Comments Thread For: Roach Admits: Floyd Mayweather is King of This Era

[Xi_]

Hopkins was an underdog.

'Only argument is Vegas odds?'

Well, why don't you go on to Vegas and become a millionaire?

If you have such foresight.

It was a good fight, and Hopkins was the underdog; and absolutely dominated.

Hopkins was fighting at light heavyweight, so the catchweight wasn't really that unreasonable.

please tell me what about pavlik's game convinced you that he would trouble a fighter like bhop? why is it so hard to admit that he had fights that were cherrypicks? hopkins has plenty of cherry picked fights on his resume and he didn't always fight the best each time out. winky, pavlik, murat, shumenov, roy jones, etc....all cherrypick fights post tarver.

[Drunken Cat]

They were at LHW and Ronald Wright had no business being there. Pavlik too.

I guess north of 168 is light heavyweight.

I don't know that Wright belonged there, although he had fought at middleweight.

Pavlik, he was a career middleweight, and I frankly don't think the weight was much of a factor. A middleweight and a light heavyweight meeting at 170 frankly doesn't bother me much.

[Drunken Cat]

please tell me what about pavlik's game convinced you that he would trouble a fighter like bhop? why is it so hard to admit that he had fights that were cherrypicks? hopkins has plenty of cherry picked fights on his resume and he didn't always fight the best each time out. winky, pavlik, murat, shumenov, roy jones, etc....all cherrypick fights post tarver.

So how much cash did you make on Hopkins-Pavlik?

Pavlik was undefeated, and Hopkins was the underdog.

Take your revisionist history somewhere else.

And at the time of the fight, I thought Hopkins might be past it, to answer the question.

And he was the underdog.

[IMDAZED]

I guess north of 168 is light heavyweight.

I don't know that Wright belonged there, although he had fought at middleweight.

Pavlik, he was a career middleweight, and I frankly don't think the weight was much of a factor. A middleweight and a light heavyweight meeting at 170 frankly doesn't bother me much.

Depends on who. In this case it's Kelly Pavlik and Bernard Hopkins. Pavlik did nothing above 160 (obviously weight was...a factor), had a short reign at 160 and quite frankly, is a big win in name only. Fighting Winky at 170 was laughably bad.

[texasboi15]

Pavlik was a true definition of a cherry pick....cw fight vs a style that bhop always destroyed......the only argument against it being a cherry pick were the vegas odds but you studied bhop's career and styles you can see what it was a cherry pick.

That's easy to say in hindsight

Pavlik had just brutally knocked out the guy that Hopkins went tooth and nail with twice

F uck style and catchweight we all expected Kelly to carry that power up and be able to hurt Hopkins

It was a risky fight for Hopkins to take

Now in hindsight after Bernard defeated the monster that was Pavlik we can all say it was a cherrypick

Fck outta here

[SterlingStained]

technically record unbeaten wise sure floyd.

but in terms of giving the fans great memorable fights, floyd's wayyyyy down the list.

oscar, roy, manny, tyson all gave boxing fans greater memorable fights than floyd.

what's floyd's most memorable fight?

how many great fights has floyd given the fans who paid ppv? even his pacquiao win, he won but he really didnt do much. he didnt do anything memorable in that fight.

they all were boring stale fights devoid of action and drama. but hey at least his 24/7 and all access shows were legendary.

[Drunken Cat]

The points are only ridiculous because you view Hopkins through eyes of admiration. Just like most of the points you made about Floyd seem ridiculous to me because we view Floyd in a different light. That's the problem when you go nitpicking fighters resumes. Any semi-knowledgeable fight fan can shred 99% of all fighters resumes in one way or another. And more times than not its based on you you feel personally about a fighter.

I don't wanna come off as tring to **** on Hopkins. I'm a fan of his, probably moreso than Floyd. He's a felon that's pulled himself up, stayed outta trouble, and made something of his life. I can relate. He had a much rougher upbringing than me, and made it out. I think Floyd tends to exaggerate some of hus heartships growing up. As a man, I respect Hopkins a helluvs lot more than I respect Floyd. That said, I think Floyd was a better fighter. And my post was mostly to give you a visual as to how Hopkins career was just ad carefully constructed as Floyd's. Probably more carefully constructed. Because Floyd chased big fights. Where Hopkins let the fights come to him.

I love all fighters.

Floyd has rubbed me the wrong way, due to his marketing and stuff, including promotion of anti-social values, in order to sell himself.

I'm not any Hopkins fanboy.

I just think he is a greater fighter, but I respect your opinion.

Floyd's technical ability is unreal, and p4p lists are fakeness, in any case.

Floyd is a great fighter.

[texasboi15]

Winky was a cherry pick

BWaHAHaahahaHAHAHAhahaaHAHa!!

[TrueBoxingFan23]

I've said for years, the only fight Floyd didn't take that leaves somewhat of a sour taste in my mouth is Cotto. He should have fought Cotto immediately after Hatton. And watching how Cotto competed with him when they finally fight only emhanced my disappointmemt that the fight didn't take place back in 08. Aside from that, dude's resume is air tight.

And to be real, the term "primed" gets thrown around too much anyway. Most guys physical prime only last 2-3yrs. Being great in your prime isn't what makes you an ATG. Longevity is what makes you an ATG. Floyd beat guys when they were considered at the top of the sport. Physical prime is irrelevant:

Baldomir: reigning lineal welterweight champ

Hatton: top 5 P4P, reigning lineal jr welterweight champ

JMM: #2 P4P, reigning lineal lightweight champ

Mosley: #3 P4P, consensus #1 welterweight

Pacquiao: top 5 P4P: consensus #2 welterweight behind Floyd

As a sidenote, Floyd moved up three times during his welterweight run to challenge arguably the top guy at jr middleweight. DLH, Cotto, Canelo

He also filled his the gaps between his big fights with guys like Ortiz, Guerrero, and Maidana (2), who were top 10 fighters in the division, albiet not elite.

Folks can feel free to poke holes all they want. But that's a HOF resume right there. And that's totally disregarding what Floyd did in his physical prime (there's that word again.)

I agree with most, but if you do your research, when Floyd was with top rank Bob wanted to set up a fight with Margarito. Floyd wanted the fight for a amount of money and wanted a fight where the winner was to fight Cotto. Bob said no to the Cotto fight or the purses. This is coming from Bobs mouth and was posted on boxingscene

[hitking]

So how much cash did you make on Hopkins-Pavlik?

Pavlik was undefeated, and Hopkins was the underdog.

Take your revisionist history somewhere else.

And at the time of the fight, I thought Hopkins might be past it, to answer the question.

And he was the underdog.

Do you base "risk taking" on whether a guy is the underdog or not? Because if so, you're being very unfair to guys like Floyd and Roy. And maybe giving too much credit to guys like Hopkins and even Manny. Floyd and Roy were decorated amateurs that were EXPECTED to be great. Hopkins kinda came outta nowhere. I don't know if Floyd was an underdog in his entire career. Maybe Hernandez or Chico. But to me that's a very unfair criteria to base "risk taking" on. Even now, at nearly 40, Floyd would have tp fight the best middleweight on the planet to be considered an underdog. At the end of his run, as a former middleweight and small light heavyweight, Roy would have been favored to beat most of the top 10 heavyweights back then. So was anything short of fighting Lennox Lewis a cherrypick?