Comments Thread For: Fighter of The Decade? Mayweather, Ward Top List of Candidates

[Combat Talk Radio]

My problem is with the Rosenthal list.

Chocolatito? After getting dominated and sparked cold by an underdog in Rungvisai? No!

And then you dismiss Floyd's wins because of age (Canelo 'Green'? 'Green' fighters don't dominate Shane Mosley, Kermit Cintron, Carlos Baldomir and Alfonso Gomez.)

Yet, you go on to praise Crawford's wins when he really only had TWO notable ones: Gamboa and Postol. Gamboa you say was "respected" which you know full well was BS and Postol basically threw the fight.

[chrisJS]

My problem is with the Rosenthal list.

Chocolatito? After getting dominated and sparked cold by an underdog in Rungvisai? No!

And then you dismiss Floyd's wins because of age (Canelo 'Green'? 'Green' fighters don't dominate Shane Mosley, Kermit Cintron, Carlos Baldomir and Alfonso Gomez.)

Yet, you go on to praise Crawford's wins when he really only had TWO notable ones: Gamboa and Postol. Gamboa you say was "respected" which you know full well was BS and Postol basically threw the fight.

Mosley was shot. Mundine made that same Mosley quit. Gomez was also past his best and much smaller. Baldomir was old as hell and ass and Cintron always ******.

Gamboa was respected and Postol did not throw the fight. He was just outclassed.

[ShoulderRoll]

You're either completely ignorant, completely ******, or just lazy.

You really want to put all your chips down on this hand!?!?!?

I have more respect for you than that. There's no way that's the fight you're selling as Floyd's signature of the 2000's. Look at the hoops he made Marquez hop through. It was a great performance. As in, Floyd showed skill. But Floyd beating Marquez is like B Hop beating De La Hoya, Schmeling beating Walker or Tyson beating Spinks. A reminder why all fighters, but especially old ones should respect weight classes.

De La Hoya got WRECKED by Pacquiao. While Floyd made De La Hoyacut weight. And Floyd needed DLH to fade before pulling out a convincing but hard-earned win.

Mayweather also avoided the smaller Pacquiao through out the decade. He waited until Pac had one foot in the grave before meeting him. And, you guessed it, at Mayweather's preferred weight.

I'm not saying it was his signature performance of the decade. That would be Diego Corrales.

But I bring up Marquez just to show the talent gap there was between Floyd and Pacquiao.

De La Hoya was severely weight drained for the Pac fight and even had IV marks on his arms according to Freddie Roach. Are you trolling me with this?

Lastly, Floyd had agreed to all terms to fight Pacquiao in 2009. But it was Pacquiao who avoided signing and who avoided stricter, random testing. Those are just the facts.

[Boxing_1013]

Honestly it should be GGG but with the recent Canelo decisions going against him I don't think he will get it. From 2000-2010 it was obviously either Floyd or Pac. In this decade it basically comes down to how you view the controversial decisions and resumes of the guys on this list.

Even without the Canelo fights GGG has 15 good to great wins on his list in this decade, all different styles, 14 of them by KO. If you thought he won both Canelo fights as a lot of people do, then that's 17 wins over good opposition with no losses, with a few signature wins.

Crawford has excelled basically every time he's been in the ring but has only 7-8 quality wins and without a real signature fight it is hard to put him up there.

I admit I am no fan of Ward and think he only has one top quality non-controversial win, which was over Froch. I've never seen the supposed greatness people talk about with him, like you clearly see with the other guys on this list. If you try and justify the two Kov fights then he may get it but again it's all about how you view those types of fights. I think we all know he clearly lost the first fight and then the 2nd he was getting outboxed before the stoppage which was controversial as well. If those decisions had gone Kov's way he would be in the running but after the KO to Alvarez he wouldn't have won anyway.

Loma has an extremely strong resume for a guy who just started pro boxing 13 fights ago, but then again he was old when he started so he had to throw himself into the fire. The Salido loss, even if it was controversial, hurts him some. He has quite a few really good wins on his resume though I just don't think he has quite done enough.

Pac has too many losses to really be considered again in this decade. And I say that as legit losses, as the Floyd and Marquez fights were straightforward and the Horn fight he struggled with Horn's bully tactics and lost imo.

Floyd has the cleanest resume on this list and the best names, but again when he fought most of them matters, and most were not at their peak. I have no problem with Floyd getting it though since he has been the best boxer of this generation and deserves some recognition.

Canelo has a good resume as well but some of those names were not at their peak when they fought, and I thought GGG won both fights against him so I can't really give it to Canelo. I think it's funny though when people will hype up Canelo's resume and down GGG's. I think Canelo's best real win is over Lara 7-5, and GGG's (Besides the Canelo fights) is over Jacobs 8-4. Most of GGG's resume is KOing good or really good fighters on neutral terms in their primes. A few of Canelo's good wins are over smaller, formerly great fighters past their prime. That is not a knock on Canelo, he is a hell of a fighter. It just seems like a lot of people are quick to dismiss GGG's resume even though it is actually very solid.

