so all you #48 fans are just coming back outta the woodwork huh?? i see ggg has given

[The Big Dunn]

ITs a wierd one really. I think over time great fighters on the resume (no matter what stage they were at in their careers) will be remembered as bigger wins than prime contenders. For example the Pac win will be huge on Floyds resume in 50 years despite the fact pac had looked way past prime for years before they fought. The no.1 contenders and solid top 10 opp vs prime guys will be kind of pushed to the side. Thats whats happened with most great resumes.

Not that I think Floyd compares favourably either way. Its just a different way your resume gets looked at as time goes on

See what you did there? You said Pac looked way past prime prior to facing Floyd.

In the 20 fights prior to Floyd he lost 1 time by KO when he made a mistake by dropping his hands. He got robbed by Tim and had close fights with JMM, a 1st ballot HOF'er.
Manny was the #2 p4p boxer. He didn't look way past prime, he just got defeated by a better man.

This is the crux of my argument. When it comes time to rank fighters you don't see stuff like this.

Respectfully, why can't you just say he defeated the #2 ranked p4p boxer by a wide margin? That's the truth.

If we all just call everything straight, its easy to see why he is a top 10-20 ATG in almost every poll of historians/media/journalist/experts and "close".

[WesternChamp]

Sorry, you got the wrong guy. I never complained about too many Pac fans. They're about 10 of them on these boards. The rest were alts/aliases and Floyd haters. They've turned into GGG fans, like it or not. One day, maybe with a little luck, they'll become boxing fans.

so going by your logic why are we not seeing 20 threads about how good ggg is? and the last part, it starts from the within, try practicing what you preach and lead the way.

[NEETzsche]

Other major forums have the same **** to be fair.

Its the internet that does it

yeah it's funny how the much maligned "casual fan" often seems to actually take more enjoyment out of the sport than the soi-disant "hardcores" on the forums

seems like the more invested you get in a hobby the more critical and biased you become

[The Big Dunn]

On NSB, Mayweather never ages. He's been 28 forever. Did you know Manny is older than him?

On NSB, Pacquiao was damn near about to retire when Floyd fought him...yet, Floyd is retired and Pacquiao is still knocking off top welters.

On NSB, Mosley was being ducked...until Mayweather signed to fight him. Then he was washed.

On and on. It's how you separate fans from the bitter, folks.

Exactly. whenever NSB does Floyd's resume there is this weird attempt to devalue the guy for no reason other than Floyd beat him.

[side note: That stuff is fine until the same thing is done to GGG. then we get this outrage from posters about how unfair that is.]

If you hate Floyd, cool. Just evaluate his resume as you do all others.

[Tom Cruise]

See what you did there? You said Pac looked way past prime prior to facing Floyd.

In the 20 fights prior to Floyd he lost 1 time by KO when he made a mistake by dropping his hands. He got robbed by Tim and had close fights with JMM, a 1st ballot HOF'er.
Manny was the #2 p4p boxer. He didn't look way past prime, he just got defeated by a better man.

This is the crux of my argument. When it comes time to rank fighters you don't see stuff like this.

Respectfully, why can't you just say he defeated the #2 ranked p4p boxer by a wide margin? That's the truth.

If we all just call everything straight, its easy to see why he is a top 10-20 ATG in almost every poll of historians/media/journalist/experts and "close".

He did look past prime

Obviously.

Doesnt mean it isnt still a good, or even a great win.

My point is that in time just saying 'Mayweather defeated Pacquiao' will be enough and the context will be lost. Mayweather didnt beat the Pacquiao who wrecked Cotto, Clottey, Hatton etc. He beat the one who had been KO'd badly and had generally turned poor performances for a good few years.

Just the same as when people say 'SRR beat Armstrong'. He did, clearly according to reports. But he didnt beat the version of Armstrong who had blitzed through 3 old divisions and defended the WW title a record number of times, he beat the version who was still solid, and getting a few good wins, but was well on the decline.

By the same token solid contenders on Robinsons resume have been completely forgotten, whereas guys like Maidana would still be mentioned for Floyd.

[IMDAZED]

so going by your logic why are we not seeing 20 threads about how good ggg is? and the last part, it starts from the within, try practicing what you preach and lead the way.

Going by what logic exactly, my bitter alias/alt? Tell me about it, I do wanna hear more.

[Tom Cruise]

yeah it's funny how the much maligned "casual fan" often seems to actually take more enjoyment out of the sport than the soi-disant "hardcores" on the forums

seems like the more invested you get in a hobby the more critical and biased you become

I think the way boxing is set up fosters it tbf.

They market the fighters, rather than the sport, and you get fans of the fighters.. rather than the sport.

[IMDAZED]

Exactly. whenever NSB does Floyd's resume there is this weird attempt to devalue the guy for no reason other than Floyd beat him.

[side note: That stuff is fine until the same thing is done to GGG. then we get this outrage from posters about how unfair that is.]

If you hate Floyd, cool. Just evaluate his resume as you do all others.

LOL. The new thing is pretending you're a fan of Floyd when you aren't. Like that guy Derranged. Pretends he's a fan or neutral but I remember in the Floyd-Pac fight thread, he was so mad at the outcome that he claimed the fight was fixed

Was Manny past his prime? Absolutely. Was Floyd? Absolutely. Sucks they didn't get it on earlier but both were 1&2 p4p when did they fight, whether folks like it or not.

[bojangles1987]

Now I look at it he is that Nubiyan guy

****ing NSB man

It's hard to tell sometimes. Some of them show up for a week and you never see them again. Some post the same ****ing threads every day over and over for years.

I can't even tell if this one actually believes the things they say or it's a Mayweather hater being a douche.

[The Big Dunn]

He did look past prime

Obviously.

Doesnt mean it isnt still a good, or even a great win.

My point is that in time just saying 'Mayweather defeated Pacquiao' will be enough and the context will be lost. Mayweather didnt beat the Pacquiao who wrecked Cotto, Clottey, Hatton etc. He beat the one who had been KO'd badly and had generally turned poor performances for a good few years.

Just the same as when people say 'SRR beat Armstrong'. He did, clearly according to reports. But he didnt beat the version of Armstrong who had blitzed through 3 old divisions and defended the WW title a record number of times, he beat the version who was still solid, and getting a few good wins, but was well on the decline.

By the same token solid contenders on Robinsons resume have been completely forgotten, whereas guys like Maidana would still be mentioned for Floyd.

Yes, he was past prime. I gave his record in the previous 20 fights just to give proper context.

Respectfully, he beat the Manny that did all those things. Those things didn't go away. He had been KTFO twice early and came back. DO those KO's diminish Morales or JMM's wins for you? Of course not.

So does context only apply at that point in his career or all other points? Doe it matter floyd was 38?

Also, if we are being honest, the Manny you reference turned Floyd down, same with ODH, Cotto, and Shane. Does Floyd get like extra credit for that from you? Of course not.

I mean do you find it strange that literally everyone Floyd defeated was always better before and after Floyd fought them?