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

[aboutfkntime]

once more.....


FACT: Pacquiao did not win a FW title by beating Barrera


and, you simply cannot award Pac an imaginary title at 126 because

1) he did not beat Marquez
2) he did not beat Morales, who beat him at 130 less than a year later

here, let me put it in techno-geek to see if that helps.....

Pac never won a physical title, and he never qualified for a virtual one

hope that helped, but know that it didn't


we thought all that pac-nonsense would stop when Manny was outclassed by Mayweather and KTFO by Marquez

[harry-greb]

YOU claimed that lineage proved who the best fighter was

remember this rubbish.....





but, at 126.....

FACT: Pacquiao did not win a world title

FACT: Pacquiao could not even beat Marquez

FACT: Pacquiao did not beat Morales, who beat him less than a year later at 130

lineage doesn't mean shht to anyone except for the silly casuals

and yet, you used lineage to justify handing around world titles

it is disgraceful the way you fanboys lower the standards within boxing to benefit your favorite fighters..... ****ting all over the sport of boxing in the process

Do u read my replies at all??
Lineal champ means u are the champ. There are anamolies. Canelo and stevenson. There are upsets in boxing as in other sports. See me football and tennis examples.
See my baldomir vs Judah example.
Nobody thought he was the best fighter in the welterweight division, but on that one night, he fought his ass off and beat Judah who had beat spinks who had beat mayorga who had beat forrest who had beat Mosley.
Even the alphabet gangsters don't require you to clean out the division before your are "champ".
If fighter a (wbc " champ") loses to fighter b, fighter b becomes wbc " champ". Fighter b is not required to clean out the whole division before he is designated "champion".
So would u call fighter b champion????
Pacquiao did not win a title at featherweight. He won THE title at featherweight. He beat Barrera who beat naz who had the best resume in the division. I don't need to bring up Marquez's murderers row again.
Then after beating Barrera he went after the top contender (Marquez) in his next fight. no gimme fights, no warm ups. In a great fight, that could have gone either way, it was ruled a draw. Pacquiao keeps his lineal title as he would have kept any alphabet title in the case of a draw.
You keep saying that pacquiao could not beat Marquez but u always forget to say that Marquez could not beat pacquiao.
And u say Fact, pacquiao did not beat morales. How the **** could he beat Morales when Morales left the division. And u also forget to mention that after pacquiao lost to morales at 130, he knocked him out twice at 130, so whad u talking bout Willis????? Laughable FACTS

Casual fans wouldn't know a lineal champion if he came up and kicked them in the balls. Casuals see shiny green and gold belts and have multiple!e ******s.
Lineage does the complete opposite of lowering standards. What are u talking about. Alphabets and their supporters lower the standards. 5,6,7 belt holders per division!!!! I'm shaking my head.
One lineal champ and the rest are contenders, a bit like that ring ratings list you tried to bull***** me with. Have u got that website for me yet? You've gone quiet on that front!!!!

[harry-greb]

YOU claimed that lineage proved who the best fighter was

remember this rubbish.....





but, at 126.....

FACT: Pacquiao did not win a world title

FACT: Pacquiao could not even beat Marquez

FACT: Pacquiao did not beat Morales, who beat him less than a year later at 130

lineage doesn't mean shht to anyone except for the silly casuals

and yet, you used lineage to justify handing around world titles

it is disgraceful the way you fanboys lower the standards within boxing to benefit your favorite fighters..... ****ting all over the sport of boxing in the process

Wrong wrong wrong. I have never said lineage proved who the best fighter was. It proves who the lineal champion is. If he's not the best fighter well then, he will be found out. See baldomir.
Silly casuals have no knowledge of lineage. The opposite is true. Hardcore fans who love the history and traditions of the sport respect title lineage.

Your first fact above, we're not going to convince the other on that

Your second fact, u say that pacquiao cud not EVEN beat Marquez as if Marquez was some tomato can!!! The fight was a draw. Marquez couldn't beat pacquiao either. So pacquiao keeps THE title as he would if he were an alphabet beltholder.

Your third fact is a beauty!! How could pacquiao beat Morales at featherweight when morales was at super feather by the time pacquiao arrived??????? Explain that one to me.
Alphabets are the ones ****ting on the sport. You ask any sports fan about why they don't follow boxing and the first thing most of them say is that there are too many champions, too many belts, too confusing.
Promoters don't give a **** about the sport. As long as they can push a fight as a world title fight, that's all they care about. And you lap that up.
Alphabets don't give a **** about the sport. Money money money. And you lap it up
Title lineage can't be bought borrowed or stolen. Its above all that. Its not perfect but its way better than the alternative.

I'm still waiting on that ring featherweight rankings website. Or do u want to concede defeat on that one???!!!!

