Comments Thread For: McGregor on Mayweather: Early Rounds All Mine, Later Rounds I Outlanded Him

[Kannabis Kid]

I was just reading an article of Arum recapping Floyd versus Castillo 1. Arum had it 8 rounds to 4 for Castillo and (1) judge scored it 7-5 for Castillo. Another judge from Mexico practically gave Floyd every round which was outrageous. Arum said Floyd and his corner knew they lost and he was in the ring telling him 1 loss won’t ruin his career.

But I’m going to watch it again on ESPN 2 tonight at 11 pm EST. To be fair, I think Floyd lost that fight. And I think it scared him straight to be extra prepared and extra trained and be in supreme condition for all of his fights moving forward to not come close to losing again or put himself in the best position to win. I think he took Castillo lightly thinking he could beat him with natural boxing ability and training to a lessor degree than the training regimen he became known for over the years. All of his fights were too easy after winning the title from Hernandez heading in the Castillo fight. That fight almost cost him and almost altered his persona, career, and money.

I agree I thought Floyd lost but Floyd said he had a injured rotator cuff going into the first Castillo fight I don't think it had anything to do with his training just was fighting a tough come forward fighter with one arm.

[hugh grant]

You've actually not lied or doctored my post. Thank you.

?

But it's true isn't it? Floyd is the only ATG boxer in history who never gave his biggest rivals a rematch!
Why is that? And before you answer please don't reply with the usual Floyd fan reply of he beat them convincing first time, so no need for rematch

[Oregonian]

But it's true isn't it? Floyd is the only ATG boxer in history who never gave his biggest rivals a rematch!
Why is that? And before you answer please don't reply with the usual Floyd fan reply of he beat them convincing first time, so no need for rematch

————————

Since you preempt your question, let’s try something different, ok? Using your own logic of course.

First you have to define “rival” as it seems it means something different to you.

Two, why didn’t all the other ATG give their “rivals” a rematch?
Oscar, Hopkins, Roy, Calzaghe, Cotto, PAC, Lennox, Hatton, Wladimir, Ward, Tito, Crawford, they did not give their rivals rematches .... I mean I could go on if you’d like.

More important, what is the reason for a rematch? Can you explain in your own logic what makes a rematch happen?
For example, do you think PAC should have given Hatton a rematch?
Or maybe Hopkins giving Oscar a rematch?
Or even Floyd giving Zab, Hatton, Ortiz etc rematches?

[hugh grant]

————————

Since you preempt your question, let’s try something different, ok? Using your own logic of course.

First you have to define “rival” as it seems it means something different to you.

Two, why didn’t all the other ATG give their “rivals” a rematch?
Oscar, Hopkins, Roy, Calzaghe, Cotto, PAC, Lennox, Hatton, Wladimir, Ward, Tito, Crawford, they did not give their rivals rematches .... I mean I could go on if you’d like.

More important, what is the reason for a rematch? Can you explain in your own logic what makes a rematch happen?
For example, do you think PAC should have given Hatton a rematch?
Or maybe Hopkins giving Oscar a rematch?
Or even Floyd giving Zab, Hatton, Ortiz etc rematches?

The thing is Floyd s biggest rivals have better resumes than him, so one win over them don't mean anything or count for much. I mean when all is said and done, nel o will likely have surpassed floyd, so floyd s win over nelo won't mean much.

Floyd beating Pac once don't mean he's better than Pac h2h, let alone having better resume. Just like morales and Bradley beating Pac didn't mean they were better h2h than pac, so we can't assume Floyd is!

Beating your biggest rival in rematch means first wasn't a fluke! plus boxing fans want to see the best fight each other more than one time
Duran have srl rematch. Holyfield v lewis. Willie pep v sandy sadler, Ali v frasier and liston. SRR v lamotta. Pac v barrera, pac v morales, pac v bradley, pac v jmm.
Pac should not have given hatton rematch, and floyd doesn't need to rematch the baldomirs and Ortiz of this world. BIGGEst rivals being operative word

[Oregonian]

The thing is Floyd s biggest rivals have better resumes than him, so one win over them don't mean anything or count for much. I mean when all is said and done, nel o will likely have surpassed floyd, so floyd s win over nelo won't mean much.

Floyd beating Pac once don't mean he's better than Pac h2h, let alone having better resume. Just like morales and Bradley beating Pac didn't mean they were better h2h than pac, so we can't assume Floyd is!

Beating your biggest rival in rematch means first wasn't a fluke!
Duran have srl rematch. Holyfield v lewis. Willie pep v sandy sadler, Ali v frasier and liston. SRR v lamotta. Pac v barrera, pac v morales, pac v bradley, pac v jmm.
Pac should not have given hatton rematch

———

So according to you, beating a fighter one time could mean it was a fluke and hence a rematch warranted.
Marquez destroying PAC with one punch is defined as a “lucky punch” by you guys even though he dropped PAC in the third round of the same fight.

But PAC’s one punch KO of Hatton was not a lucky punch. Do you get that logic?
As for the examples you gave, it just means you don’t know much about boxing.

The reason Holyfield and Lennox fought twice was because almost everyone thought Lennox won the first time. It was a controversial win for Holyfield.

