If Pac beats Crawford....do you place him above May in the TBE race?

[hugh grant]

PAC couldn't deal with counter punchers and movers very well? He best jmm 3 time didn't he? Jmm can't be the only counter punching movers he's faced!

Jmm said PAC is the best of the era

[travestyny]

PAC couldn't deal with counter punchers and movers very well? He best jmm 3 time didn't he? Jmm can't be the only counter punching movers he's faced!

Jmm said PAC is the best of the era

Just a question. Why is it so important for you that JMM said Pac is the best of the era?

Many more have said Mayweather is the best of the era, including Pac's trainer.

[The Big Dunn]

If Pac beats Crawford....do you place him above May in the TBE race?


Wachu got son??? ok......................GO!

If Manny beats Crawford it only solidifies Floyd's claim to TBE. If Manny loses to Crawford, it only solidifies Floyd 's claim to TBE. If they draw, same thing.

Floyd proved he is better then Manny. He is ranked higher on every ATG list compiled by experts and historians. The "fair and impartial" boxrec computer has him higher. There is nothing Manny can do to change this.

Manny has had a ATG career and is a 1st ballot HOF'er. This should be good enough for his fans or those that hate Floyd but it isn't. Fans in these groups keep trying to make Floyd less and they fall short every time.

[PAC-BOY]

you miss the point entirely.....

injuries happen in sports.....

saying a win is controversial because one fighter was injured has no real basis....

it is just a view...a perception......

our differing views on this topic prove that....

the meat is why would the result of a fight be deemed controversial because of an injury to one fighter? again, injuries do happen so many ways, so many times....yes, it is an awful event that affects the fight outcome....but to attach controversy to an event that is common place or very likely to happen is a stretch....

one can not be be happy or satisfied with the fight outcome...and may demand for a rematch because one's view or perception of a different desired outcome if the injury did not happen is strong....

but that is again going through another "what if"....

what if no fighter was injured?

a sure win for one fighter? i don't think so....

the word upset came into being because....upsets do exist...do happen..

In bold...You just defined Controversy in the fullest definition. Im not making this up. Please google the definition for your self. No...I will copy and paste it for you.
Controversy:
noun, plural controversies.
1.
a prolonged public dispute, debate, or contention; disputation concerning a matter of opinion.
2.
contention, strife, or argument.


Im not missing the point at all. I know injuries happen in all sports but right now we are talking about Boxing. I dont need a reference to another sport.
Outcome is the same if anything changes the momentum the event for one or another or a team it can then be backed by a controversy. Hence the reason for the actual definition of the WORD itself. I believe its you that missed the point entirely my friend. You cannot deny a controversy just because a injury "JUST HAPPENS" lol Thats why its controversial.

I will give you an example...Two top fuel dragsters at the starting line. Green light flashes One car tears down the track and the other car stalls out at the starting line. One car wins...yay! Other car loses tough luck. Yeah it happens. But is that the normal way of racing? Is that what fans pay to see? Could the other guy have won? Did he get a fair shake???? Was it a fair race? What if? Was it normal way of racing? Or winning? Until they race again you will never know if the other car can really beat the car that won. Or can the car that won really beat the one that loss? HELLO...Thats called CONTROVERSY!

[PACnPBFsuck]

The only one with anything to gain here is Bud.

[hugh grant]

Just a question. Why is it so important for you that JMM said Pac is the best of the era?

Many more have said Mayweather is the best of the era, including Pac's trainer.

Mainly because some Floyd fans were boasting maidana said Floyd was best of thus era. My reply was that maianna hadn't even fou.ght pac. Jmm has fought both so jmmm opi ion would mean more. Also juyst because Floyd beat jmm more comfortably don't mean jmm would think Floyd up is greater.
Roach never fought oac or floyfd

[tangalog2200]

In bold...You just defined Controversy in the fullest definition. Im not making this up. Please google the definition for your self. No...I will copy and paste it for you.
Controversy:
noun, plural controversies.
1.
a prolonged public dispute, debate, or contention; disputation concerning a matter of opinion.
2.
contention, strife, or argument.


Im not missing the point at all. I know injuries happen in all sports but right now we are talking about Boxing. I dont need a reference to another sport.
Outcome is the same if anything changes the momentum the event for one or another or a team it can then be backed by a controversy. Hence the reason for the actual definition of the WORD itself. I believe its you that missed the point entirely my friend. You cannot deny a controversy just because a injury "JUST HAPPENS" lol Thats why its controversial.

