Floyd Mayweather NEVER DARED TO BE GREAT

[chrisJS]

Your boy that you quoted did...yet you didnt check him lmao. You have an agenda against Floyd admit it.

Wasn't part of the discussion we were talking about Larry having never heard of McCallum or knowing some of the basic 90s names. Talking more about him being a casual than resumes at this point. Like not knowing Eder Jofre, Carlos Ortiz or Emile Griffith or being able to identify the fighter in my sig.

[chrisJS]

he was coming off the best run of his career. you are just using age to measure prime i see. he didn't start getting noticed till about 30 years old so we cant fantasy pretend what would have happened if he was 5 years younger. he was in the prime of his career. maybe not the physical prime of his life but thats debatable and for fantasy. for example oscar was younger than mccallum was when floyd fought him so oscar was closer to his career prime? no, cause he had one legit win in 4 years and that was over mayorga and and he never won another meaningful fight.

I'd say he wasn't in his absolute peak but by today's standards would be considered prime yes. That version of McCallum is vastly superior to anything Floyd ever fought and that's a fact.

[daggum]

Your boy that you quoted did...yet you didnt check him lmao. You have an agenda against Floyd admit it.

you are going to try and nitpick when a guys prime was while at the same time saying floyd was teh best fighter of the last 25 years? you realize that doesnt really go together because the only way you can make that claim is if you completely ignore how past it most of floyd's opponents were.

[chrisJS]

you are going to try and nitpick when a guys prime was while at the same time saying floyd was teh best fighter of the last 25 years? you realize that doesnt really go together because the only way you can make that claim is if you completely ignore the how past it most of floyd's opponents were.

This poster said the version of Hatton that Mayweather beat was better than the Hearns that Hagler beat and the version of Gomez that Sanchez beat.

[KillaMane26]

Worst than my ex girlfriends yo....

[Xi_]

you are going to try and nitpick when a guys prime was while at the same time saying floyd was teh best fighter of the last 25 years? you realize that doesnt really go together because the only way you can make that claim is if you completely ignore the how past it most of floyd's opponents were.

Yes...y'all do it to floyd. Everybody else is fair game.

[Xi_]

This poster said the version of Hatton that Mayweather beat was better than the Hearns that Hagler beat and the version of Gomez that Sanchez beat.

You puzzy....there you go with your lies.

[daggum]

Yes...y'all do it to floyd. Everybody else is fair game.

but mccallum was on the best run of his career. you are nitpicking by finding something small and blowing it out of proportion. that small detail is his age and can easily be explained since he turned pro at age 25 and not age 18 like a lot of top boxers. so factually he was older but he didnt have as much wear and tear on his body as most.

so when you say mccallum wasnt prime its highly debatable. when you say pac wasnt prime its pretty damn clear unless you have an agenda. he had recently been ko'd cold by a guy he had beaten twice already not a small detail! thats glaring. he hadn't scored a ko in 6 years. not a small detail! he lost to jeff horn shortly after and i dont think a prime pac loses to jeff horn. not a small detail! those are not nitpicks. they are clear indications this fighter is no longer the same.

you can do the same thing with oscar, mosley,and cotto. they just weren't the same fighters. marquez was moving up 2 weight divisions so thats not a very great win. corrales and castillo were solid fighters but not in the great category. guys like baldomir just no. canelo at 152? i guess we have to wait and see. if he keeps getting that judging that will probably become floyds best win so maybe we can put one great win over a prime opponent in the future. leonard still has 4 though and jones at least 2 so hes not going to catch them

[chrisJS]

but mccallum was on the best run of his career. you are nitpicking by finding something small and blowing it out of proportion. that small detail is his age and can easily be explained since he turned pro at age 25 and not age 18 like a lot of top boxers. so factually he was older but he didnt have as much wear and tear on his body as most.

so when you say mccallum wasnt prime its highly debatable. when you say pac wasnt prime its pretty damn clear unless you have an agenda. he had recently been ko'd cold by a guy he had beaten twice already not a small detail! thats glaring. he hadn't scored a ko in 6 years. not a small detail! he lost to jeff horn shortly after and i dont think a prime pac loses to jeff horn. not a small detail! those are not nitpicks. they are clear indications this fighter is no longer the same.

you can do the same thing with oscar, mosley,and cotto. they just weren't the same fighters. marquez was moving up 2 weight divisions so thats not a very great win. corrales and castillo were solid fighters but not in the great category. guys like baldomir just no. canelo at 152? i guess we have to wait and see. if he keeps getting that judging that will probably become floyds best win so maybe we can put one great win over a prime opponent in the future. leonard still has 4 though and jones at least 2 so hes not going to catch them

It's useless trying to reason with them. His fans believe every opponent entered their prime the exact night they fought Floyd. ****, I swear Larry thinks Mosley was the best Sugar and that he was at his peak aged 38 coming off a 16 month layoff and being 20 years past his actual best. He's not the only one. They think Mayweather was disadvantaged against Marquez because that was Marquez best weight and he was more than prepared for a fight at 147. Just a couple of insane examples.

[Xi_]

but mccallum was on the best run of his career. you are nitpicking by finding something small and blowing it out of proportion. that small detail is his age and can easily be explained since he turned pro at age 25 and not age 18 like a lot of top boxers. so factually he was older but he didnt have as much wear and tear on his body as most.

so when you say mccallum wasnt prime its highly debatable. when you say pac wasnt prime its pretty damn clear unless you have an agenda. he had recently been ko'd cold by a guy he had beaten twice already not a small detail! thats glaring. he hadn't scored a ko in 6 years. not a small detail! he lost to jeff horn shortly after and i dont think a prime pac loses to jeff horn. not a small detail! those are not nitpicks. they are clear indications this fighter is no longer the same.

you can do the same thing with oscar, mosley,and cotto. they just weren't the same fighters. marquez was moving up 2 weight divisions so thats not a very great win. corrales and castillo were solid fighters but not in the great category. guys like baldomir just no. canelo at 152? i guess we have to wait and see. if he keeps getting that judging that will probably become floyds best win so maybe we can put one great win over a prime opponent in the future. leonard still has 4 though and jones at least 2 so hes not going to catch them

Nobody is gonna read that bias bs...you're a troll. Foh