How can anyone rate Mayweather's win over Marquez?

Which is bull****. Hence the intervention! :good

It is my thread though.

Yawn. What a puerile, pedantic child you are. So in a court of law, what you did does not fit the legal definition of slander, but we're not in a court of law ****wit, we're on a boxing forum, and to accuse someone of being 'clouded by bias' is slandering their reputation. You can go fish out some dictionary definition of the word all you like, but in the common everyday usage of the word, you made a slanderous accusation.

I am in a perfect position to make the comments I made, absolutely perfect. I know Cuchulain, I know his posts, I know his opinions, and I know what a complete moron you are, so when I see comments made by you both on my thread, I have the ideal vantage point from which to intervene. :smoke

Dry your eyes, if I see you slandering another poster I will intervene if I see fit, have a box of tissues ready next time so your keyboard doesn't get covered in salty ***** tears.

 

As usual, a diabolical fail from one of the thickest ****s on ESB.

JMM's peak was at 126, not 130 and 135. If you think JMM looked better in the Casamayor and Diaz fights than he did as a featherweight, I conclude that you've never seen JMM fighting at 126.



Floyd's best performances were at 130, between 1998 and 2001 (9-12 years ago)

He has been at 147 since 2005.



JMM's best performances were at 126, between 2002 and 2006 (4-8 years ago) - I think JMM was still prime at 130 just like Floyd was still prime at 135, 140 & 147, but JMM's absolute peak was 126 IMO, and Floyd's was 130

He had been at 135 for 1 year before he fought Floyd.


It is now 2010.


Let me ask you, ****wit, why would these respective boxers' peaks which occurred years and years ago, be the determining factor now?

Floyd had been a welterweight for FOUR years by the time he fought JMM, JMM had never even fought at light-welter, and had only fought at lightweight twice.


Paul Williams started at welterweight but has fought a couple of times at middleweight - if he now fought Timothy Bradley at a 157lbs catchweight, would that be a meaningful win for him?

Imbecile.

 

The two worst posts on this thread as usual come from this complete ****ing inbred:

atsch

 

I give Floyd credit for coming back after 18 months off to dominate a stone overweight Juan Manuel Marquez. Nothing spectacular but it's a decent enough win, probably rate it as 5 or 6 out of 10.

I think people put way too much emphasis on weights these days anyway. Yes the weight of fighters can be key to who wins certain fights and obviously was a big factor in the Mayweather-Marquez fight. But the fact is we have 17 recognised weight divisions as well as frequent catchweight fights. This is too many really and if we went back to the original 8 divisions (as I believe it should be), the fight would have been between the current lightweight champion and the former welterweight champ. Obviously it is a gap and was a decisive one here but it's not as bad as some people make out.