I will give you an example...Two top fuel dragsters at the starting line. Green light flashes One car tears down the track and the other car stalls out at the starting line. One car wins...yay! Other car loses tough luck. Yeah it happens. But is that the normal way of racing? Is that what fans pay to see? Could the other guy have won? Did he get a fair shake???? Was it a fair race? What if? Was it normal way of racing? Or winning? Until they race again you will never know if the other car can really beat the car that won. Or can the car that won really beat the one that loss? HELLO...Thats called CONTROVERSY!

yes, you did miss the points i am driving at, buddy....let me elaborate...

the outcome of a fight was due to or decided by an injury to a fighter.....say like the famous twisted ankle; as injuries do happen....let us say this is factor #1.....so this is the reality part of the fight....as this represents what actually transpired in the ring....where is the controversy in this?

you must consider that the controversy you are trying hard to attach to this is purely borne of your non-acceptance of the result...a result that does not meet your expectation.....and this is factor #2....

now, if your expectation is fighter A will win hands down...i think you will be very happy and not attach any controversy to the outcome of the fight if indeed fighter A won even if fighter B had an injury....

where factor #1 relates to reality...factor #2 is based on non-acceptance of reality and on what ifs......

peoples may have different views or opinions on anything under the sun...but it does not readily equates to a controversy.....

[tangalog2200]

In bold...You just defined Controversy in the fullest definition. Im not making this up. Please google the definition for your self. No...I will copy and paste it for you.
Controversy:
noun, plural controversies.
1.
a prolonged public dispute, debate, or contention; disputation concerning a matter of opinion.
2.
contention, strife, or argument.


Im not missing the point at all. I know injuries happen in all sports but right now we are talking about Boxing. I dont need a reference to another sport.
Outcome is the same if anything changes the momentum the event for one or another or a team it can then be backed by a controversy. Hence the reason for the actual definition of the WORD itself. I believe its you that missed the point entirely my friend. You cannot deny a controversy just because a injury "JUST HAPPENS" lol Thats why its controversial.

I will give you an example...Two top fuel dragsters at the starting line. Green light flashes One car tears down the track and the other car stalls out at the starting line. One car wins...yay! Other car loses tough luck. Yeah it happens. But is that the normal way of racing? Is that what fans pay to see? Could the other guy have won? Did he get a fair shake???? Was it a fair race? What if? Was it normal way of racing? Or winning? Until they race again you will never know if the other car can really beat the car that won. Or can the car that won really beat the one that loss? HELLO...Thats called CONTROVERSY!

yes, you did miss the points i am driving at, buddy....let me elaborate...

the outcome of a fight was due to or decided by an injury to a fighter.....say like the famous twisted ankle; as injuries do happen....let us say this is factor #1.....so this is the reality part of the fight....as this represents what actually transpired in the ring....where is the controversy in this?

you must consider that the controversy you are trying hard to attach to this is purely borne of your non-acceptance of the result...a result that does not meet your expectation.....and this is factor #2....

now, if your expectation is fighter A will win hands down...i think you will be very happy and not attach any controversy to the outcome of the fight if indeed fighter A won even if fighter B had an injury....

where factor #1 relates to reality...factor #2 is based on non-acceptance of reality and on what ifs......

peoples may have different views or opinions on anything under the sun...but it does not readily equates to a controversy.....

[travestyny]

Mainly because some Floyd fans were boasting maidana said Floyd was best of thus era. My reply was that maianna hadn't even fou.ght pac. Jmm has fought both so jmmm opi ion would mean more. Also juyst because Floyd beat jmm more comfortably don't mean jmm would think Floyd up is greater.
Roach never fought oac or floyfd

Mosley and Hatton have gone on record saying that Floyd is the best of this era. It just seemed that you kept bringing up JMM's opinion to try to justify this belief, so that's why I was asking.

I'm not sure what Cotto's opinion is. Dela Hoya also says this is the Mayweather era, though he says that it is the worst era. hahaha

Do you happen to have a link for JMM making the statement. I'd be interested in hearing what he bases that opinion on.

[hugh grant]

Mosley and Hatton have gone on record saying that Floyd is the best of this era. It just seemed that you kept bringing up JMM's opinion to try to justify this belief, so that's why I was asking.

I'm not sure what Cotto's opinion is. Dela Hoya also says this is the Mayweather era, though he says that it is the worst era. hahaha

Do you happen to have a link for JMM making the statement. I'd be interested in hearing what he bases that opinion on.

Funny you should mention hatton as PAC beat him quite convincly yet you claim hatton thinks Floyd is the best, yet when jmm says PAC is the best their is furore? The ring mag august issue. Interview with jmm. Jmm mentions pac hit hardest, fastest hands and feet, strongest chin believe that or not, and best defense. It did take 4 fights to land that punch so u might understand where he's coming from
Cotton thinks PAC is better as well. He said PAC would have beast Floyd in his prime that's why Floyd ducked him. PAC beat dlh more convincing as well