''If We Look At Marciano's record, he Fought a Bunch of DUCKS!'' - Floyd

[travestyny]

This is common knowledge isn't it.
I know you guys say Paquaio refused. I say they both walked away from the table, then the Mayweather camp had the out of court settlement for defamation.

Right. It is common knowledge. That's what we are discussing with the clown above.

Pacquiao clearly walked away from the first negotiation because of the 14 day cut-off. Do you think it was a fair offer?

[travestyny]

He didn't accept first time around because Floyd made false accusations,

LMAOOOOO. SO HE WAS IN NEGOTIATION FOR THE FIGHT TO HAPPEN.....EVEN WENT TO MEDIATION OVER THE 14 DAY CUT-OFF....BUT HE NEVER HAD ANY INTENTION OF FIGHTING DUE TO THE ACCUSATIONS????


LMAOOOOO. IF THAT'S TRUE, THAT FURTHER PROVES THAT HE DUCKED MAYWEATHER. THANKS, CLOWN!


The **** is his team going into mediation for to settle the cut-off date for testing if he never intended to fight? You are a moron.

Both sides agreed to enter into mediation on January 7, 2010, in hopes of coming to an agreement on the blood testing issue. Retired federal judge Daniel Weinstein, who successfully resolved a prior dispute between Top Rank and Golden Boy Promotions, would again act as mediator. Two days later, after hours of negotiating during mediation, Arum declared that the fight was officially off after Mayweather refused to agree to a 24-day cut-off date. Mayweather revealed that he offered a 14-day cut-off date to Team Pacquiao, but it was rejected.

Even the dude that tried to come in on your side above said that all of this is "common knowledge."

Get out of here, foolio. You aren't worth my time.

[djtmal]

Right. It is common knowledge. That's what we are discussing with the clown above.

Pacquiao clearly walked away from the first negotiation because of the 14 day cut-off. Do you think it was a fair offer?

The 2009 negotiation?

Honestly. I think it was fair up to the issue of testing. Pacquaio wouldn't budge on 24 days, or something to that effect, and Floyd 14 days. I felt both sides walked away without finding that middle ground between 24 and 14 in the interest of making the fight.

[travestyny]

The 2009 negotiation?

Honestly. I think it was fair up to the issue of testing. Pacquaio wouldn't budge on 24 days, or something to that effect, and Floyd 14 days. I felt both sides walked away without finding that middle ground between 24 and 14 in the interest of making the fight.

I'm not clear on your answer. Do you think that drug testing with a 14 day cut-off before the fight is a fair offer?

[The Akbar One]

"Marciano didn't come back to fight Liston"...............

Marciano retired at 29 yrs old because he wasn't able to train due to extreme back problems. Everyone in boxing knew he had serious back issues and his last year was the end.

As for Liston, Sonny wasn't even a ten round fighter when Rocky retired so there was no truths about Marciano ducking anyone.
He fought everyone that signed the paper and often gave return bouts to men who fought well against him.

Ray

Marciano talked of coming back because he thought he could handle the smallish Floyd Patterson. Liston destroyed Patterson, and Marciano got quiet.

Akbar

[djtmal]

I'm not clear on your answer. Do you think that drug testing with a 14 day cut-off before the fight is a fair offer?

Honestly. I don't know man. It was more of a demand than an offer if ya asked me, and in 2009 I don't think nobody placed more stringent testing on anybody with no hard proof of the other party being guilty of juicing

[travestyny]

Honestly. I don't know man. It was more of a demand than an offer if ya asked me, and in 2009 I don't think nobody placed more stringent testing on anybody with no hard proof of the other party being guilty of juicing

You don't know if offering/demanding a 14 day cut-off is fair? If you agree to extra drug testing already, why in the world would a cut-off of 14 days before the fight be a deal breaker. It makes zero sense. But ok.

Just to be clear, even Pac's trainer seems to think it was fair since he said the first negotiation's failure was Pac's team's fault, but I'll just leave it at that.

[djtmal]

You don't know if offering/demanding a 14 day cut-off is fair? If you agree to extra drug testing already, why in the world would a cut-off of 14 days before the fight be a deal breaker. It makes zero sense. But ok.

