Secret to beating mayweather

[Marvellous1]

If you are just commenting about one post, then no problem but when I read it, it appeared that you were trying to put more than that one poster in that same boat.


"many people play chess but they would never call themselves an expert, whereas so many internet geeks think they're boxing experts but have never boxed a round in their lives" - Marvellous1

How many years have been into boxing forums? You think this the first post of it's kind. The "I know how to beat *insert name*, you just have to....." post. If what I said doesn't apply to you, the don't take offense. By the way, I've watched boxing for nearly thirty years but spent little time in a boxing ring, so when I use the term "internet geeks", happily include myself, which is why I afford all those that do this for a living a modicum of respect.

[toooooool]

Is that you Marvin?

How many years have been into boxing forums? You think this the first post of it's kind. The "I know how to beat *insert name*, you just have to....." post. If what I said doesn't apply to you, the don't take offense. By the way, I've watched boxing for nearly thirty years but spent little time in a boxing ring, so when I use the term "internet geeks", happily include myself, which is why I afford all those that do this for a living a modicum of respect.

Cuz..let me make a comment..boxing is a SCIENCE...and I like to make
SCIENTIFIC observations.Boxing isn't just about "wow dude!he really got
smashed in that fight".And by the way,many many fighting arts are derived
from animals fighting in the wild..go to the library once in a while and stop
being a self proclaimed "internet geek"

[jas]

So all you people bashing people for being internet geeks would never study tape if you had a fight? F off.

[Marvellous1]

So all you people bashing people for being internet geeks would never study tape if you had a fight? F off.

The important part of that is "had a fight". First, I'd imagine that those in the fight game that those who studied tape of any elite fighter with a mind to beating wouldn't be so derisory to call masterful boxing, "reducing to sparring sessions". Also, DLH looked like a prize prat for actually stating he had a blueprint and fought the guy. I'm going to take this piece of boxing "science" seriously?

[ADP02]

He signed to Manny the first time around it was the other party who didn't and felt the commission should do there jobs.

Ask yourself this .....

Floyd also ACCUSED Manny to the world that he is doing PEDs. With NO PROOF! Why? Read below.

A Floyd fan trying to make excuses the other day for Floyd since he is too sensitive about Arum being Manny's promoter (Floyd said no fight) said this "I understand that Floyd doesn't want to do business with someone that threw him under the bus. Who would? I would NEVER" ...... hmmmm!!!


.

[toooooool]

The important part of that is "had a fight". First, I'd imagine that those in the fight game that those who studied tape of any elite fighter with a mind to beating wouldn't be so derisory to call masterful boxing, "reducing to sparring sessions". Also, DLH looked like a prize prat for actually stating he had a blueprint and fought the guy. I'm going to take this piece of boxing "science" seriously?

Delahoya and other's that try to "attack" Mayweather make the mistake
of attacking him hard with lots of energy then they back off to see what
kind of damage they've done.This is a mistake because when they back
off,that's when they get countered, plus they throw punches too hard so they
get tired later..and that's when Floyd takes them out.I propose that a fighter
throws continuous,medium strength punches throughout ,without EVER
BACKING OFF.This is exactly how Marciano fought and he never lost a fight.

[Marvellous1]

Cuz..let me make a comment..boxing is a SCIENCE...and I like to make
SCIENTIFIC observations.Boxing isn't just about "wow dude!he really got
smashed in that fight".And by the way,many many fighting arts are derived
from animals fighting in the wild..go to the library once in a while and stop
being a self proclaimed "internet geek"

I'll stop when you do "Cuz". And believe I know about the animal styles of Chinese boxing (Gong xi fat choi, by the way). Good attempt at the scientific analysis but you didn't give us any practical examples. For instance, Hatton's smothering did little for him. Constant jabbing which DLH attempted and Cotto periodically produced, gave Mayweather more problems than fighters that have tried to just press and smother. Although styles do make fights, but the user makes the style effective rather than visa versa. Broner could try to use a shoulder roll and so could Berto, but they were overcome by fighters you wouldn't pick against Mayweather.

[ADP02]

How many years have been into boxing forums? You think this the first post of it's kind. The "I know how to beat *insert name*, you just have to....." post. If what I said doesn't apply to you, the don't take offense. By the way, I've watched boxing for nearly thirty years but spent little time in a boxing ring, so when I use the term "internet geeks", happily include myself, which is why I afford all those that do this for a living a modicum of respect.

Look, everyone is beatable but first you need to find the guy who can do it and then have him fight Floyd ..... but since Floyd is selective in who he fights, it makes it kind of hard to do.

It's possible that the post can be written in a way that the poster can't express himself to the fullest and make himself understood. Or maybe, the recipients, such as Floyd fans, just extrapolate what they want and then in turn put down the opinion. Yes, he can also be wrong but you can't paint everyone with the same brush!

I'm not saying that whoever you are commenting on has it right or wrong but the responses by Floyd fans are at times, just as laughable.

The point that I tried to make is that you don't need to be some kind of elite fighter. You don't even need to know how to play to understand, analyse and give your opinion.

[billeau2]

I'll stop when you do "Cuz". And believe I know about the animal styles of Chinese boxing (Gong xi fat choi, by the way). Good attempt at the scientific analysis but you didn't give us any practical examples. For instance, Hatton's smothering did little for him. Constant jabbing which DLH attempted and Cotto periodically produced, gave Mayweather more problems than fighters that have tried to just press and smother. Although styles do make fights, but the user makes the style effective rather than visa versa. Broner could try to use a shoulder roll and so could Berto, but they were overcome by fighters you wouldn't pick against Mayweather.

Gong Xi fat choi???? Do you mean Choy Li fut? Chi Gong? Xi yuan? You like mixed 3 different distinct styles into some mishmash! Or are you saying "Happy year of the Horse?" But Horse would be phonetically different....I just have to know! It sticks in my brain.

[radioraheem]

It's called analyzing the game.

You do it for so many years you can be pretty good at it. Not everyone can do it but can't say that you need to be an elite chess player or boxer or football or hockey player to be able to analyze and give your opinion.

You may 'watch' something for a very long time, but it is absolutely incomparable to someone who has actively and professionally participated at that something for a very long time.

A watcher will a lot of times analyze things incorrectly, and therefore give an opinion that is often not sound. But the one with actual legit experience will see many things inside and out, that will the blind to everyone else a lot of times.