Is this era really that weak, why didn't Floyd have a nemesis?

I think a fighter probably has to cultivate that kind of relationship in a way.

You could say that Floyd had a nemesis in JLC. Tough first fight and then Floyd got back in the ring months later with him and beat JLC easy.

If they had had a rubber match you could have called it a rivalry but of course JLC lost BOTH fights so it wouldn't have made a ton of sense.

 

Hopkins' nemesis was Jones Jr.

Edgar Sosa and Brian Viloria were right there the whole time Calderon was fighting and Calderon even fought Viloria four times in the amateurs winning three of their series.

Sven Ottke and Calzaghe were ranked #1 and #2 at super middleweight for five consecutive years. They both retired undefeated without fighting each other.

Wlad and Vitali were each other's nemesis.

Golovkin has no nemesis.

 

I don't need a crystal ball, I've already seen Floyd's career as he has cherrypicked his way to the top. The top 5 guys I just mentioned Floyd never would have faced.

But I forgot, he is now fighting the dangerous Andre Berto who went life and death with Luis Collazo and lost to journeymen Jesus Soto Karass.

 

Don't they have to fight each other for that?

 

Nah man, that's just vitamins, clean living, and superior genetics.

 

They can still be rivals even if they were too ***** to fight each other.

 

Well then Pacquiao is obviously Floyd's nemesis and they fought anyway.

 

It makes me laugh how people actually thought Pacquiao had a chance.

 

Yeah well, you're an idiot. If Manny didn't injure himself I think it would have still been 40/60 in 2015 whether he could win or not. Back in 2009 it would have been 60/40 Manny's way.

 

Floyd waited until Pacquiao was past prime and had lost the attacking explosivity of his younger years.

He did this multiple times in his career but dumbass loser fanboys would rather co-sign his ducking than call him out on it and see a good fight. Enjoy your Berto fight, Floyd's big present to you all.

 

No it wouldn't have been, he was always the underdog from the first manifestations of thoughts of this dream match. Not one point in the timeline was Pacquiao the favorite to win. This was always a fight for Floyd to lose. I don't think the fight would've been any different in '09, the only exception would be both guys would've punched more, meaning manny opening himself up more to get hit more flush times.

 

How is mayweather pacquiao not the rivalry of the era lol it was all everybody spoke of for 6 years

 

I think people are idiots who think two fighters can face each other at any point in their careers and the result will always be the same. If history shows us anything it's that whenever two evenly matched fighters go head to head multiple times the result is always all over the place.

The Leonard Duran trilogy Duran won the first, quit the second, lost the third. Leonard Hearns, Leonard won the first and lost the second. Marquez vs Pacquiao, Pac won the first and second, lost the third and got knocked out in the fourth. Pac vs Morales, Pac lost the first and won the next two. Hopkins vs Jones, the first one Jones won the second one Hopkins won. Zale and Graziano traded knockouts. Morales won the first fight against Barrera and lost the next two. Marquez Vazquez went back and forth. Charles vs Walcott broke both ways. Pep Saddler went both ways. Duran vs De Jesus went both ways.

Sometimes one fighter starts out with an advantage and then at some point in their careers they cross and the other fighter has the advantage. Only profoundly stupid people can look at two fighters as good as Pacquiao and Mayweather and think the outcome would always be the same no matter when or how many times they fought.

 

Pacquiao is very lucky floyd got old.joking ... lol but seriously i agree both guys aint the same anymore and it would of been different in 2010.. i still think the same result but thays just my opinion