the welterweight division either way.

lolololol

[Chups]

and i wonder if pacquiao will still keep that slot when they find out he's been juicing

Will never be....they even took a random blood test against him in the Morales fight. He refused that but was forced. Nothing was found. And you'd think a refusal would automatically mean guilt.

i mean seriously what other explanation can there be as to why he left a potential $40 million on the table?

No to bullies and crackheads......more options in the horizon than negotiate with a nonnegotiable/unreliable loudmouth.

[hahaa]

no way in hell is Calzaghe number 3

and i wonder if pacquiao will still keep that slot when they find out he's been juicing

i mean seriously what other explanation can there be as to why he left a potential $40 million on the table?

and no love for abraham, dawson and williams?

i know they ain't fought the most elite of opposition but come one if thats the case calzaghe shouldn't be so high either

dawson and abraham are undefeated surely they deserve to make the cut at least

ricky hatton is way too high in the list aswell if you ask me

and im a winky wright fan but come one his record in the 00's was 12-2-1 and he was number 20!

The bolded sentence needs to get in the dolorean time machine and travel back 3 weeks where its relevant.lol

As for the list, I too would argue as hopkins > calzaghe, their opposition is really so far off.

[Championart]

How can anyone seriously compare Calzaghe to Hopkins as a fighter or even their body of work. Is short term memory a disease with todays fans. How soon do we forget the 20+ title defenses? Don't tell me calzaghe is higher on the list because he got the decision over an old hopkins which in reality hopkins won that fight but got robbed. But lets say for arguments sake that calzaghe really beat an Old hopkins, is that whats being used to place him over Bhop because going by that logic there are some bums who beat Ali when he was old in his career should they be ranked higher than him also? SMH