True or False: James Toney's win over Michael Nunn is better than any win of Floyd's?

[arraamis]

was Toney 38 years old when he did it? NO

What about when Mayweather fought Corrales? Corrales was number 5 P4P in the world, undefeated 33-0 with like 30 KOs, in his prime and just KOed all the top guys in his division plus he was the lineal champion and was considered to be number 1 at 130 lbs at the time. Floyd at the time was ranked number 7 P4P and number 2 at 130, he was also an underdog going into the fight, so going into the fight Corrales was a beast, just like Nunn if not more devastating, and Floyd beat him up, won all rounds, knocked him down like 6 times and stopped him, Toney on the other hand was down on the score cards and had to KO Nunn to win, so Mayweather's win against Corrales was imo better, and his win against Pacquiao is more impressive than any other victory in the last 20 years cuz it was the only time since a long time where the number 1 P4P guy fights the number 2 guy and don't use Pacquiao being old as an excuse cuz Mayweather is 2 years older, 38 years old, best P4P in the world, the record speaks for itself.

Yeah, its kind of hilarious when guys state that Manny was past prime, when Floyd is older that Manny.

[Ahmed_Ismail]

In fact, as proof of my above point regarding P4P rankings at different times, I am willing to bet that roughly 0 people complaining in this thread that believe Pac was a bigger win than Nunn would say that Pacquiao beating #3 P4P Bradley was an equal or bigger win than Nunn.

Prove me wrong.

Why is Nunn a better fighter than Bradley? how is Nunn's resume better than Bradley, he just had more fights, what u don't understand is at the time boxers were praised and people only focused on the positive things they do, now it's the exact opposite, boxers don't get praised anymore from the fans and people have unrealistic expectations from fighters cuz in people's minds now if the fighters of today didn't surpass the achievments of fighters of yesterday they're automatically bums, which is a damn shame. Bradley AND Nunn are both good fighters.

[LacedUp]

Yeah, its kind of hilarious when guys state that Manny was past prime, when Floyd is older that Manny.

Since when is prime defined by age?

Pacquiao was clearly more out of his prime than Floyd. No point in denying that.

Although both were out of their prime.

[LacedUp]

Why is Nunn a better fighter than Bradley? how is Nunn's resume better than Bradley, he just had more fights, what u don't understand is at the time boxers were praised and people only focused on the positive things they do, now it's the exact opposite, boxers don't get praised anymore from the fans and people have unrealistic expectations from fighters cuz in people's minds now if the fighters of today didn't surpass the achievments of fighters of yesterday they're automatically bums, which is a damn shame. Bradley AND Nunn are both good fighters.

Nunn was a much better fighter than Bradley. No point in discussing that at all.

[Divine Hammer]

Yeah, its kind of hilarious when guys state that Manny was past prime, when Floyd is older that Manny.

u have no clue about ring age do u hahahahahahha. just because floyd is 2 years older than manny doesn't mean he is more past prime. pac has been in farrrr more tough fights where he takes a lot of wear and tear. this type of wear and tear quickly chips away at ur prime. this is why some guys in their late 20s or early 30s are finished because they've been in sooo many tough fights and wars that they've completely exhausted their prime years away. do u understand now??? manny has been a pro since 16 years old, has fought far more fights and been in farr more hard tough fights (even the fights he wins he gets beat up - look at cotto or margarito fights for example). not to mention manny suffered a HUGE KO loss against marquez. it was the type of KO loss that MANY fighters pac's age (34 at the time) would have retired on. it's a complete miracle that manny didn't come out of that loss absolutely shot.

and then look at floyd who only has 48 fights, took years in "vacation" while the rest of his competition beat eachother up, only fought once a year, and has a very defensive minded style, etc. all of tehse contribute to extending ur prime much longer than someone who is all action and willing to take punches to land big ones of his own.

[LacedUp]

was Toney 38 years old when he did it? NO

What about when Mayweather fought Corrales? Corrales was number 5 P4P in the world, undefeated 33-0 with like 30 KOs, in his prime and just KOed all the top guys in his division plus he was the lineal champion and was considered to be number 1 at 130 lbs at the time. Floyd at the time was ranked number 7 P4P and number 2 at 130, he was also an underdog going into the fight, so going into the fight Corrales was a beast, just like Nunn if not more devastating, and Floyd beat him up, won all rounds, knocked him down like 6 times and stopped him, Toney on the other hand was down on the score cards and had to KO Nunn to win, so Mayweather's win against Corrales was imo better, and his win against Pacquiao is more impressive than any other victory in the last 20 years cuz it was the only time since a long time where the number 1 P4P guy fights the number 2 guy and don't use Pacquiao being old as an excuse cuz Mayweather is 2 years older, 38 years old, best P4P in the world, the record speaks for itself.

That's just not true at all.

[BrometheusBob.]

What's funny is, there are MANY threads I could find where the same users who seem to now believe Pac was a monster going into the fight and the rightful #2 P4P did not feel that way before the Mayweather fight was announced. Here is a fun example of that:

past prime or not, Pac was a certified P4P #2 on basically every list when Mayweather beat him, so... Mayweather.

Oh that's interesting because well before the May/Pac fight was announced you said THIS:

Let's face it fanboys, Pac is not the same as he was in 2009 and Mayweather ages better than him (due to his style). Pacis still very good, but no way he's on #2 or #1 on P4P rankings. He's about #3 or #4-#5
So stop your nonsense...

I guess to be fair, Pac did beat Algieri since then so that may have changed your mind.
Feel free to explore the thread that quote is from, plenty of non-believers that Pac should P4P #2 and/or who, like the above, admit that Pacquiao was not the same anymore then but will not do so now..(EDIT: HEND not being one of those users as he preceded his post with "past prime or not")

Here is another fun thread:

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=661277

Just 2 months before May/Pac is announced and shockingly few people putting the "certified P4P #2" Pacquiao at #2.

Y'all complain that Mayweather haters hype someone up before a fight and then act like they are a bum after. But y'all are doing the opposite **** - you make fun of a fighter before the fight and then hype him up after.

There are more things I can quote but I don't have the time to expose all of y'all. Hopefully you'll just be straight up about it and take this L like a man.

[Kuyukut]

Yeah, its kind of hilarious when guys state that Manny was past prime, when Floyd is older that Manny.

ydksab... go have a seat in the corner, son!

[IronDanHamza]

That's just not true at all.

I'm pretty sure he was.

When the odds opened he was but they got shorter by fight night.

[Ahmed_Ismail]

That's just not true at all.

When the betting first started Mayweather was a clear underdog but as the fight got closer the odds were pretty close but I remember Floyd being a slight underdog right before the fight