Adrien Broner already accomplished more then Mayweather has at age 23

[Larry the boss]

thread starter just wants broner and floyd fans to argue,he doesnt give a damn about either

[ElBossHogg™]

thread starter just wants broner and floyd fans to argue,he doesnt give a damn about either

But I do Larry But I Do...

But IM sorry I cant care on your level to make death threats, so you right in your eyes I probably don't give a damn about either.

[Mr. Fantastic]

I think Floyd beating Genaro Hernandez is much better than anything Broner has done so far.

[BafanaBafana]

Floyd's resume at 23 (1996-2000): 24-0-0 (18 KOs)

Meaningful fights(chronological):
Ranking by The RING at the time they were fought.

Genaro Hernandez 38-1-1(#1 ranked at 130 pounds, WBC titleholder)
Angel Manfredy 25-2-1(#4/5 ranked at 130 pounds, no title)
Carlos Gerena 34-2
Gregorio Vargas 40-6


Broner's resume at 23 (2008-2012): 25-0-0 (21 KOs)

Meaningful fights (chronological):

Ponce de Leon 41-2
Jason Litzau 28-2 (#10 ranked at 130 punds, no title)
Vicente Martin Rodriguez 34-2-1 (for vacant WBO title)
Eloy Perez 23-0-2 (#8 ranked at 130 pounds, no title)
Vicente Escobedo 24-2
Antonio DeMarco 28-2-1 (#1 ranked at 135, WBC titleholder)

Conclusion: Broner's record at 23 looks better overall, but Mayweather's record at 130 pounds is much better than Broner's. Skill-wise Mayweather was much better but didn't have the same power. If you look at their opposition prior, Ponce de Leon and Genaro Hernandez were huge step ups for both respectively at the time they fought them.

Source: Boxrec

[big_james10]

Mayweather only captured one title @ 130 by age 23 and now broner has captured one @ 130 and @ 135.

What yall think about this?

It amazes me how the people who post on this site can take the most minute things such as this ridiculous comparison or the ridiculous rumor that has been floating around the last few days that has absolutely no basis in fact and that no one, except the haters who post on this site, pay any attention to, and use this crap to criticize Floyd Mayweather. Don't you guys have anything else better to do than waste your time focusing on every word that comes from the mouth of anyone who ever so much as shined Mayweather's shoes or once opened a door for him. Even if this was true, only the haters on this site actually give a damn.

In my opinion, Broner is a good fighter, but he hasn't fought anyone who has ever really tested him or was capable of beating him because he was fighting in a weak division. Now he has moved up and fought a guy who really wasn't that good, in spite of the fact that he had a title. I will give him his accolades when he beats a high quality opponent that is actually capable of beating him. So far, he has done nothing more than Joe Calzaghe -- spend his entire career fighting weak opponents in a weak division. I will start comparing him to Mayweather when he starts beating the type of quality opposition that Mayweather has beaten and starts drawing the fans and PPV numbers that Mayweather draws.

[BafanaBafana]

It amazes me how the people who post on this site can take the most minute things such as this ridiculous comparison or the ridiculous rumor that has been floating around the last few days that has absolutely no basis in fact and that no one, except the haters who post on this site, pay any attention to, and use this crap to criticize Floyd Mayweather. Don't you guys have anything else better to do than waste your time focusing on every word that comes from the mouth of anyone who ever so much as shined Mayweather's shoes or once opened a door for him. Even if this was true, only the haters on this site actually give a damn.

In my opinion, Broner is a good fighter, but he hasn't fought anyone who has ever really tested him or was capable of beating him because he was fighting in a weak division. Now he has moved up and fought a guy who really wasn't that good, in spite of the fact that he had a title. I will give him his accolades when he beats a high quality opponent that is actually capable of beating him. So far, he has done nothing more than Joe Calzaghe -- spend his entire career fighting weak opponents in a weak division. I will start comparing him to Mayweather when he starts beating the type of quality opposition that Mayweather has beaten and starts drawing the fans and PPV numbers that Mayweather draws.

I think he's on the right track. If he succeeds then good for him and U.S. boxing in general. If he doesn't then who cares? Why should we hold him to Mayweather's standards? What is he Floyd's son? Let Broner be Broner and Mayweather be Mayweather.

[-Kev-]

Mayweather won the WBC 130 title at 21 years old, 130 lineal title at 23 years old, 135 The Ring/Lineal/WBC titles at 25 years old.


Broner has yet to collect one Ring/Lineal title, and it is too late for him to even get a lineal title at 130 like Floyd did. He can get his first Ring title here at 135.

Mayweather actually accomplished more at 23, because he actually became "The Man To Beat" at 130. But you wouldn't know about that obviously since you think he only got one title by the age of 23. You don't seem to even know what lineal title is I guess.

[BafanaBafana]

It amazes me how the people who post on this site can take the most minute things such as this ridiculous comparison or the ridiculous rumor that has been floating around the last few days that has absolutely no basis in fact and that no one, except the haters who post on this site, pay any attention to, and use this crap to criticize Floyd Mayweather. Don't you guys have anything else better to do than waste your time focusing on every word that comes from the mouth of anyone who ever so much as shined Mayweather's shoes or once opened a door for him. Even if this was true, only the haters on this site actually give a damn.

In my opinion, Broner is a good fighter, but he hasn't fought anyone who has ever really tested him or was capable of beating him because he was fighting in a weak division. Now he has moved up and fought a guy who really wasn't that good, in spite of the fact that he had a title. I will give him his accolades when he beats a high quality opponent that is actually capable of beating him. So far, he has done nothing more than Joe Calzaghe -- spend his entire career fighting weak opponents in a weak division. I will start comparing him to Mayweather when he starts beating the type of quality opposition that Mayweather has beaten and starts drawing the fans and PPV numbers that Mayweather draws.

Mayweather won the WBC 130 title at 21 years old, 130 lineal title at 23 years old, 135 The Ring/Lineal/WBC titles at 25 years old.


Broner has yet to collect one Ring/Lineal title, and it is too late for him to even get a lineal title at 130 like Floyd did. He can get his first Ring title here at 135.

Mayweather actually accomplished more at 23, because he actually became "The Man To Beat" at 130. But you wouldn't know about that obviously since you think he only got one title by the age of 23. You don't seem to even know what lineal title is I guess.

I'm not sure about this but did Genaro become the "lineal" champion by fighting Azumah Nelson who had a 2-1-1 record in his last 4 fights at 130. I know for a fact that Genaro never held a RING belt. In early 1997 (prior to fighting) I suspect Nelson might have been ranked #1 contender and Hernandez at #3 though.

[JDezi4]

Mayweather beat Hernandez and Corrales by age 24... So far Broner's best win is... Demarco

[BafanaBafana]

Mayweather beat Hernandez and Corrales by age 24... So far Broner's best win is... Demarco

What if 'hypothetically' at 24 Broner were to beat Danny Garcia. What would that do for him?