The same thing with Marquez and Manny. Controversial wins for Manny.

Ali vs Frazier fought three times because those were all close and exciting fights. There were huge demands for those fights.

The same can be said for PAC-Morales and PAC-Barrera. Close fights that created rivalries.

The only fights that Floyd had that were close were Maidana and Castillo, that’s why rematches happened.

I bet you call Marquez a coward (like all Filipinos) because he refused to fight PAC a 5th time. There’s no need for a 5th fight. Marquez was robbed the first three times.

PAC was robbed against Bradley hence the rematches.
Tarver was robbed against Roy hence the rematches.

Rematches typically happens when a fight ends controversially or the fight was a hellacious war of attrition (Gatti-Ward, Marquez-Vasquez, etc).

You seem to have a huge disconnect between why rematches happen and how rivalries are created.

[hugh grant]

———


But PAC’s one punch KO of Hatton was not a lucky punch. Do you get that logic?
As for the examples you gave, it just means you don’t know much about boxing.

You seem to have a huge disconnect between why rematches happen and how rivalries are created.

Pac has shown he can best biggest rivals more than once numerous times, floyd not really. Hatton historically is no threat to pac, pac has fought better fighters so no need to rematch hatton. Nobody wanted another.
Floyd v nelo most would like, as they believe Nell was green and weakened. As did they want floyd v pac. And considering people expected 3 fights in first place between these 2.
The only real reason floyd wouldn't give rematch to Nell and pac is because he wanted to surpass those wins and go for bigger fish, but fought berto instead? There was controversy regarding pac v floyd fight and nelo. Just because you choose to ignore doesn't mean others do

[Oregonian]

Pac has shown he can best biggest rivals more than once numerous times, floyd not really. Hatton historically is no threat to pac, pac has fought better fighters so no need to rematch hatton. Nobody wanted another.
Floyd v nelo most would like, as they believe Nell was green and weakened. As did they want floyd v pac. And considering people expected 3 fights in first place between these 2.
The only real reason floyd wouldn't give rematch to Nell and pac is because he wanted to surpass those wins and go for bigger fish, but fought berto instead? There was controversy regarding pac v floyd fight and nelo. Just because you choose to ignore doesn't mean others do

———-

Like all fans, you choose to ignore the factual and logical points given to you.

PAC has shown two things .... his rematches have happened because he got dubious wins or he was robbed (Bradley) or that his fights were so close that they warranted rematches.
The Hatton example is just a good example of my point. It did not warrant a rematch. I don’t need to be a PAC fan to acknowledge that.

Two, PAC typically fights guys that are coming off losses (Cotto, Mosley, Margarito, Broner, Clottey etc) or weight draining fighters to weaken them (Cotto, Oscar, Margarito etc).

You hold on to the Berto fight but lavish praise on PAC for fighting BUMS like Rios, Mathysse, Diaz, Algieri etc.

Floyd beat PAC and Nelo by Unanimous Decision. They weren’t even close fights.

You PAC fan boys always excuse PAC’s losses. The guy has 7 losses but every loss you try to give reasons (injured shoulder, lucky punch, robbery etc). Your boy got beat, period.

[hugh grant]

———-

Like all fans, you choose to ignore the factual and logical points given to you.


The Hatton example is just a good example of my point. It did not warrant a rematch. I don’t need to be a PAC fan to acknowledge that.



Floyd beat PAC and Nelo by Unanimous Decision. They weren’t even close fights.

.

Why do you try changing subject and go off on tangent?
Why do you keep talking about hatton? If your biggest rivals have better resumes than you wouldn't you want to have 2wins over your rival? Floyds just left people thinking pac, Nell and dlh would best floyd in rematch. They do warrant rematch.

Pac rematch barrera didn't he? I'm sure pac gave rematch simply because barrera wanted one.
Why do you try excuse floyd? If rematch were good enough for fighters far greater than Floyd will ever be why isn't it good enough for floyd?

[Jedi Vader]

But it's true isn't it? Floyd is the only ATG boxer in history who never gave his biggest rivals a rematch!
Why is that? And before you answer please don't reply with the usual Floyd fan reply of he beat them convincing first time, so no need for rematch

He beat them very easily and didn't need to rematch any of them.

[Oregonian]

Why do you try changing subject and go off on tangent?
Why do you keep talking about hatton? If your biggest rivals have better resumes than you wouldn't you want to have 2wins over your rival? Floyds just left people thinking pac, Nell and dlh would best floyd in rematch. They do warrant rematch.

Pac rematch barrera didn't he? I'm sure pac gave rematch simply because barrera wanted one.
Why do you try excuse floyd? If rematch were good enough for fighters far greater than Floyd will ever be why isn't it good enough for floyd?

————-

Why do you keep changing subject? Talking about Barrera.
Why didn’t PAC rematch Cotto at 147 (not some dubious catchweight)?
Why didn’t he rematch Oscar at 154 (not some dubious catchweight)?
Rematch Margarito at 154 (not some dubious catchweight)?
Why didn’t he rematch Hatton after that lucky punch?

PAC has seven losses. He got knocked out a couple of times.

Why does PAC keep fighting journeymen (Rios, Diaz, Mathysse, Broner, Vargas etc)?