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

Congrats you have just won the award for worse post of the week.

Thats no small feat considering the competition you have here.

1000Vcash will be sent to your account.

Spend it wisely :yep

 

The statement is acceptable but his reasoning is ****ing bull****.

He says because Pac has had more thrilling fights. Err so because Pac struggling back and forth with guys like marquez and morales he gets bonus points

He says morales was on the top of his game. Errr didn't morales lose before he fought Pac and still beat Pac.

He says that Pac beat guys more convincingly than mayweather. Errr mayweather style is to out box u not to knock u out.

Also the reason Pac had to fight guys like morales and marquez so much was because either he lost one of those matches so had to do rubber match with morales and with marquez every fight was controversial apart from when marquez knocked him spark out.

To suggest that floyd ain't been in meaningful fights is ******ed.

Floyd beat coralles at 130 he beat generous hernandez also at that weight. He beat castilo twice at 135. He beat the man of the division mosley at 147. He beat Hatton at 147. He beat marquez at 147. He beat Oscar at 154. He beat cotto at 154. He beat canelo at 152. And u trying to tell me floyd hasn't been in as many meaningful fights as pacquaio because he didn't fight these guys 3 times each lol. Get the **** out of here.

The level of opposition both guys have faced is nowhere near as far off as people make it out to be. Pac was blessed he was able to get fights with hall of famers like barrera and morales but let's not forget these guys were losing to boxers like raheem and Jones.

 

floyd has always fought the best in each division UNLIKE paq who has never really, and floyd has beaten the better or tougher bigger fighters while being the same size as paq.

merch is a phukin idiot and his claim is paq won some and lost some but was more exciting as a reason he has been in more meaningful fights make him look like more of a fool and he proves floyd is far better for not losing and struggling so much.

go figure

 

if paq fought all floyds opponents as they were i doubt he still be fighting. not 100% sure he be walking or talking

 

Nah, too many world class fighters, and not a drunk, senile old fool like Merchant have placed Floyd amongst the TBE to fight in the sport. Merchant never boxed and doesn't know WTF he's talking about.

 

Merchant has forgotten more about boxing while taking a dump this morning than your male groupie ass will ever know, you have zero knowledge of the history of the sport you're just have a sick obsession with a guy that happens to be a boxer.:deal

 

i agree with merchant

 

Bla bla bla.....

 

Meaningful fights?

Merchant brings up pac fighting Morales, Mab and Juan multiple times as to why pac is better. Its nosense when you dont put things in perspective. Yea pac fought Morales 3 times..He also lost to him the first time and when he beat him the first time Morales was coming off a spanking to Zahir raheem. Let me say that again...ZAHIR RAHEEM!

The second and third Morales fights were meaningless...I gie pac a pass on the second for avenging a loss but the third? Pointless

Mab 1 was a good win...However the second fight was again pointless

I give pac tons of credit for face Juan 4 times.. But it can be argued he lost every fight to Juan.

Cotto is a good win.

DLH an Hatton....Not so much considering what they looked like in the previous fight before facing pac.

Without putting things in perspective you get comment like these

 

I love all of the wordsmithing that goes on whenever this topic comes up.

I think they have comparable resumes. IMO, of the common opponents they had, only DLH was substantially different. I don't buy that Cotto was weight drained against Pac, I don't buy that Mosley was any different against Mayweather than against Pac. You could have switched the order of fights and the results would have been identical. I don't buy that Hatton was any different. He would have lost to Mayweather at any weight, and lost to Pacquiao even if Pac fought him before Mayweather. I also don't buy that Mayweather was too big for Marquez. Marquez is the same size as Pac! Mayweather just fought such a flawless outside game that he looked bigger than he really was.

So for me, the only real difference in their resumes, and the thing that gives Floyd the edge in my book, is that he went undefeated through his run, and continues to be dominant even as he's passed his prime.

 

Surely you mean vicious beating Margarito gave Cotto right? Oh, I forgot Pac fought him AFTER Margarito. So let's not bring that up.

 

Of course you do you blind ****ing homer.

 

Perfectly reasonable for him to think that.

 

Hardly even up for debate, Pacs resume is far deeper than Mayweather even if he took some losses.
Mayweather can't even compare to Pac having faced the other of this eras "fab 4" numerous times.

 

MAB, Morales and JMM are just telephone booth sluggers who are over hyped, praised, regarded just because they provide entertaining fights. If those guys fought more varied competition they would get exposed easily and already have have to a certain extent. Getting outboxed by Raheem and Bradley clearly shows your only good against a specific type of opponent. I laugh when these guys are brought up as of they aren't just a bit more better versions of Gatti or Ward. I give a **** about fighters who just slug it out.

The fab 4 are all overhyped fighters who look great against rockem sockem opponents but look like **** against anyone who doesn't stand there and trade shot for shot against them. Too many people on this forum need their eyes checked.