A Question To Floyd Mayweather Detractors

quick question,if its so worthless to you why start a thread about it m8?

i know what you're getting at,but you said you wanted objective views,yet criticise anything you dont agree with.

 

Let me tell you this. Be honest with yourself, do you think Mayweather won the first fight with Castillo?

 

Mayweather detractors don't all think Castillo won. In fact, most think Floyd won a close fight. I certainly do.

Most people don't like him because:
a) He's a *****;
b) He never demonstrated a modicum of humility;
c) He repeatedly claimed to be better than he was;
d) Having done so, he continued to take easy fights- the path of least resistance and most money;
e) He's a *****.

 

I'll simplify it for you then. No hate, no talk about circumstances or rematches or anything but the fight itself:

Watch Mayweather-Castillo I. Score it. Castillo won on the night. Won more rounds, got more points, won the fight. It was pretty close, but definitively clear IMO.

Whatever happened after, whatever circumstances there were on the night, whatever whatever, Castillo won that fight. I'm not saying the judges cheated him or anything, just that they made the wrong decision.

And that anyone who saw the fight knows that's the truth.

 

While Floyd officially won, most people don't believe he actually did, which is why it's normally brought up. Simple as that.

As for the injury, I myself have watched the fight and Floyd really didn't seem to be too bothered by it after a while.

Floyd proved in the rematch that he could adapt, albeit in a much more boring fight where he was fighting on the move and pot-shotting the entire time. Either way, Castillo proved a stylistic dilemma for Floyd, as even in the rematch Castillo won about 4 rounds.

When people bring this up, normally they're bringing it up to bring into question Floyd's weaknesses or stylistic problems, such as when mythical matchups between someone like Chavez and Floyd are concerned.

 

It's a flawed argument that you already pointed out. It's used by PBF haters as a way to try and discredit him. PBF was injured going into the first fight and still won a close fight and then gave a rematch and won clearly even JLC admitted it.

 

The judges are just as flawed, biased, and corrupt as the rest of us. Had there been different judges that night it might have been a different story. Watch the fight with your own eyes instead of going by what other people think. I believe everyone has seen the immense flaws in boxing judging by now.

 

What is your point?

Are you that simple? If someone wins every fight of his career despite getting his ass kicked and never winning a round due to corrupt judging, and happens to win those decisions over all the best of his era. Does that make him an ATG? No, it simply makes him a fraud.

I'm not saying the same for Floyd, but your point of view is ridiculous and straight up childish. Learn to think for yourself.

 

You're making an ass of yourself. I suggest stopping now.