I honestly have never seen Mayweather put on a "masterclass"

[ThePunchingBag]

The real response to this thread.

Floyd is so good, he makes it look easy.

It's not about the skills. His tactics are so high-level that what he does looks simple to the layman. Like watching Bob Ross paint.

[Marvellous1]

That really does not matter. Where was the other poster wrong? You even agreed with other posters concerning ADP. On what did you agree on?


As for your question, there were discussions here about Canelo's struggles prior to the Floyd fight. He ballooned to around 172 against Trout and was having stamina issues. So that could have been the point or perhaps comments made prior to the fight being signed by Canelo and his team. There was a lot of talk coming from them that they can't do a CW without having issues making weight but only that poster can tell you what they meant by that statement.

As for the 152 CW and this may also answer your question, you should be listening to Floyd's own words. "CWs are used to drain your opponent". If you take someone's word then you need to take Floyd's.

I hear that. And in all honesty Mayweather proved himself a massive hypocrite for taking that catchweight. But....... you cannot take credit away from that win without taking credit from Pacquiao's win over Cotto. The same way I feel if you call it a masterclass (I think it was), the Cotto beat down gets the credit it deserves.

Still this is off at a tangent from what is a massively ignorant thread and it's exposed a lot of posters that either don't know what a masterclass is or just straight refuse to acknowledge one because of who performed. That is NOT what being a boxing fan is. That is being an ignorant child.

[MRBOOMER]

Troll thread at its best lol.

[Lets_Get_It_On!]

None of the drivel you posted answers my question. He weighed in under 154 for Trout. Explain how that indicates he had issues making 154.

You don't know what the poster I quoted meant, so why the **** are you getting involved in the convo?

Oh, ADP02's posting history tells me that those posters are right.

You are in some kind of tunnel vision with that it seems. You asked a question that was precisely responded to you by ADP. All he really said was when Canelo struggled with 154 and even told you it was AFTER the Floyd fight. Still, you either pretended or ignored what he said and you said that he does not know what he was talking about.

That was my point with you. That poster was not wrong. You actually said the same thing as him, as far as your question. All he did was answer your question.

My point was also with the other poster who brought up an article of 2 years prior to the fight and calling people idiots for not agreeing with him that it was valid still valid 2 years later.

[ADP02]

I hear that. And in all honesty Mayweather proved himself a massive hypocrite for taking that catchweight. But....... you cannot take credit away from that win without taking credit from Pacquiao's win over Cotto. The same way I feel if you call it a masterclass (I think it was), the Cotto beat down gets the credit it deserves.

Still this is off at a tangent from what is a massively ignorant thread and it's exposed a lot of posters that either don't know what a masterclass is or just straight refuse to acknowledge one because of who performed. That is NOT what being a boxing fan is. That is being an ignorant child.

Everyone has their own personal definition of that word. Some of that is dependent on what you like seeing more of in boxing and who you like in boxing.

Personally, I don't like the fouls that are committed in fights. Not just in boxing but other sports that I like. In some sports, acceptable fouls make bad players better than they really are and bring down the quality of the good players. In turn, hurting the game. Once refs enforce the rules, it lifts the level of the game and actually shows who are the most skilled people or teams of the sport.

[ADP02]

So you give Pac as little, or as much credit for the Cotto fight as you give Floyd for the Canelo fight?

Ben, you have been here a while. We are talking about Reloaded. He was totally against CWs.

I can find a middle ground. I rather see a fight than no fight but as long as nobody gets a clear advantage from it.

[ADP02]

None of the drivel you posted answers my question. He weighed in under 154 for Trout. Explain how that indicates he had issues making 154.

You don't know what the poster I quoted meant, so why the **** are you getting involved in the convo?

Oh, ADP02's posting history tells me that those posters are right.

Like was said, I responded to your question of when Canelo was clearly struggling. You maybe thought that I was the other poster or read what the other poster said but I didn't.

I was simultaneously responding to you and others on this. The other guy went back 2 years and thought it was valid to do so.



.

[b00g13man]

You are in some kind of tunnel vision with that it seems. You asked a question that was precisely responded to you by ADP. All he really said was when Canelo struggled with 154 and even told you it was AFTER the Floyd fight. Still, you either pretended or ignored what he said and you said that he does not know what he was talking about.

That was my point with you. That poster was not wrong. You actually said the same thing as him, as far as your question. All he did was answer your question.

My point was also with the other poster who brought up an article of 2 years prior to the fight and calling people idiots for not agreeing with him that it was valid still valid 2 years later.

You're just as dense as he is. I'll spell it out one last time...

How the **** did Mayweather bring Alvarez down to 152 knowing he had issues making 154 when he showed no signs of a struggle in any of the previous fights?

If you don't have an answer, I'd suggest you STFU.

[Marvellous1]

Everyone has their own personal definition of that word. Some of that is dependent on what you like seeing more of in boxing and who you like in boxing.

Personally, I don't like the fouls that are committed in fights. Not just in boxing but other sports that I like. In some sports, acceptable fouls make bad players better than they really are and bring down the quality of the good players. In turn, hurting the game. Once refs enforce the rules, it lifts the level of the game and actually shows who are the most skilled people or teams of the sport.

That's all well and good, and yes boxing can be subjective, but no matter how much you dislike a particular fighter, denying what they have actually done on more than one occasion because you didn't take the time to educate yourself is ignorance. Performances against Corrales and Gatti were masterclasses no matter how subjective you want to get. If you can't acknowledge that as a fan of the sport, you're beyond help- pretty much the OP.

[PACnPBFsuck]

He forgot Canelo, Guerrero, Marquez, Gatti, Bruseles and Corales.

The fact that this thread went past this comment, is truly amazing.