Comments Thread For: Daily Bread Mailbag: Mayweather-McGregor, Mosley, Ward

[harry-greb]

you are giving him credit for all sorts of things

including winning a title at featherweight

I think Liam Neeson should have won an Oscar for taken





stop making stuff up as you go along

WHO you beat, with consideration given to when/how

regardless as to what silly title the fans placed on your opponent on any given day

apply that same logic to everyone, and you have your criteria

that way we can compare across era's

without observers being mislead by all of the modern stuff that popped up..... like 17 weight divisions, same-day weigh-ins, and multiple sanctioning organisations..... and without observers being mislead by all of the modern BULLSHHT that popped up..... like ESPY awards, magazine awards, and lineage

To use your "who you beat with consideration given to when and how" criteria.

Naseem named cleaned out the featherweight division in the late 90's early 2000's. Beating the likes of Steve Robinson, Manuel Medina, boom boom Johnson, Wayne McCullough, Augie Sanchez and Kevin kelly. He knocked everyone of them out except for McCullough (tough as nails).
Would you agree that he was the best featherweight in the world? Historians and hardcore fans would all be in agreement that he was the best at that time.
Barrera moves up from super bantam and in his first fight at featherweight takes on the best fighter in the division. He was a huge underdog and he schooled hamed while also slamming him into the turnbuckle and asking him and I quote "who's your daddy?" In the 11th round. Does that meet your who when and how criteria? Can we agree that Barrera now becomes the man at feather???
The year after he beats future hall of famer and prime Erik morales in a close fight. He also beat johnny Tapia and Kevin Kelley who had only lost 2 fights each at the time.
In November 2003 in his first fight at featherweight pacquiao completely dismantles Barrera becoming what?
That's right, becoming THE MAN. THE LINEAL CHAMP.

Good luck dis*****g any of that!

[harry-greb]

I agree with the bold


what you don't seem to understand is.....

The Ring does not mandate, and The Ring does not sanction.....

they are just a magazine

like this.....





also.....

the word " lineal " refers to ancestry, it is not a boxing term

it was only really applied to boxing in the 1980's, following the advent of the 3rd/4th official sanctioning organisations

Pac should - and will - be given credit for beating Barrera

but he did not win a world title at featherweight

just saying

btw, how many lineal " titles " did Willie Pep win..... ?

Pep did not win a lineal title, because there was no such thing

Pep > Pac

stop being ridiculous

I get it. You're an alphabet guy. They would sanction me and you for the featherweight title if there was enough money in it. Please!!!! "Sanctioning bodies". Crooked scum bags. The same people who gave canelo a belt for beating Ricky hattons brother at junior middle. The same people who stripped Sergio Martinez for not fighting a guy that HBO deemed unworthy and then turning round and giving Chavez junior Sergio's belt for beating the same guy. Disgusting. But they " sanction" and they "mandate" so its all good.

[harry-greb]

Google Willie pep world featherweight champion and see what belt he was wearing!!!!
Lineal featherweight champion

[aboutfkntime]

To use your "who you beat with consideration given to when and how" criteria.

Naseem named cleaned out the featherweight division in the late 90's early 2000's. Beating the likes of Steve Robinson, Manuel Medina, boom boom Johnson, Wayne McCullough, Augie Sanchez and Kevin kelly. He knocked everyone of them out except for McCullough (tough as nails).
Would you agree that he was the best featherweight in the world? Historians and hardcore fans would all be in agreement that he was the best at that time.
Barrera moves up from super bantam and in his first fight at featherweight takes on the best fighter in the division. He was a huge underdog and he schooled hamed while also slamming him into the turnbuckle and asking him and I quote "who's your daddy?" In the 11th round. Does that meet your who when and how criteria? Can we agree that Barrera now becomes the man at feather???
The year after he beats future hall of famer and prime Erik morales in a close fight. He also beat johnny Tapia and Kevin Kelley who had only lost 2 fights each at the time.
In November 2003 in his first fight at featherweight pacquiao completely dismantles Barrera becoming what?
That's right, becoming THE MAN. THE LINEAL CHAMP.

Good luck dis*****g any of that!

no, Marquez was

Hamed ducked Marquez like the plague

[aboutfkntime]

I get it. You're an alphabet guy. They would sanction me and you for the featherweight title if there was enough money in it. Please!!!! "Sanctioning bodies". Crooked scum bags. The same people who gave canelo a belt for beating Ricky hattons brother at junior middle. The same people who stripped Sergio Martinez for not fighting a guy that HBO deemed unworthy and then turning round and giving Chavez junior Sergio's belt for beating the same guy. Disgusting. But they " sanction" and they "mandate" so its all good.

nah, you still don't get it

[aboutfkntime]

Google Willie pep world featherweight champion and see what belt he was wearing!!!!
Lineal featherweight champion

what the fk is wrong with you ?

fkn dumbass casual fans LMAO

[harry-greb]

One and two sentence responses??
You've been owned son!!!

