Mayweather vs Tszyu, who wins it now?

[j]

i'm sure you can guess whom i voted for.


maybe i'm getting the wrong impression, but it seems that people only think of kt as a power puncher. he IS a skilled technician.

remember when tszyu lost to phillips? what happened to his next ten opponents? nine of 'em got KO'd. maybe, a loss is just what he needed. then again, maybe he will simply retire.

i believe someone said pbf would KO kt lol! that's a good one. in case that you were being serious, examine kt's 2 losses. corner stoppage and corner stoppage. it's not like tszyu, himself, had quit or was ktfo. mayweather would not likely be able to do either.

and judah/tszyu round 1 - why was that brought up? tszyu is known as a slow starter if you have followed his career. i do also seem to remember kt starting to light up judah towards the end of that round. then, we all know what happened next.

in my opinion, saying pbf would win a lopsided decision is quite a bit off from the many ways i could see the fight going. a lopsided decision for tszyu or mayweather and ko for mayweather are the most unlikely scenerios i've read here.

is it just me or is there a sudden surge of people all over the mayweather bandwagon? when he losses, this board should be quite humorous.

[mECHsLAVE]

I just proved a point to you, that Mayweather has beaten the so called scraps in Zab & Mitchell over the last year, but the funny thing is these 2 scraps are best wins in Tszyu's career. Then you should not compare Tszyu's resume to PBF.

Tszyu did not knock Mitchell out in the first fight, you made it sound it was a brutal knockout, fact is Mitchell was actually winning the fight & he couldn't continue because he injured his knee. How was this a brutal knockout, please explain??? Tszyu did stop Mitchell in the second fight, but not in the first fight.


Tszyu got knocked out in his prime by who (Vince Phillips)

Mayweather has not lost a fight yet.

Tszyu beat bunch of over the hill guys in his prime.

Mayweather beat guys, like Chico, Castillo twice & Chavez just to name a few.

You called me a PBF nut-hugger, fact is you're PBF hater & have proven to be hater of PBF.

Kostya beat them first as an underdog, when they were prime and winning, not years later after they had been beat up and worn out, trying to come back from losses. Yes, Floyd beat Corrales, the last really impressive win he's had. He split with Castillo in the view of myself and most (yes, yes, I know you had Floyd winning huge, we don't need to argue that insanity again), and the fact that you don't see is that when a fighter takes out a top, reigning fighter then it is far more impressive than going after that fighter when he's already down and beaten. Knocking-out Judah as a reigning, undefeated champion just, to me, is far more impressive than outscoring him immediately after he was outscored by Baldomir in his previous fight. See how that works? It's really not that hard.

It's sad that I have to map out these little paint-by-numbers scenerios to hammer a point into your thick skull.

Yes, yes, I know Mitchell opted to not continue because he said he hurt his knee in that first fight. In fact, while the fight was close, Mitchell was getting roughed up and just wanted out with so far to go in the fight. That's my opinion. He was clearly getting weaker as Kostya was getting stronger. Kostya would have stopped him later in that fight, without question....which he went on to solidify when they fought again and just ran through him like he wasn't even there, coming off of a two-year layoff and with Mitchell coming off of a win streak which impressed most writers enough to make him the favorite.

Are Gunstar and Bozo the same poster? Seriously.... It's like shooting fish in a rain barrell, folks.

[BLOODSHED]

No it's not like shooting fish in a barrell. You're willingly avoiding and dodging the issues.

That's why you've been banned from my threads.

Kostya beat them first as an underdog, when they were prime and winning, not years later after they had been beat up and worn out, trying to come back from losses. Yes, Floyd beat Corrales, the last really impressive win he's had. He split with Castillo in the view of myself and most (yes, yes, I know you had Floyd winning huge, we don't need to argue that insanity again), and the fact that you don't see is that when a fighter takes out a top, reigning fighter then it is far more impressive than going after that fighter when he's already down and beaten. Knocking-out Judah as a reigning, undefeated champion just, to me, is far more impressive than outscoring him immediately after he was outscored by Baldomir in his previous fight. See how that works? It's really not that hard.

