mayweather. Fast, dancy and good. But entertaing?

in eye of beholder...depends on what you consider entertaining to watch. If you prefer offense, not much. If you find defense entertaining, along with details in the science then yes...though most I dont think find him to be entertaining, regardless of what revenue he generates.

 

HUH, yeah. He is a once in a lifetime talent that does not come around often.

I can't blame a casual fan not being interested. All they want is blood and brawls and that's not Floyd.

But I can't understand why any true boxing fan wouldn't wanna watch Floyd fight. Just watching the subtle changes in his game that leaves the opponent baffled is just so fun to see.

 

ppl pay because he is undefeated and want to see him get beat/ko.

blood brawl.. yeah cus if you dont like mayweathers boring defense tactics to win, you must therefore be a brute that doenst understand or like the art and expression of boxing.

People compare him to SRR, i just watched a doc on him and some of his fights, and SRR was far more entertaining, and to be entertaining, you must have to be offensive, right?

 

why would you mention him if you don't know who he is??

 

when floyd wins, when they raise his his hands, he should also be given a checkered flag.

 

saying that Floyd isn't entertaining because his opponents cant find a way to get to him, is just an another way to express his domination, in my mind

don't flame the master because the apprentices can't come to the party

 

so people make their own definition of what is entertaining

do you want to watch the greatest boxer of the modern era show why he is so much better than everyone else?
or do you want to see beer and popcorn gatti fights?

 

Pernell??? Hells yeah, there's a reason they called him sweet. The dude looked amazing in the ring. For Floyd??? Yeah, he's not as flashy, much more subtle than Whitaker, but if you can see all of the subtleties together...it's beautiful like a work of art!