[aboutfkntime]

One and two sentence responses??
You've been owned son!!!

you wrote a novel (fiction), saying that Hamed was the best FW

I corrected you

there was no need to spend more time correcting you at that point

in fact..... when Pac beat Barrera, Hamed had already retired

of the 5 notable fighters campaigning around featherweight during that era, I would rank Hamed #5..... Marquez, Pacquiao, Barrera, Morales were all better than Hamed at that point in time

then you said..... " I get it. You're an alphabet guy "

and yet, I despise them to the very core of their essence

and this is following on from your initial assertion that lineage has been recognised since the 1920's..... and that the opinion of a magazine somehow equates to winning a mandated/sanctioned World Title..... which is also bollocks

I am losing track of your inaccurate posts/comments


also, I am not the asshat who said this.....

Google Willie pep world featherweight champion and see what belt he was wearing!!!!
Lineal featherweight champion

[harry-greb]

you wrote a novel (fiction), saying that Hamed was the best FW

I corrected you

there was no need to spend more time correcting you at that point

in fact..... when Pac beat Barrera, Hamed had already retired

of the 5 notable fighters campaigning around featherweight during that era, I would rank Hamed #5..... Marquez, Pacquiao, Barrera, Morales were all better than Hamed at that point in time

then you said..... " I get it. You're an alphabet guy "

and yet, I despise them to the very core of their essence

and this is following on from your initial assertion that lineage has been recognised since the 1920's..... and that the opinion of a magazine somehow equates to winning a mandated/sanctioned World Title..... which is also bollocks

I am losing track of your inaccurate posts/comments


also, I am not the asshat who said this.....

I wasn't going to respond to u but your talking so much gibberish, I had no choice
First of all, saying that naz wasn't the best featherweight in the world at that time is like Donald trump saying he had a bigger inauguration crowd than *****. Both statements are just not true. #alternative facts
Pull up boxrec and look at marquez's opponents around that time and compare them to hameds. Nuff said.
What does it matter that hamed had retired by the time Manny beat Barrera?? Barrera had already beaten hamed. I don't get your point.

How can you rank naz #5 "at that point in time" as you put it when pacquiao never fought at featherweight while naz was fighting, Erik morales only arrived at featherweight in September 2000 (fighting Kevin Kelly who naz smoked three years earlier), barrera hadnt fought at featherweight until he dethroned naz in 2001 and Juan Manuel Marquez was fighting such killers as remigio Daniel Molina, roque cassiani, reynante jamili, Sean fletcher, baby larona Jr., johnny walker while also getting beaten by Freddie norwood.
As conor McGregor says "who the **** are those guys"??!! Everything I've said above are facts, not opinions. If you're talking about ranking naz and the other 4 all-time that's a different debate.

Mate, take yourself and your a$$hat (whatever the **** that is) and lie down.

[aboutfkntime]

I wasn't going to respond to u but your talking so much gibberish, I had no choice
First of all, saying that naz wasn't the best featherweight in the world at that time is like Donald trump saying he had a bigger inauguration crowd than *****. Both statements are just not true. #alternative facts
Pull up boxrec and look at marquez's opponents around that time and compare them to hameds. Nuff said.
What does it matter that hamed had retired by the time Manny beat Barrera?? Barrera had already beaten hamed. I don't get your point.

How can you rank naz #5 "at that point in time" as you put it when pacquiao never fought at featherweight while naz was fighting, Erik morales only arrived at featherweight in September 2000 (fighting Kevin Kelly who naz smoked three years earlier), barrera hadnt fought at featherweight until he dethroned naz in 2001 and Juan Manuel Marquez was fighting such killers as remigio Daniel Molina, roque cassiani, reynante jamili, Sean fletcher, baby larona Jr., johnny walker while also getting beaten by Freddie norwood.
As conor McGregor says "who the **** are those guys"??!! Everything I've said above are facts, not opinions. If you're talking about ranking naz and the other 4 all-time that's a different debate.

Mate, take yourself and your a$$hat (whatever the **** that is) and lie down.

you said..... despite the fact that Pacquiao did not win a world title at featherweight..... IN YOUR OPINION, Pacquiao was "the man" at 126..... don't bullshht me now, you actually said that

and you based that assertion on the fact that Barrera had beaten Hamed 3 years earlier

well, Marquez was the best featherweight, so stop your nonsense

you would know that if you watched the Norwood fight

FACT: Pac did not beat Marquez, who many say won that fight

so, when you awarded Pacquiao an honorary world title you were pushing shht uphill with a pointed stick

also, Morales would have beaten Pacquiao at 126, just like he beat him at 130 less than a year later

stop handing world titles around you wally