It doesn't bother me. I'm sure other people think you look ridiculous following me around say "Jack doesn't know Jack" when you flat out refuse to engage in a debate about it. So please, carry on saying all that. It means nothing if you can't back it up, and everyone reading this thread knows you won't because you can't.
No idea what you mean here. I have posted several times in the past few days that I am down right excited about Dirrell's future prospects. The young man showed tremendous growth between his last fight and this one. An outstanding accomplishment at this stage of his career at this level of competition. I've posted that several times in the past couple of days. Just an example.
I know, I just don't think you lend yourself any credibility in pavlik discussions when you're going to obviously be biased. If someone said "pavlik is going up to HW" I guarantee you'd start listing HW's he would clearly KO.
I've openly said I wouldn't pick him against Bute at this point. So, no. I usually have a pretty good idea from study in the fights I'd pick him. Ones like this crap thread is about? Not really. Not worth watching the film for. I also said in another thread that I'd pick him over Dirrell in the short term because I think Dirrell can still be pressured on the big stage, but in a year or two? I'm not so sure about that at all.
It's got nothing to do why Abraham. Why would I even care about that, anyway? I obviously don't. This is about Mayweather and Pavlik, that's all. Still no argument to say why Pavlik would win? Awesome!
If you actually need it spelled out for you, fine. Mayweather gets within a light year of Pavlik, his lopsided size advantage counts. He sticks that jab in Mayweather's face, backs him onto the ropes and rapes him worse than Floyd Sr. probably did. Mayweather couldn't get Pavlik's respect if he went into the ring with a baseball bat. The better question: How does Mayweather land on Pavlik?