Lampley's Anti-Gatti List

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • PlasterWraps
    Britta'd
    Gold Champion - 500-1,000 posts
    • Aug 2013
    • 729
    • 39
    • 22
    • 7,098

    #121
    Originally posted by New England
    so a fighter who holds, backs away consistently, pot shots, and boxes primarily isn't negative now?

    .......

    you and your little crew are the only people who don't think floyd mayweather is negative. you're just going to have to accept that you're biased. do you not agree that you're biased toward floyd? i have no biases against floyd mayweather. i paid a lot of money to travel to vegas and watch him fight canelo.
    That's like anti-vaxxers admitting that vaccines don't cause Autism.

    Comment

    • El-blanco
      Undisputed Champion
      Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
      • Jul 2014
      • 12647
      • 616
      • 2,141
      • 23,841

      #122
      Originally posted by IMDAZED
      Let's get back to the topic. What was "negative" about Mayweather's style from 130-140?
      No rebuttal to what he said? Floyd has been at 147 for close to a decade.

      Comment

      • New England
        Strong champion.
        Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
        • Oct 2010
        • 37514
        • 1,926
        • 1,486
        • 97,173

        #123
        Originally posted by IMDAZED
        I sure do.

        Still waiting.


        i gave you a post with "facts and clarity" and you told me to get back on track


        are you biased for floyd mayweather? i think that's an easy enough question to answer.


        here's another easy one: are you really going to deny that floyd was still in his prime at 147 lbs to suit your agenda that he "wasn't negative in his prime?"


        you sound like a child. all of you do. you sound like children on a playground. it's embarrassing to see you reduced to this, because you do bring things to the table where the mayweather - pacquiao feud isn't concerned.

        Comment

        • New England
          Strong champion.
          Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
          • Oct 2010
          • 37514
          • 1,926
          • 1,486
          • 97,173

          #124
          Originally posted by El-blanco
          No rebuttal to what he said? Floyd has been at 147 for close to a decade.


          he wasn't prime doe, papi.

          Comment

          • IMDAZED
            Fair but Firm
            Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
            • May 2006
            • 42644
            • 1,134
            • 1,770
            • 67,152

            #125
            Originally posted by El-blanco
            No rebuttal to what he said? Floyd has been at 147 for close to a decade.
            Why would you only look at his career from that point? He's fought 14 times since moving up from 140. He made 8 defenses of his 130 title alone.

            What I said was that he wasn't negative in his prime which, to me, was from 130-140. And he certainly wasn't. When you're talking about Mayweather simply potshotting, you're talking about a past prime version.

            Comment

            • IMDAZED
              Fair but Firm
              Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
              • May 2006
              • 42644
              • 1,134
              • 1,770
              • 67,152

              #126
              Originally posted by New England
              i gave you a post with "facts and clarity" and you told me to get back on track


              are you biased for floyd mayweather? i think that's an easy enough question to answer.


              here's another easy one: are you really going to deny that floyd was still in his prime at 147 lbs to suit your agenda that he "wasn't negative in his prime?"


              you sound like a child. all of you do. you sound like children on a playground. it's embarrassing to see you reduced to this, because you do bring things to the table where the mayweather - pacquiao feud isn't concerned.
              You think Mayweather was closer to his prime at 147 than he was between 130-140.

              Bias? Miss me with your bull****.

              Comment

              • New England
                Strong champion.
                Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                • Oct 2010
                • 37514
                • 1,926
                • 1,486
                • 97,173

                #127
                look, i love floyd mayweather. i really do.


                i generally don't care for his fans any longer. just try and call it like it is, floyd fans. your guy isn't perfect, and every conceivable scenario in which one could fault mayweather isn't the product of some pacquiao driven agenda.

                floyd is a great fighter. he's one of the best defensive fighters ever. he's the best i've seen personally on defense. prime whitaker is before my time. he's better than toney, hopkins, others.


                he's negative when compared to most other great fighters. people generally find him more boring than past greats.

                Comment

                • b00g13man
                  Undisputed Champion
                  Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
                  • Dec 2012
                  • 12197
                  • 265
                  • 51
                  • 34,905

                  #128
                  Loooooooooooooooooooool.

                  Comment

                  • New England
                    Strong champion.
                    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                    • Oct 2010
                    • 37514
                    • 1,926
                    • 1,486
                    • 97,173

                    #129
                    Originally posted by IMDAZED
                    You think Mayweather was closer to his prime at 147 than he was between 130-140.

                    Bias? Miss me with your bull****.

                    i never said that. floyd mayweather is one of the best 130 lbers i've ever seen. if he wasn't in his prime then, i'd be frightened for his opponents. he had a rough fight at 135 with a terrific lightweight named jose luis castillo. again, he was still in is prime. he wasn't at 140 for long. he's been a welterweight for 10 years. and yes, he was in his prime for most of it.


                    the creation of straw man arguments is literally all you do.

                    Comment

                    • El-blanco
                      Undisputed Champion
                      Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
                      • Jul 2014
                      • 12647
                      • 616
                      • 2,141
                      • 23,841

                      #130
                      Originally posted by New England
                      he wasn't prime doe, papi.

                      Originally posted by IMDAZED
                      Why would you only look at his career from that point? He's fought 14 times since moving up from 140. He made 8 defenses of his 130 title alone.

                      What I said was that he wasn't negative in his prime which, to me, was from 130-140. And he certainly wasn't. When you're talking about Mayweather simply potshotting, you're talking about a past prime version.
                      So Floyd was past prime versus oscar? Hahaha. This is ridiculous. He moved up in weight and realized his strategy needed to change. That doesn't make him past prime.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      TOP