[aboutfkntime]

Do u read my replies at all??
Lineal champ means u are the champ. There are anamolies. Canelo and stevenson. There are upsets in boxing as in other sports. See me football and tennis examples.
See my baldomir vs Judah example.
Nobody thought he was the best fighter in the welterweight division, but on that one night, he fought his ass off and beat Judah who had beat spinks who had beat mayorga who had beat forrest who had beat Mosley.
Even the alphabet gangsters don't require you to clean out the division before your are "champ".
If fighter a (wbc " champ") loses to fighter b, fighter b becomes wbc " champ". Fighter b is not required to clean out the whole division before he is designated "champion".
So would u call fighter b champion????
Pacquiao did not win a title at featherweight. He won THE title at featherweight. He beat Barrera who beat naz who had the best resume in the division. I don't need to bring up Marquez's murderers row again.
Then after beating Barrera he went after the top contender (Marquez) in his next fight. no gimme fights, no warm ups. In a great fight, that could have gone either way, it was ruled a draw. Pacquiao keeps his lineal title as he would have kept any alphabet title in the case of a draw.
You keep saying that pacquiao could not beat Marquez but u always forget to say that Marquez could not beat pacquiao.
And u say Fact, pacquiao did not beat morales. How the **** could he beat Morales when Morales left the division. And u also forget to mention that after pacquiao lost to morales at 130, he knocked him out twice at 130, so whad u talking bout Willis????? Laughable FACTS

Casual fans wouldn't know a lineal champion if he came up and kicked them in the balls. Casuals see shiny green and gold belts and have multiple!e ******s.
Lineage does the complete opposite of lowering standards. What are u talking about. Alphabets and their supporters lower the standards. 5,6,7 belt holders per division!!!! I'm shaking my head.
One lineal champ and the rest are contenders, a bit like that ring ratings list you tried to bull***** me with. Have u got that website for me yet? You've gone quiet on that front!!!!

you are talking utter bollocks

if being lineal " means u are the champ " then there are no anomalies

you don't get to decide when/if lineage is relevant, depending on how much you like a particular fighter..... don't be ridiculous

if you think Pac should be awarded a title at FW, because he beat the lineage holder therefore becoming "the man"..... then so should Stevenson/Canelo

ranking by lineage is an ignorant "I don't know what the fk I am doing" casual-fan system

stop being ridiculous

there are no grounds whatsoever for you to award Pac an imaginary title at featherweight because.....

1) he did not win a title from Barrera
2) he did not beat Marquez in his only title fight
3) he did not beat Morales, who beat him at 130 less than a year later

stop handing around world titles you wally fanboy

[aboutfkntime]

Wrong wrong wrong. I have never said lineage proved who the best fighter was. It proves who the lineal champion is. If he's not the best fighter well then, he will be found out. See baldomir.
Silly casuals have no knowledge of lineage. The opposite is true. Hardcore fans who love the history and traditions of the sport respect title lineage.

Your first fact above, we're not going to convince the other on that

Your second fact, u say that pacquiao cud not EVEN beat Marquez as if Marquez was some tomato can!!! The fight was a draw. Marquez couldn't beat pacquiao either. So pacquiao keeps THE title as he would if he were an alphabet beltholder.

Your third fact is a beauty!! How could pacquiao beat Morales at featherweight when morales was at super feather by the time pacquiao arrived??????? Explain that one to me.
Alphabets are the ones ****ting on the sport. You ask any sports fan about why they don't follow boxing and the first thing most of them say is that there are too many champions, too many belts, too confusing.
Promoters don't give a **** about the sport. As long as they can push a fight as a world title fight, that's all they care about. And you lap that up.
Alphabets don't give a **** about the sport. Money money money. And you lap it up
Title lineage can't be bought borrowed or stolen. Its above all that. Its not perfect but its way better than the alternative.

I'm still waiting on that ring featherweight rankings website. Or do u want to concede defeat on that one???!!!!

" If he's not the best fighter "..... then you were really ****** for awarding him an imaginary world title

and btw, nice flip-flop.....

you stated that the lineal champ was " the man "

well, I don't think you know what " the man " means

" the man " at featherweight, was Marquez..... and Pac did not beat him when they fought

but..... you started handing around world titles anyway

once more, Marquez was..... " the man "

Barrera was just..... the-man-who-beat-the-man a few years ago, but not the best in his division..... just like Stevenson/Canelo

[aboutfkntime]

Wrong wrong wrong. I have never said lineage proved who the best fighter was. It proves who the lineal champion is. If he's not the best fighter well then, he will be found out. See baldomir.
Silly casuals have no knowledge of lineage. The opposite is true. Hardcore fans who love the history and traditions of the sport respect title lineage.

Your first fact above, we're not going to convince the other on that

Your second fact, u say that pacquiao cud not EVEN beat Marquez as if Marquez was some tomato can!!! The fight was a draw. Marquez couldn't beat pacquiao either. So pacquiao keeps THE title as he would if he were an alphabet beltholder.

Your third fact is a beauty!! How could pacquiao beat Morales at featherweight when morales was at super feather by the time pacquiao arrived??????? Explain that one to me.
Alphabets are the ones ****ting on the sport. You ask any sports fan about why they don't follow boxing and the first thing most of them say is that there are too many champions, too many belts, too confusing.
Promoters don't give a **** about the sport. As long as they can push a fight as a world title fight, that's all they care about. And you lap that up.
Alphabets don't give a **** about the sport. Money money money. And you lap it up
Title lineage can't be bought borrowed or stolen. Its above all that. Its not perfect but its way better than the alternative.