Wlad's best 10 years just didn't sync up with this decade and with the two losses he would be out as well.

[Thraxox]

Pacquaio beat no ATG's in their prime.

I like how you didn't use the P4P list as reasoning this time

Barrera 2003 and Marquez 2008 but nice try though. Just because Mayweather doesn't have any prime ATG fighters on his resume doesn't also mean that Manny didn't fight atgs in their prime and best them.

He tooked the risks and he took the scalp. And P4P? Barrera was p4p 3 behind bhop and Roy Jones coming off wins from Tapia Hamed and Morales when Pacquiao had beaten, that's a legit prime ATG . While Marquez was p4p top 2 behind Pacquiao, coming off series of wins. And they fought at their prime weight class while also in their prime age.

[bballchump11]

Honestly it should be GGG but with the recent Canelo decisions going against him I don't think he will get it. From 2000-2010 it was obviously either Floyd or Pac. In this decade it basically comes down to how you view the controversial decisions and resumes of the guys on this list.

Even without the Canelo fights GGG has 15 good to great wins on his list in this decade, all different styles, 14 of them by KO. If you thought he won both Canelo fights as a lot of people do, then that's 17 wins over good opposition with no losses, with a few signature wins.

Crawford has excelled basically every time he's been in the ring but has only 7-8 quality wins and without a real signature fight it is hard to put him up there.

I admit I am no fan of Ward and think he only has one top quality non-controversial win, which was over Froch. I've never seen the supposed greatness people talk about with him, like you clearly see with the other guys on this list. If you try and justify the two Kov fights then he may get it but again it's all about how you view those types of fights. I think we all know he clearly lost the first fight and then the 2nd he was getting outboxed before the stoppage which was controversial as well. If those decisions had gone Kov's way he would be in the running but after the KO to Alvarez he wouldn't have won anyway.

Loma has an extremely strong resume for a guy who just started pro boxing 13 fights ago, but then again he was old when he started so he had to throw himself into the fire. The Salido loss, even if it was controversial, hurts him some. He has quite a few really good wins on his resume though I just don't think he has quite done enough.

Pac has too many losses to really be considered again in this decade. And I say that as legit losses, as the Floyd and Marquez fights were straightforward and the Horn fight he struggled with Horn's bully tactics and lost imo.

Floyd has the cleanest resume on this list and the best names, but again when he fought most of them matters, and most were not at their peak. I have no problem with Floyd getting it though since he has been the best boxer of this generation and deserves some recognition.

Canelo has a good resume as well but some of those names were not at their peak when they fought, and I thought GGG won both fights against him so I can't really give it to Canelo. I think it's funny though when people will hype up Canelo's resume and down GGG's. I think Canelo's best real win is over Lara 7-5, and GGG's (Besides the Canelo fights) is over Jacobs 8-4. Most of GGG's resume is KOing good or really good fighters on neutral terms in their primes. A few of Canelo's good wins are over smaller, formerly great fighters past their prime. That is not a knock on Canelo, he is a hell of a fighter. It just seems like a lot of people are quick to dismiss GGG's resume even though it is actually very solid.

Wlad's best 10 years just didn't sync up with this decade and with the two losses he would be out as well.

GGG's best wins are Jacobs and Kell Brook. There's no way he's fighter of the decade.

[hugh grant]

I think the FOTD is up for grabs. THe audition ends soon and you can make a case. Floyd obviously isn't a candidate for it, but Ward could be.
Pac might go for Thurman and if Pac beat Thurman im sure he would be FOTD again 100%. Contenders could be Lomo, GGG, Nelo cant be discounted also even with PED gate and controversial wins over GGG, depending what happens in Jacobs fight.
But fighters will be lining up for it now.

[Boxing_1013]

It's ironic that GGG's stretch of dominance started just about at the beginning of this decade. If the Canelo fights went his way I think most people, even those who hate on him, who begrudgingly say he deserves FOTD. A lot of people really are over the top with their hate on him/his resume, but when you study it a little bit he has a lot of really solid wins.

[champion4ever]

Why does that bother you?

It was an amateur mistake. The dude wasn't a veteran and associated w/ a large established camp. Really, that's who they're hoping to catch.

if anything, it means there's a better chance that Fury today is one of the few guys juicing.

He's better than any Heavyweight we've ever seen. That skill doesn't come from a needle in the ass. Unlike someone else we know... to dis day.

The reason why it bothers me because it's the same reason why Roger Clemens isn't in the Baseball Hall of Fame to day because he juiced and cheated the integrity of the game.

[Rok4]

Crawford?

I like Crawford! I like him a lot but once he mentioned his name as a possible candidate for fighter of the decade I had to stop reading the article. C'mon Man!! Lol