The "All Things Mayweather/Pacquiao" Express!!!!!!

Sam Langford never won the the legitimate Welterweight title, so by his logic

Baldomir>Langford.

that makes me sick just typing it :-(

 

tell me you did not consider Briggs the best HW in the world for beating foreman? surely you appreciate it was actually holyfield for beating tyson?

Foreman knocked out moorer in 94 right? what did he do since then to keep his position as number 1 in your opinion?

 

That fight was stopped on a cut, and IIRC, Judah may have been up on the scorecards...

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

 

WTF?

Foreman was the *lineal* legitimate champion @ HW. Foreman lost to Briggs who lost to Lewis.

Tyson *never* regained the HW title after losing it to Douglas and Holyfield *never* regained the HW title after losing it to Moorer.

1 + 1 = 2

 

absolute nonsense. did you even watch boxing back then? have you even bothered to watch the fights from this period?

foreman, after beating moorer lost the majority of rounds he contested until, ironically, briggs where he took a clear 7-5 victory.

Briggs was never ever regarded as the premiere HW.

whilst this was going on, Tyson blasted out two top 5 heavyweights coming off victories over McCall and Tucker, he then lost a great war with Holyfield before losing a DQ in the rematch.

At this point it was unanimous that Holyfield was the king, he solidified this by knocking out moorer.

Lewis won the true HW championship the night he beat holyfield (the first fight)

 

Logic according to naysayer:

burley and langford never won the WW championship. Baldomir did.

Baldomir > Burley + Langford

 

Bull****.

Holyfield lost his title to Moorer who lost to Foreman who lost to Briggs who lost to Lewis.

Lewis was already the *lineal* and legitimate HW champion the night he stepped in the ring for the first Holyfield fight.

Please take your head out of your ass...

 

Facts are facts? So what? Trees are also trees and cupboards are cupboards, cows are cows...etc etc. A fact is a fact by definition, but don't confuse facts with compelling evidence for the discussion at hand.

The so called 'fact' in this case simply does not directly equate with quality of fighter. Anyone who has been a boxing fan since the proliferation of titles and weight classes should be able to understand that even the lineal title has been significantly watered down in relavance due to the importance placed on the ABC belts by fighters. They don't get any money for it, which is why we rarely, if ever, hear fighters having the goal of the the lineal title. They don't, they want belts since that generally increases their earnings and earning potential more than the shattered lineal titles that often don't mean anything at all.

To cut a long story short, Baldomir was one of the most limited fighters to make it to the top in recent memory. He did nothing of note before, or after, he was just very lucky with timing. To claim that he is better than Cotto is surely trolling, or exposing an utter lack of understanding of the sport we are discussing. When Mayweather announced the fight, I immediately sighed and started wondering if his next opponents would be better.

 

do you not realise how meaningless the "lineal" championship was at this point?

let me remind you

bowe threw his belt in the trash to avoiding fighting the top contender in lewis.

bowe then lost a close fight to holyfield who lost a debatable fight to moorer who got knocked out by foreman who won a very debatable fight with schulz before losing a very debtabale fight with briggs.

Briggs was not the premiere HW before he stepped in the ring with Lewis.

you don't half talk ****.

 

margarito was at 150
and how did ortiz barely get by berto? and everyone can see he clearly beat peterson

 

The point here is that Floyd's victory over Baldomir is of a better quality than Pacquiao's victory over Cotto.

At the very least, Floyd beat a fighter who was the *lineal* and legitimate champion @ 147lbs and was coming off of his biggest win.

Pacquiao, OTOH, was fighting a guy, who in all reality, has never *beaten* anyone of note and was coming off of a BRUTAL beating and KO loss.

So yeah, Baldomir may have done nothing of note in his career other than win the *lineal* and legitimate title @ 147lbs - but what has Cotto done other than get KO'ed twice and win a HOTLY disputed SD over an old Shane?

 

Meaningless to whom?

You?

Facts are FACTS. Foreman was the Man until he lost to Briggs.

Bowe may have ducked Lewis but Bowe was STILL the Man until he lost to Evander.

Briggs was the Man @ HW until he lost to Lewis which made Lewis the Man @ HW.

These are the FACTS. Learn to live with them...

 

Cotto had beaten the following: Maussa, Ndou, Bailey, Corley, Torres, Branco, Malignaggi, Quintana, Judah, Mosley, Clotted.

he easily had the best active resume between 140 and 147 at the point pac beat him.

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

do you ever actually watch boxing?