Who is the closest fighter ever to being perfect?

[12TRIBEsRiSe]

i went to vegas to watch floyd fight canelo . i'm a huge fan. i'm just not biased, the way a lot of floyd's fans on the internet are.

i get what has happened. you've been at war for 5-6 years. when you've been a hammer for a long time, everything looks like a nail. i'm not out to get floyd mayweather, or smear him. i paid a lot of money to fly from the east coast and see him fihgt. i was not there for canelo. i dont' care if you believe me or not.


there's one spot in the 7th and one spot in the 10th where canelo is on the ropes for a long time after having been "walkled down" and he's clearly waiting for an opportuniyt to counter floyd, and not really being backed into the ropes because of what's in front of him.



floyd mayweather did not walk canelo down. that is a myth. there was a larry thread on this a few months ago

I believe you bro, I saw it differently tho

[New England]

It's a term used in gyms, at least the few I've been to. Roger didn't originate it. You see Mike Stafford and others use that term as well.

it's obviously not a term coined by roger. he's not implying that.

he's explaining why it's in the mayweather fanboy discourse. they picked it up from roger

[New England]

You don't even know what walking down or one dimensional is. What's the point of even engaging in an argument?

dude, you said floyd mayweather walked canelo down, can't provide any instances of floyd walking canelo down in the fight when pressed, and now you're telling me i don't know what it means.
only on bscene.


why don't you show me floyd walking canelo down? show me where this happened. i want you to either go abck and watch the fight and learn something from seeing how silly you sound, or come here and humiliate yourself by telling me he walked him down in spots where he clearly did not. you're not going to find something that is not there. again, i was at that fight, and i've seen it from 3 different angles on camera. that's 4 angles. i've seen that fight probably a dozen times now.

[12TRIBEsRiSe]

dude, you said floyd mayweather walked canelo down, can't provide any instances of floyd walking canelo down in the fight when pressed, and now you're telling me i don't know what it means.
only on bscene.


why don't you show me floyd walking canelo down? show me where this happened. i want you to either go abck and watch the fight and learn something from seeing how silly you sound, or come here and humiliate yourself by telling me he walked him down in spots where he clearly did not. you're not going to find something that is not there. again, i was at that fight, and i've seen it from 3 different angles on camera. that's 4 angles. i've seen that fight probably a dozen times now.

do u think Floyd and sweet pea are one dimensional? why so?

[-PBP-]

it's obviously not a term coined by roger. he's not implying that.

he's explaining why it's in the mayweather fanboy discourse. they picked it up from roger

So that's the excuse your running with for not knowing what the **** your talking about?

Back in 93 people were talking about Whitaker walking down Chavez at various points in the fight. He wasn't aggressively forcing him backwards, pinning him against the ropes and brawling. He moved forward, maintaining defensive responsibility and forced him backwards at times.

[JStill Unbiased]

No not defensively, I give that to PBF, he was more defensively aware, but thats the only category I would give him againts SRL. SRL was better than him in every other category, which is why I say he was the better overall fighter.

Really? Every other category? Floyd's in ring adjustments are greater than SRL. His counter punching is greater than SRL. His accuracy, judiciousness, footwork all greater than that of SRL.

[New England]

do u think Floyd and sweet pea are one dimensional? why so?

historically and compared to all time well rounded fighters like leonard, robinson, yes, they're mostly one dimensional fighters. they're boxers.

i don't think its' fair for me to have to group them together liek they're the same fighter. we've been talking about floyd mayweather in the thread so i'll stick to talking about him specifically.

mayweather was a big 130 lber, particularly in reach, and was obviously much more dynamic at the weight. he spend most of his career against welterweights, however, and at that weight he wasn't very potent offensively. he had very few knockouts, and he certainly wasn't always fighting particularly dangerous or durable welterweights.


another poster said this in the thread, and i agree with him: leonard does everything better than floyd other than defend in counter. he's better in every other regard. he's inarguably the more well rounded fighter by any unbiased standard, and yes, by comparison, floyd mayweather looks one dimensional because of his inability to finish.


leonard was behind on every card against tommy hearns, and needed several knockdowns or a knockout to beat him. he finished him. he was a great finisher. that's what makes ray leonard a more complete fighter than floyd mayweather.

[12TRIBEsRiSe]

Really? Every other category? Floyd's in ring adjustments are greater than SRL. His counter punching is greater than SRL. His accuracy, judiciousness, footwork all greater than that of SRL.

I wanted to say all of this but I just left lit alone lol people get caught in the hype sometimes and always think of 147 version of Floyd... then they mention tommy hearns and haggler and say Floyd wouldn't beat them as their basis. that has nothing to do with the question of the most complete boxer. Floyd at 130-135 is the greatest boxer ive seen.

[New England]

Really? Every other category? Floyd's in ring adjustments are greater than SRL. His counter punching is greater than SRL. His accuracy, judiciousness, footwork all greater than that of SRL.

floyd looks awkward and unbalanced when he throws combinations. he's very accurate with one or two shots, but leonard absolutely blows him away when you're not only counting pot shots.


again, defending and countering. when you take into account that leonard had to counter much better offensive fighters, even that becomes closer.

[therealpugilist]

I have literally never seen a fighter as good as Roy in his prime and I've watched fights of them all.

thank god for youtube...some may crucify me for his but I'd put a prime Roy Jones in and Tab him to beat all the greats from 160-168

Hagler, Monzon, Eubanks, Benn, Ward, Calzaghe(not the shell of Roy but 90s Roy), Collins, Tiger, Zale, Nunn, Beneventi...you name him Roy was too damn good and I never saw a fighter like that and I've been following the sport and watching the greats for decades

To our era, he was sugar roy Jones....the best all around fighter of the post 1950 and Robinson was the best all around before 1950....too bad a lot of footage of him in the 40s doesn't exist