I'm still waiting on that ring featherweight rankings website. Or do u want to concede defeat on that one???!!!!

honestly, I don't know why you are getting so upset

Pac still gets credit for beating Barrera..... and winning titles in 7 divisions is not bad

oh, right..... Margarito

well, winning titles in 6 divisions is not bad

oh, right..... Cotto at catchweight SMH

look, we should just leave it there..... winning titles in 6 divisions is not bad bro

give it a rest

[harry-greb]

you are talking utter bollocks

if being lineal " means u are the champ " then there are no anomalies

you don't get to decide when/if lineage is relevant, depending on how much you like a particular fighter..... don't be ridiculous

if you think Pac should be awarded a title at FW, because he beat the lineage holder therefore becoming "the man"..... then so should Stevenson/Canelo

ranking by lineage is an ignorant "I don't know what the fk I am doing" casual-fan system

stop being ridiculous

there are no grounds whatsoever for you to award Pac an imaginary title at featherweight because.....

1) he did not win a title from Barrera
2) he did not beat Marquez in his only title fight
3) he did not beat Morales, who beat him at 130 less than a year later

stop handing around world titles you wally fanboy

There are underdog stories in every sport who win world championships.
Name a sport and I'll give u an underdog who won world championships.
I think u only read half my posts.
Baldomir was the lineal champ. May weather was a far better fighter. Then when the two of them fought, mayweather dominated becoming lineal champ.
Lineage is absolutely relevant in regards to canelo and stevenson.
But I think GGG will beat him and I think ward wud beat stevenson. But until then they are rightful lineal champions. The best in any sport don't always win the title. Surely you're not going to argue that point!!!!

Are u ignoring my response to your third "fact". Address it please.

[harry-greb]

" If he's not the best fighter "..... then you were really ****** for awarding him an imaginary world title

and btw, nice flip-flop.....

you stated that the lineal champ was " the man "

well, I don't think you know what " the man " means

" the man " at featherweight, was Marquez..... and Pac did not beat him when they fought

but..... you started handing around world titles anyway

once more, Marquez was..... " the man "

Barrera was just..... the-man-who-beat-the-man a few years ago, but not the best in his division..... just like Stevenson/Canelo

Laughable!!!!!!!!
What does the man who beat the man become??????!!!!!!!
THE MAN
He beat the best fighter in the division (naz) in his first ****in fight at featherweight. If that doesn't make u the man, I don't know what does?
You say Marquez was the man,
Show me evidence to back up your statement.
I make a case why naz was the man by providing evidence(beating a who's who of featherweight division in late 90's early 2000's). I make a case why Barrera then became the man by providing evidence(beating naz who was the man) I then make a case why pacquiao then becomes the man(beating Barrera who beat naz).
I also provided evidence why Marquez was not the man(his murderers row of featherweights)
So I'd like u to provide me with evidence that Marquez was the man. And saying "he just was" is not evidence.
And please don't post your three alternative facts again. Youve posted them at least five times.
I would like u to post the unedited ring rankings that u posted a while back or at least tell me which website u got it from. But I'd say you'll ignore that last request because u know u were found out.

[harry-greb]

honestly, I don't know why you are getting so upset

Pac still gets credit for beating Barrera..... and winning titles in 7 divisions is not bad

oh, right..... Margarito

well, winning titles in 6 divisions is not bad

oh, right..... Cotto at catchweight SMH

look, we should just leave it there..... winning titles in 6 divisions is not bad bro

give it a rest

You're preaching to the converted on catchweights. Can't stand them.
I don't recognize any alphabet titles.
Margarito catch weight was a joke but it was probably pacquiao's toughest fight. He took some serious body shots in that fight.
He was hurt 2 or 3 times.
Cotton should have been allowed to weigh 147. I don't think it would have made much difference. Pacquiao took some serious punishment in that fight too. The reason I don't think its as bad as the Margarito fight is because cotto was only required to weigh in a pound less than he weighed for his previous fight. When the fight was signed I thought cotto would murder him. Lost money on it too.
As far as I'm concerned he didn't win a title in the cotto or margarito fights
He was a lineal champion in four weight divisions. Flyweight,feathereight, junior welterweight, welterweight.
And he was a triple crown champion in three of the original eight weight divisions.
Jaysus I had beaten u about 10 posts ago and u kept on digging!!!

I accept your surrender!!

[aboutfkntime]

There are underdog stories in every sport who win world championships.
Name a sport and I'll give u an underdog who won world championships.
I think u only read half my posts.
Baldomir was the lineal champ. May weather was a far better fighter. Then when the two of them fought, mayweather dominated becoming lineal champ.
Lineage is absolutely relevant in regards to canelo and stevenson.
But I think GGG will beat him and I think ward wud beat stevenson. But until then they are rightful lineal champions. The best in any sport don't always win the title. Surely you're not going to argue that point!!!!

Are u ignoring my response to your third "fact". Address it please.

the post you replied to had NOTHING to do with underdogs

you said lineage categorically proved who was the man

then you flip-flopped and started wanking on about anomalies