It's sad that I have to map out these little paint-by-numbers scenerios to hammer a point into your thick skull.

Yes, yes, I know Mitchell opted to not continue because he said he hurt his knee in that first fight. In fact, while the fight was close, Mitchell was getting roughed up and just wanted out with so far to go in the fight. That's my opinion. He was clearly getting weaker as Kostya was getting stronger. Kostya would have stopped him later in that fight, without question....which he went on to solidify when they fought again and just ran through him like he wasn't even there, coming off of a two-year layoff and with Mitchell coming off of a win streak which impressed most writers enough to make him the favorite.

Are Gunstar and Bozo the same poster? Seriously.... It's like shooting fish in a rain barrell, folks.

[Bozo_no no]

I will never admit that scoring that round 10-8 is a joke. It was a clear knockdown. Judges can score a round 10-8, 10-9, 10-10 whatever- at their discretion, not based on what the referee sees or doesn't see. If a JUDGE sees something that he thinks makes it a 10-8 round (and guess what? a clear knockdown would probably qualify) then he can score it so. Simple. Agonizingly simple. That's why I let it go. You are spinning your wheels and going in circles debating something that is totally meaningless because you are so in love with Floyd that someone saying that he only beat Judah by 3 points offends you, why? Because it would force you to take a close look at Floyd and if he is in fact P4P #1 when he was knocked down beating a fighter by only a few points that Carlos Baldomir just beat.

I actually rarely discuss P4P, like I said. I rarely ever post P4P lists, because they are so utterly subjective that they are meaningless. I'm arguing the top spot with you and youre tap-dancing all around the answer. The real answer is that whether or not you or I think Floyd is P4P #1 is not relevant, only the fact that he hasn't fought the best in his division or won a true championship in many years. P4P is a meaningless title if Floyd DOES have it, because it means you can keep it for years without actually fighting the best. Get it, finally?

A poll? They happen every week, why do another? It's a popularity contest. You'll have some Taylors, some Pacs, some Floyds, etc. It's mostly everyone picking their favorite fighter out of a group of top fighters below HW. For what it's worth, I think you'll have almost everyone with any sense choosing Taylor as #1 in the upcoming P4P polls if he can beat Winky.

You are honestly one of the saddest individuals I have come across.

If you were a judge at that fight, you would have scored that round 10-9. They all did so for a reason. Even Lederman, with the video replay right at his disposal, scored the round 10-9.

Suggesting anything else is not the least bit credible and you know it. Once again, you realize you are wrong, change the subject (to something you say isn't worth talking about because of how "subjective" it is) and then come out spewing rambling non sense when called on it.


It's overly entertaining that you start with a disclaimer that pound for pound ranking are so subjective they're not worth discussing and then end up on a mission to discredit the guy 95% of people would agree is number one.

I don't even overly care for the guy, but he's the best in the world right now, bar none. He's a special talent who is unparalleld in the sport right now in terms of skill, is undefeated and dominating up several weight classes from where he started. He also has wins over two pound for pound fighters in Castillo and Corrales.

You're wrong about the scoring of that round, and your trying to argue something that's almost universally agreed upon which you prefaced as saying was subjective.

You're so see through it's not even funny. Have a candy and be quite now.

[sauld420]

Thank you Bozo someone needs to shut up that hater.

[mECHsLAVE]

He's a special talent who is unparalleld in the sport right now in terms of skill, is undefeated and dominating up several weight classes from where he started. He also has wins over two pound for pound fighters in Castillo and Corrales [many years ago].

I agree he is obviously very talented, but shouldn't he at least fight the best fighters in his division in order to keep P4P #1? 2002 he beat Castillo, avenging what most thought was a win by Castillo in their first meeting. That's the last time he has.

