Did Mayweather Harm or Help the sport of boxing

[-PBP-]

All of this arguing would end if everybody admitted that their favorite current fighter is a protected cherry picking bit*h.

It's like these dudes are saying "My favorite fighter is a *****. I blame Floyd for giving them this ***** mentality".

Floyd isn't responsible for the current state of boxing. It's the current era of boxers faults for being bitc*es.

[Mr. Punch-Out!!]

so my original statement was correct that the only ones who was cheated was the one who want to see him lose

If Floyd's fights were entertaining, it wouldn't have mattered if he lost. It's about getting your money's worth.

You're so ridiculous.

A slug-fest.......... that many casuals didn't watch............. because they have no idea who those guys are............. because they rarely fought on PPV.......... and weren't promoted to full extent.

You're trying to tell me that casuals bought Mayweather V Guerrero even though most don't know who the guy is? A Million people? Base on his fight with Berto?

Please, just stop. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

As if PPV is the only way to watch boxing fights. LOL

[The Big Dunn]

Upset? You know as well as I do why people buy Floyd's fight. He draws attention by being the villain. Everybody knows that. You yourself said that it maybe because people like boxers who attract haters (which has nothing with what he does in the ring).

Why are YOU getting all bent out of shape?

If that worked then, per the assumptions in this thread, everyone would try being the villian.

Floyd played off ODH brilliantly in 24/7. That got him attention. What keep people coming back is they like the product.

Basically, you, the Ts and others are making an argument similar to "people drink Coke because of the design on the can, not because they like the taste."

[Razcal26]

As if PPV is the only way to watch boxing fights. LOL

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

So you couldn't refute any of my points? Of course not.

PPV is a way to get the casuals interested and involved. It's a way to branch out and expose the fighter to a greater audience.

Why do you think GGG just fought on PPV? For the fun of it? Or the get his name out there?

I don't hear a bunch of casuals screaming for GGG to fight Canelo........ I hear hardcore fans though.

Fact is, 1 million people didn't buy the Mayweather V Guerrero fight because they believed Guerrero could win and you know it.

[Mr. Punch-Out!!]

If that worked then, per the assumptions in this thread, everyone would try being the villian.

Everyone is not like Floyd.

Floyd played off ODH brilliantly in 24/7. That got him attention. What keep people coming back is they like the product.

Basically, you, the Ts and others are making an argument similar to "people drink Coke because of the design on the can, not because they like the taste."

Again, what keep people coming back is because they want to see someone shut Floyd up and as long as he doesn't lose, people will keep paying to see if that will finally happen. Once it became clear that it was total waste, they started tuning out and this was especially clear throughout 2014, which was all after his fight with Canelo.

[VERSION1 (V1)]

If Floyd's fights were entertaining, it wouldn't have mattered if he lost. It's about getting your money's worth.



As if PPV is the only way to watch boxing fights. LOL

but if you going to buy a fight just to see a fighter lose then you will never get your money worth. some people find him entertaining and some don't not everyone like the same thing

[The Big Dunn]

Everyone is not like Floyd.



Again, what keep people coming back is because they want to see someone shut Floyd up and as long as he doesn't lose, people will keep paying to see if that will finally happen. Once it became clear that it was total waste, they started tuning out and this was especially clear throughout 2014, which was all after his fight with Canelo.

Agian, you have no way of knowing why people are buying. The most logical answer, they like the product.

[Mr. Punch-Out!!]

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

So you couldn't refute any of my points? Of course not.

Because you had no points anyway.

PPV is a way to get the casuals interested and involved. It's a way to branch out and expose the fighter to a greater audience.

Why do you think GGG just fought on PPV? For the fun of it? Or the get his name out there?

I don't hear a bunch of casuals screaming for GGG to fight Canelo........ I hear hardcore fans though.

Fact is, 1 million people didn't buy the Mayweather V Guerrero fight because they believed Guerrero could win and you know it.

Casuals watch more than just PPVs. They have free fights on HBO and Showtime, in which they will be watching more often then PPV fights. They'll know who Golovkin is, especially seeing how often he's being pushed as HBO's big star in a similar way to Tyson and Chavez before him.

LOL People wouldn't have even cared about the fight if that was the case. Mayweather appeared to be on the decline and that's why people tuned in. It surely wasn't to see him win, that's for sure.

[fanofslug]

I am not going to beat around the bush, I don't like Mayweather and in my personal opinion he helped in perpetuating the risk/reward model because he was so successful at generating the highest reward possible for the lowest risk possible. He did take risks and he fought good fighters but there were many instances where he didn't fight the best fighters at the divisions he was in and took on lesser fighters. Due to his success a lot of fighters are starting to implement this strategy or so it seems (Canelo vs. Kahn anyone?). i just recently looked at the top 10 super welterweights and to my surprise most of them haven't fought in 3-5 months and have no fights lined up. These are top guys, Charlo brothers, Lara, Andrade, Vanes (though vanes is a bad example because he has fought majority of the top super welterweights) etc.

I can't blame Floyd for applying the basic human instinct of taking the least amount of risk for the highest reward. We all do it, however as a fan of a sport, i want to see the best fight the best and usually that doesn't always translate for fighters as the risk and reward don't match. The reason why i bring Mayweather to the conversation is because he was the one and only guy who successfully executed this strategy to the extend that he did and was the fighter who earned the biggest financial rewards, no one will remember 20 years from now the small things like the catchweight vs. Canelo or the gloves vs. Maidana, or why the fight with Margarito and Paul Williams didn't take place etc. But they will remember that he beat Paquio, and moved up 5 weight classes and made the most money.

Some time ago Floyd said he did a lot of the sport, in my eyes he did more damage than good. Floyd is a great boxer and has top notch skills but he did more harm to the sport than good. There are others fighters who in my opinion did harm to the sport but Floyd did something that would negatively effect the sport for years to come, other fighters negative effects would end or have ended ie Wlad Klitschko hurt the sport as due to his extremely boring fighting style he turned off many fans, and he was my favorite fighter pre-Emanuel Steward.

This thread isn't to debate how good Mayweather is or how he would or could have beaten fighters he didn't fight. Its a simple question of did Floyd help the sport or make it worse.

He was poison to the sport, all flash no pop

[Mr. Punch-Out!!]

Agian, you have no way of knowing why people are buying. The most logical answer, they like the product.

So you're denying that Floyd talked mess to promote his fights?

but if you going to buy a fight just to see a fighter lose then you will never get your money worth. some people find him entertaining and some don't not everyone like the same thing

If he was so entertaining, then people wouldn't have been losing interest in his fights. The fact is, all those matches and yet, almost none of them live up to their hype. Not once have I ever heard anybody say his matches are entertaining. Not even from his fans.