would be a more worthy topic without the involvement of Floyd and Manny, cause the characterizations of some of the fighters are stretching the categories you are trying to force them into.
What's better: Beating Faded Greats? Or Beating Prime Mediocres?
Collapse
-
-
Comment
-
Dumb thread......Floyd beats "Prime mediocres" and "Faded greats" which means his resume is greater. Floyd beat two of those "faded greats" on manny's list who were titlist, a full year younger, one at his natural weight before Manny fought them. You think it's a coincidence that everyone manny beats always retire? No, it's because they already had one foot out the door.Pacquiao's resumé is built on beating faded and out of prime greats. e.g. Mosley, DLH, Barrera, Morales, Marquez
Floyd's resumé is built on beating prime mediocre to good fighters. e.g. Judah, Baldomir, Hatton, Corley, Corrales, Castillo, etc.
Which holds more prestige down the line historically speaking?Comment
-
damn *****...just damn lolDumb thread......Floyd beats "Prime mediocres" and "Faded greats" which means his resume is greater. Floyd beat two of those "faded greats" on manny's list who were titlist, a full year younger, one at his natural weight before Manny fought them. You think it's a coincidence that everyone manny beats always retire? No, it's because they already had one foot out the door.Comment
-
How is barrera faded when pac fought him? Morales II was still good(did u see Morales go to war against maidana?), Marquez was prime as can be when pac fought him 2 times.
Pac ****s on Floyd's resume. It's not even close.Comment
-
Comment
-
sweet mother mary you morons are getting dumber each and every day. it obviously depends on how faded and great they are.
KTFO of Roy Jones at this point obviously wouldnt mean as much as beating someone like Marco Huck, who is mediocre but obviously still better than Roy at this point.
conversely beating someone like Hopkins who is very obviously faded is still better than beating a prime Pascal, who is so mediocre and flawed that even faded Hopkins is still a better achievement.
STOP BEING SO ****ING GENERALISTIC AND ******ED. do you ****ing people even watch boxing? youre all ****ing ****** morons.
and incidently you ******ed thread starter, Pacquiao's wins over old ass shot Mosley, DLH and Morales are all worse than Floyd's wins over prime Castillo and Corrales.
On the other hand, Pacquiao's first win over Barrera is better than any single win that Mayweather has, and his second win over Barrera is just as good or better than Mayweather's win over Corrales.
stop being such a ****ing moron.Comment
-
I agree man, atlest you seem to know boxing, BOTH fighters have there flaws.sweet mother mary you morons are getting dumber each and every day. it obviously depends on how faded and great they are.
KTFO of Roy Jones at this point obviously wouldnt mean as much as beating someone like Marco Huck, who is mediocre but obviously still better than Roy at this point.
conversely beating someone like Hopkins who is very obviously faded is still better than beating a prime Pascal, who is so mediocre and flawed that even faded Hopkins is still a better achievement.
STOP BEING SO ****ING GENERALISTIC AND ******ED. do you ****ing people even watch boxing? youre all ****ing ****** morons.
and incidently you ******ed thread starter, Pacquiao's wins over old ass shot Mosley, DLH and Morales are all worse than Floyd's wins over prime Castillo and Corrales.
On the other hand, Pacquiao's first win over Barrera is better than any single win that Mayweather has, and his second win over Barrera is just as good or better than Mayweather's win over Corrales.
stop being such a ****ing moron.Comment
-
damnit, i picked shotes and past it greats because i didn't see that mediocre was also in a category with / good
i would change my vote now that i saw the "Good" fighter
a "good" prime fighter is always a tough test
past prime fighters sometimes don't even try
or cant take advantage if they do tryComment
Comment