If I were a judge, and saw a clear knockdown and thought that fighter that scored the knockdown also won the round, then I'd score that round 10-8, absolutely. And see it's now YOU who are backpeddling and changing the subject. Hehe. If you had come out and said "I disagree and I think 10-9 was the right score." Then I say, "No problem, that's your opinion." But here's what you said that it "excludes" it from being a 10-8 round because the ref didn't see it. That's incorrect. Nothing "excludes" a judge from scoring it a 10-8 round, if he feels a fighter earned a 10-8 round. See, you went from arguing the rules, which you were so obviously wrong about, to trying to argue what SHOULD have been scored vs. what COULD have been scored. Nice try. You're of course 100% wrong on what COULD have been scored and what SHOULD have been scored is your opinion if you were the judge. Me? I would have scored the round 10-8, period, if I saw a clean knockdown, which I did while watching the fight. And it would have been 100% within the rules of judging a fight.

You are just 100% wrong about that.

You were amusing at first, but now you're really tiring me out. I have to make a statement for you, repeat it, dumb it down for you with a paint-by-numbers example, and then get you back on track when you start to wander and change the subject. It can be scored 10-8 if the judge feels it necessary, nothing "excludes" it from being scored 10-8 in the rules of boxing. Sorry. Nothing. Now, the fact that you don't think it should have been a 10-8 round is fine. Who cares? That isn't what you said. You stated it as a matter of rules of what cannot be done, which was of course ALL WRONG.

[Bozo_no no]

If I were a judge, and saw a clear knockdown and thought that fighter that scored the knockdown also won the round, then I'd score that round 10-8, absolutely.

Then that would be the last fight you scored. That would not happen, and suggesting that all the judges missed it is laughable. Lederman had the repaly and scored the round 10-9.

Scoring it 10-8 is not credible. It's unrealistic and would be ignorant.

The point is you scored that round incorrectly, and think you can use a vague technicality to justify it.

Scoring that round 10-8 makes you ignorant. You don't like that and want to desperatly try to justify yourself.

That's not how rounds are scored, and you're wrong about it. Deal with it.

I agree he is obviously very talented, but shouldn't he at least fight the best fighters in his division in order to keep P4P #1? 2002 he beat Castillo, avenging what most thought was a win by Castillo in their first meeting. That's the last time he has.

Again, you called it subjective and not worth talking about and are now desperatly trying to discredit the guy 95% of people would agree is at #1 by making weak assertions that could be said of any other fighter.

Who has beat everyone in their division that you suggest should be ranked above Mayweather?

Who is it you suggest should be above Mayweather, period?

The bottom line is that you don't have an answer, you're just looking to be argumentative because you're petty. If that wasn't the case you woudn't be arguing without a point about something you said several times you considered so subjective it wasn't worth your time.

You're a joke, and you couldn't be anymore see through with what motivates you to contuinue arguing something once you're unable to back up what you're trying to say.

[Zab Super Judah]

I think PBF would probably stop him at this point in Tsyzu career or dominate him for 12 rounds.

[destroyed]

KT will outpoint pbf by way of aggressiveness.

[moochi]

I like Tszyu, but the fact is he has beaten many over the hill fighters. His 2 biggest wins were against Zab & Mitchell.

it is funny that you mention tszyu's big wins being against mitchell and judah!!!....because mayweather just fought then when they were both well over the hill and look at what he did to them? mayweather struggled against zab and that was a close decision!...he also took his time with sharmba.....

do i need to remind you what tszyu did to both of those fighters!!!!...

also, tell me one top fighter that mayweather has beaten?.....gatti?!...castillo by one round and losing the other(sorry that was given to him as a win)!!!

and believe me, I really like Mayweather, but bhoy he is very far from achieving anything what Tszyu did.......he needs to fight recognized champs and KTFO....not paper champs or vacant champs....

so let him KTFO Hatton, etc and then he;ll be worthy of legendary status...I hope I see it soon...