I think everyone can agree Shane fought the better competition than PBF

[STRUGG]

If it was just a Shane thread, you would have said "Shane Mosley has one of the best resumes for active fighters". Instead you say, "Shane's resume is better than Floyd's resume". Which shows once again how much you think about Floyd.

BTW you have to realize, losses shouldn't be counted as part of a "good resume". In that case, Roy Jones Jr has the best resume of the 90s and 00s.

Hopkins 2x, Toney, McCallum, Calzaghe, Tarver 3x, Johnson, Pazienza, Green, Ruiz, Woods, Trinidad, Griffin 2x, Hill, Lacy and also fought 10 undefeated fighters.

its a shane thread...............it highlights how significantly it eclipse floyds................but it is a shane thread nonetheless.............

its not about the best resume thread either............by the way delahoya's win or loss resume is greater than rjj........

[Shabba Rank$]

For the hate you try to show towards Floyd...

You sure make a lot of threads related to Floyd...

[-Kev-]

Mosley's notable wins were De La Hoya, Margarito, Collazo, Vargas, Mayorga. Mosley's best opponents were Mayweather, Winky 2x, DLH 2x, Cotto, and Forrest 2x, and Margarito.

He went 3 W - 6 L against the best opponents he faced.

Mayweather's best wins were Mosley, De La Hoya, Corrales, Castillo 2x, Hernandez, Hatton, Marquez, Judah, Chavez, Corley, Gatti, Baldomir. His best opponents were Mosley, DLH, Corrales, Castillo 2x, Hatton, Judah and Marquez.

He went 8-0 against his best opponents.

Now if Mosley at least had a win over Vernon and a win over Winky, 1-1 against each...He would have had the best resume of the 2000s for sure, surpassing any active fighter, hands down. Beating Cotto would have been icing in the cake, but he lost both times to Winky, both times to Vernon, and lost to Cotto.

[-Kev-]

its a shane thread...............it highlights how significantly it eclipse floyds................but it is a shane thread nonetheless.............

its not about the best resume thread either............by the way delahoya's win or loss resume is greater than rjj........

A win over Hopkins, Toney, Tarver and Ruiz>Anything De La Hoya, Mayweather, or Mosley have done.

[STRUGG]

For the hate you try to show towards Floyd...

You sure make a lot of threads related to Floyd...

i dont hate floyd........LOL.....but this is not a floyd thread
rather than being offended .....floyd should listen to the boxing fans

[STRUGG]

A win over Hopkins, Toney, Tarver and Ruiz>Anything De La Hoya, Mayweather, or Mosley have done.

kev......i was comparing delahoyas resume with roy jones......you misunderstood my post..............

[pocket_rockets]

LOL at *****s trying to prove otherwise. Hell, Shane faced even tougher competition than Pac. He just didn't win em all.

[Walt Liquor]

If it was just a Shane thread, you would have said "Shane Mosley has one of the best resumes for active fighters". Instead you say, "Shane's resume is better than Floyd's resume". Which shows once again how much you think about Floyd.

BTW you have to realize, losses shouldn't be counted as part of a "good resume". In that case, Roy Jones Jr has the best resume of the 90s and 00s.
Hopkins 2x, Toney, McCallum, Calzaghe, Tarver 3x, Johnson, Pazienza, Green, Ruiz, Woods, Trinidad, Griffin 2x, Hill, Lacy and also fought 10 undefeated fighters.

Losses are part of a resume. Wins are wins, with wins the opponent and what point in his
career he was in. For example, shane's win vs Oscar was a better win than floyd's win over Oscar. A win over an opponent at that opponents optimal weight class means more than a win over that fighter at a weight class
where they don't belong (see your vinny Paz reference). You can't just name names to show a good win and have any sort of credibility to your arguments. It hinders you from gaining any respect for your arguments.
If fights a fighter took and lost didn't count on their resume, no one would use the word resume, we would just say wins.

[RubenSonny]

Losses are part of a resume. Wins are wins, with wins the opponent and what point in his
career he was in. For example, shane's win vs Oscar was a better win than floyd's win over Oscar. A win over an opponent at that opponents optimal weight class means more than a win over that fighter at a weight class
where they don't belong (see your vinny Paz reference). You can't just name names to show a good win and have any sort of credibility to your arguments. It hinders you from gaining any respect for your arguments.
If fights a fighter took and lost didn't count on their resume, no one would use the word resume, we would just say wins.

Losses aren't part of a resume, you don't apply for a job listing the places you failed to work at. If we go by this, Augustus has a better resume than most today and Laporte has one of the best ever.

[Walt Liquor]

If it was just a Shane thread, you would have said "Shane Mosley has one of the best resumes for active fighters". Instead you say, "Shane's resume is better than Floyd's resume". Which shows once again how much you think about Floyd.

BTW you have to realize, losses shouldn't be counted as part of a "good resume". In that case, Roy Jones Jr has the best resume of the 90s and 00s.
Hopkins 2x, Toney, McCallum, Calzaghe, Tarver 3x, Johnson, Pazienza, Green, Ruiz, Woods, Trinidad, Griffin 2x, Hill, Lacy and also fought 10 undefeated fighters.

Losses are part of a resume. Wins are wins, with wins the opponent and what point in his
career he was in. For example, shane's win vs Oscar was a better win than floyd's win over Oscar. A win over an opponent at that opponents optimal weight class means more than a win over that fighter at a weight class
where they don't belong (see your vinny Paz reference). You can't just name names to show a good win and have any sort of credibility to your arguments. It hinders you from gaining any respect for your arguments.
If fights a fighter took and lost didn't count on their resume, no one would use the word resume, we would just say wins.