Just to be clear, even Pac's trainer seems to think it was fair since he said the first negotiation's failure was Pac's team's fault, but I'll just leave it at that.

ok. i think it was blood with a 24 days cutoff, but urine he agreed up to the day of the fight or some s**t like that, but right now do i think 14 days on a cutoff for blood testing is fair. yeah because it is both parties doing the same thing.

but hey in 2009 manny pacquaio did not. i don't speak for manny pacquaio, but in 2009 if he walked and broke the deal, because he felt floyd mayweather was trying to exercise too much a-side control, then i can understand why he walked because at that time, manny pacquaio and floyd were neck and neck in ppv #'s, they were 1a and 1b imo, so he's standing on principle...only shrewd businessmen, and street cats truly get that...

but freddie roach, ok...i've read countless posts where cats on here for years have took a total s**t on roach as a straight up lier, until he made the statement that it was pacquaio's teams fault in 2009, then freddie roach was that dude...so i don't put much stock in a cat like that...

[travestyny]

ok. i think it was blood with a 24 days cutoff, but urine he agreed up to the day of the fight or some s**t like that, but right now do i think 14 days on a cutoff for blood testing is fair. yeah because it is both parties doing the same thing.

but hey in 2009 manny pacquaio did not. i don't speak for manny pacquaio, but in 2009 if he walked and broke the deal, because he felt floyd mayweather was trying to exercise too much a-side control, then i can understand why he walked because at that time, manny pacquaio and floyd were neck and neck in ppv #'s, they were 1a and 1b imo, so he's standing on principle...only shrewd businessmen, and street cats truly get that...

but freddie roach, ok...i've read countless posts where cats on here for years have took a total s**t on roach as a straight up lier, until he made the statement that it was pacquaio's teams fault in 2009, then freddie roach was that dude...so i don't put much stock in a cat like that...

Ok. That's all I wanted to know. Whether you thought it was a fair offer or not.

My only point was in response to ADP02 saying that Mayweather ducked prime Pac. A 50/50 split and 14 day cut-off for drug testing in no way can be seen as an attempt to duck. If anything, refusing that should be seen as an attempt to duck. Some, like you, believe it was just Pac's way of saying that he won't concede everything to Mayweather. Ok. But it's clear that this offer was reasonable and an attempt to fight, and for whatever reason, Pac is the one who said no.

As for Freddie Roach, if he told multiple lies in the past to protect Pac, it wouldn't make sense that now he would throw Pac under the bus with a false narrative. It's clear to those of us that are unbiased that this was an attempt to get the fight on, and actually this turned out to be a better deal than the one Pac got in the end, since he had to accept less than 50% and testing up until the day of the fight.

I appreciate your honest opinion. Respect.

[Lester Tutor]

Ok. That's all I wanted to know. Whether you thought it was a fair offer or not.

My only point was in response to ADP02 saying that Mayweather ducked prime Pac. A 50/50 split and 14 day cut-off for drug testing in no way can be seen as an attempt to duck. If anything, refusing that should be seen as an attempt to duck. Some, like you, believe it was just Pac's way of saying that he won't concede everything to Mayweather. Ok. But it's clear that this offer was reasonable and an attempt to fight, and for whatever reason, Pac is the one who said no.

As for Freddie Roach, if he told multiple lies in the past to protect Pac, it wouldn't make sense that now he would throw Pac under the bus with a false narrative. It's clear to those of us that are unbiased that this was an attempt to get the fight on, and actually this turned out to be a better deal than the one Pac got in the end, since he had to accept less than 50% and testing up until the day of the fight.

I appreciate your honest opinion. Respect.

Floyd influenced the current decade to focus on anti-doping. VADA was founded in 2011 by Margaret Goodman and associates, a ring doctor on an old school HBO Payroll...

Hmm.

TBE!!! Straight shook the modern protocols. It's not complicated to acknowledge Floyd's skill, the guy was brought up in a boxing ring by a notorious family brewed into boxing. Pac wasn'T... Pac was brought up by Top Rank and HBO as an experiment to exploit a foreign fighter under the guise of PEDs. That's more fact than fiction. Pacboys are gullibles. If Trump said to #48 followers, ''I know more about real estate property worldwide than a Gas Station owner'' they'd be in denial like the following video... because what does Trump know about real estate property vs what does Conte know about the world of PEDs...