Comments Thread For: Mayweather Trashes Broner: Always Broke, Ellerbe Makes More!

[The D3vil]

Floyd aint never ate a stripper out in the middle of the club.

[Sledgeweather17]

who gives a **** what Ellerbe makes - that ****ing f@g!!!

Broner is a lot of things - but why is everything defined in money in Floyds world??

I hate Mayweather because he talks about money so i am going to spend 70 dollars to watch someone kick his arse

it's incredibly dumb

If we are talking supposed losses - has anyone ever mention Castillo 1 to Floyd ???

check the punch stats Floyd - you won the rematch but you lost the first fight - don't forget Castillo was the champion and floyd did not beat the champion that night

Don't get it wrong - i am not a pac fan or a floyd fan - no agenda here - just sick of this w@nker mentioning your whole worth in life is about money

Overall punch stats don't always paint the true picture of the fight. It's the round by round punch stats that are more important. Let me give you an example.

Lets say you and I fight in a three round match up. You land 13 punches in the first round and I land 10. So you win the first round right? Cool.

Second round I land 40 punches and you land 10 punches. I win the second round right? Cool, now it's 1-1.

Final round you land 15 punches and I land 10. You win the third round right? Cool, final score is 2-1 to you.

But lets count the overal punch stats. Yours is 13 10 15 which is = 28.

Mine is 10 40 10 which is = 60.

As you can see, I landed more than twice what you landed, but that don't mean I won the fight coz you won more rounds than me.

Like I said, total punch stats say a lot, but they aren't everything. Boxing is scored on a round by round basis. And even then, there is such a thing called effective/ineffective aggression.

Most people claim that Chris Algieri should have lost to Provodnikov even though Chris Algieri clearly outboxed and out landed the guy in almost every round. They (commentators and analysts included) say this because supposedly Provodnikov's landed punches were more effective than Chris Algieri's (more impact, power).

I personally call bull on that, but these are some of the many things that shape the opinion of commentators. Same thing happened in Manny-Bradley 1, if you watch the fight again and listen carefuly (you don't really need to listen carefuly if you aint biased or easily influenced by the commentators), you'll realise that the commentators keep quiet every time Bradley lands and exclaim/praise/take note of every time pacquiao does, and they keep emphasising the issue of power, power power power power difference is the only thing you hear throughout the bout.

Because Manny's shots have such power, it leads them to ignore every punch that Bradley lands in the bout. You get the feeling that even if Bradley landed twice the punches Manny landed per round, they would have still thought that Manny dominated.

(Having said that, I do think Manny won the fight, but I agree with the judges that it was a closer fight than what the commentators made it out to be).

Anyway, going back to Castillo. Castillo lost on a round by round basis. First of all, Most of Castillo's landed pucnhes, at least 80 percent of them were body shots that he only landed because he clinched the waste in order to stop lateral movement and the ref never even so much as warned him about it, there were times he even chased Mayweather with his arm extended to catch, showing clear intent of fouling and the totally ignored that ish. Secondly, out of that 80 percent, half of them were landed after the ref called a break of after the bell rang, and still the ref ignored that **** even though Castillo was consistently repeating that ish.

Castillo couldn't find Floyd's head at all during the fight and even his body in the initial four rounds, and he resorted to dirty tactics for the rest of the fight, landed a head butt too in the fourth round that caused a lump on Floyd's head.

The ref ignored all the dirt Castillo did and the first one or two times Floyd retaliated, he ducked a point from Floyd. The ref was clearly biased, but the judges saw everything and judged according to what they saw, which was desperate man who resorted to dirty wrestling tactics in order to get his way.

[mrbigshot]

Overall punch stats don't always paint the true picture of the fight. It's the round by round punch stats that are more important. Let me give you an example.

Lets say you and I fight in a three round match up. You land 13 punches in the first round and I land 10. So you win the first round right? Cool.

Second round I land 40 punches and you land 10 punches. I win the second round right? Cool, now it's 1-1.

Final round you land 15 punches and I land 10. You win the third round right? Cool, final score is 2-1 to you.

But lets count the overal punch stats. Yours is 13 10 15 which is = 28.

Mine is 10 40 10 which is = 60.

As you can see, I landed more than twice what you landed, but that don't mean I won the fight coz you won more rounds than me.

Like I said, total punch stats say a lot, but they aren't everything. Boxing is scored on a round by round basis. And even then, there is such a thing called effective/ineffective aggression.

Most people claim that Chris Algieri should have lost to Provodnikov even though Chris Algieri clearly outboxed and out landed the guy in almost every round. They (commentators and analysts included) say this because supposedly Provodnikov's landed punches were more effective than Chris Algieri's (more impact, power).

I personally call bull on that, but these are some of the many things that shape the opinion of commentators. Same thing happened in Manny-Bradley 1, if you watch the fight again and listen carefuly (you don't really need to listen carefuly if you aint biased or easily influenced by the commentators), you'll realise that the commentators keep quiet every time Bradley lands and exclaim/praise/take note of every time pacquiao does, and they keep emphasising the issue of power, power power power power difference is the only thing you hear throughout the bout.

Because Manny's shots have such power, it leads them to ignore every punch that Bradley lands in the bout. You get the feeling that even if Bradley landed twice the punches Manny landed per round, they would have still thought that Manny dominated.

(Having said that, I do think Manny won the fight, but I agree with the judges that it was a closer fight than what the commentators made it out to be).

Anyway, going back to Castillo. Castillo lost on a round by round basis. First of all, Most of Castillo's landed pucnhes, at least 80 percent of them were body shots that he only landed because he clinched the waste in order to stop lateral movement and the ref never even so much as warned him about it, there were times he even chased Mayweather with his arm extended to catch, showing clear intent of fouling and the totally ignored that ish. Secondly, out of that 80 percent, half of them were landed after the ref called a break of after the bell rang, and still the ref ignored that **** even though Castillo was consistently repeating that ish.

Castillo couldn't find Floyd's head at all during the fight and even his body in the initial four rounds, and he resorted to dirty tactics for the rest of the fight, landed a head butt too in the fourth round that caused a lump on Floyd's head.

The ref ignored all the dirt Castillo did and the first one or two times Floyd retaliated, he ducked a point from Floyd. The ref was clearly biased, but the judges saw everything and judged according to what they saw, which was desperate man who resorted to dirty wrestling tactics in order to get his way.

I don't disagree that the fight with castillo and floyd 1 was close

but castillo was still champion don't forget and i think castillo did great work with the jab which enable him to land with combinations which is such a rare sight in a mayweather fight