Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why did Manny oppose to WADA back in 2010 vs Floyd?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by LarryXXX View Post
    Even if they continue..that era is over man,they will only be shells of themselves and it can only go downhill from here on
    That's true. Or even better, Canelo or Cotto have been hyped up more once Floyd's gone. One of them walks away with the belt. Floyd beat them both. Canelo or Cotto take on GGG. Floyd comes to take on GGG at a 154 catch but still under a 160 title? Best fight for Floyd to come back. Worst case scenario, Floyd comes back to steal a 160 belt and loses? Honorable? Jokes aside, GGG wouldn't beat Floyd.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by SugarKaineHook View Post
      Who beat Oscar first? What weight agreement did Floyd and Oscar agree to? Fast forward, what did people say about Oscar taking on Pac being ''dehydrated.'' Was there a rehydration clause? Was Oscar the ideal Oscar weight when he fought Pac on fight night? hmm
      Pal, I don't give a fk about your Floyd Mayweather love fest. I don't ride one fighters nuts, I'm a fan of the sport first, fighters second...

      Let the adults have a conversation.

      Comment


      • I think it was both because he suspected it of being a strategy to throw him off his game and because Floyd was actively accusing him of cheating and he was proud and wasn't going to let someone like that dictate to him as a cheater. When he suspected it of being genuine and agreed to it then we still didn't get a fight but continued bickering about promoters, the split etc. I suspect the whole thing of being a strategy by Floyd's side of sabotaging the fight b/c I don't think he wanted the fight to begin with. But notice, admittedly, that's all speculation, and everything that can be said about it is speculation.

        Acid guru Terence McKenna instructed "My technique is don't believe anything. If you believe in something, you are automatically precluded from believing its opposite."

        It's hard to do because it's so tempting to jump to conclusions, to believe what you want to believe, right OP?
        Last edited by TheStranger; 09-22-2015, 06:43 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by SugarKaineHook View Post
          That's true. Or even better, Canelo or Cotto have been hyped up more once Floyd's gone. One of them walks away with the belt. Floyd beat them both. Canelo or Cotto take on GGG. Floyd comes to take on GGG at a 154 catch but still under a 160 title? Best fight for Floyd to come back. Worst case scenario, Floyd comes back to steal a 160 belt and loses? Honorable? Jokes aside, GGG wouldn't beat Floyd.
          Naw man,Floyd needs to move on to promoting and enjoy his life

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Jsmooth9876 View Post
            I think we actually need Floyd or Manny to get beat by one of these young cats to move on.. It always happened, a passing of the torch I guess from one great to the maybe the next.

            these young guys beating each other but never having that HOF fighter as their stepping stone seems odd...

            Oscar had JCC sr, Whitaker etc ....Manny had Barrera and later Oscar..Floyd had Oscar but was always a great fighter from way before that anyway...

            Idk, maybe it's just me, I'd like to see someone claim that spot by beating one of those 2 guys in spectacular fashion...
            Naw,i hate to see fighters fight to long and lose to people they would easily beat in their primes

            Comment


            • Originally posted by SugarKaineHook View Post
              Yeah you keep saying that...

              The waiters name who served Pacquiao's breakfast on the day of the fight, who knows...
              you mean the waiter who serves pac his breakfast was involved in PEDs?

              see how your logic works

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Jsmooth9876 View Post
                Pal, I don't give a fk about your Floyd Mayweather love fest. I don't ride one fighters nuts, I'm a fan of the sport first, fighters second...

                Let the adults have a conversation.
                What Floyd Mayweather love fest? I brought up your context, ''pal.'' My article is about Pacquiao...

                I guess fans of the sport can't bring up empirical observation...

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Rath View Post
                  you mean the waiter who serves pac his breakfast was involved in PEDs?

                  see how your logic works
                  I see how you just want to be involved in a conversation. Btw, anytime you going to refute any of my paragraphs? How many posts are you going to follow me?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by LarryXXX View Post
                    Naw man,Floyd needs to move on to promoting and enjoy his life
                    Actually Floyd should go into Philanthropy. I'm more than sure Al Haymon will help Floyd learn about different branding and investment. He'll definitely be introduced to the right people. If Sean John and Dr. Dre can do it with the capital they had, I think Floyd can to. Floyd has huge marketing potential even outside of boxing.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by TheStranger View Post
                      Acid guru Terence McKenna instructed "My technique is don't believe anything. If you believe in something, you are automatically precluded from believing its opposite."

                      It's hard to do because it's so tempting to jump to conclusions, to believe what you want to believe, right OP?
                      McKenna was the dude. I totally agree with McKenna's quote. Definitely not a guy into consumerism, the status quo, or media television. Just trip from the third eye and you see. I've done my fair share of shrooming. Regarding the quote you're referring to is the reason why thousands of debunking video experts gather objective information and put 2 and 2 together a deduct what makes the most sense. Hence, deductive reasoning.

                      Isn't it common sense that if someone gives different excuses or reasons regarding a particular subject, in this case an interview, wouldn't it be the case that the person is full of ****. If you stand on trial in an actual court system you just can't change your testimonies to the jury as if it were practical....

                      Hence, my article. In Layman's terms.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP