Roger Mayweather "I'd whoop Pacquiao's a**..."

and pac has beaten 3 times the better fighters.

pac is a genuine atg, where do you rank roger?

 

yeah you're probably right because rocky lockridge would stand in the way of a possible pac-roger fight. Roger got ktfo in one round at his prime.

 

I think Roger should shut up.

 

Is that your only come back :roll: How about the fact you don't know anything about this sport .. period

You don't start you own thread or post anything worth reading your a ****ing clown ..

 

go away worm I done with you .. there is plenty of dick on this board that your gay ass can swing from ..


Im sure relentless would luv for you to squeeze his ball ya leech

 

you're sure one hell of an insecured pitt looking dog.

Hey dummy, i'm also done with you, you screaming ******.

now go suck floydie's balls you scumbag.:rofl

 

you're the clown who doesn't know how to spell "ERA" for chrissakes!:nut

 

didn't relentless expose your ***gotry white-ass?:yep

So who's the clown now?:hey

and pretending to be something else is surely not your best suit cause you suck at it!:nut

Now go have your head checked cause there's something definitely wrong.

 

Pac beat 3 time better fighters atsch the only fighters pac beat that even get any simi credit for is Barrera, morales and Marquez ..

Berrara and morales had already beaten the **** out each other and were worn fighters before pac beat them not the mention the war they had fought with other fighters before going head to head..

Marquez out box pac twice in which the record is should be Marquez 1 and the second fight a draw..

so where are these fighter that are three times as greater as the fighter on Roger resume? I see only two worn out, beat up old guys ATG he beat ..One of them had enough left in one fight to teach him a lesson.

Pac would have lost to the same fighters Roger lost too. he would have lost to chevez, he would have lost to pernel and I highly doubt he would have gone head to head with tony baltazar ..

don't get me wrong pac is a talented fighter, but a big part of his success is timing, there is noway in hell he would be able to accomplish what he has done now 20 years ago. Not to mention this is his first legitimate welter weight title fight.

 

There ya go dick swing again, Relentless is lying to you and himself but your such nut gobbler you don't care..

I never once told anyone what color or what race Im lil boy .. Can you not think for yourself or are you alway this stupid?

Jezz you would think a person with two head would be able to think but not you ..

 

"Your a clown that does now how to spell era" atsch

find some new material, and your a fool that can't follow the sport you post on .. opps excuse sorry I forgot you like to shake pom pom and nut saks

again come back when you have something valid to post ..

 

you are twisting some facts and discrediting pac in the process. i'm fine with it cause understandably, you were never a fan of pac.

but let me twist your so called facts back to what really took place...

first off, JMM never beat pac. if not for the scoring error that one judge have admitted to, pac would have won the first fight. the 2nd jmm fight was a close one that could have gone either way. had those judges gave it to jmm, i would have had no problems with it at all. but unfortunately for you, pac won so credit must be given to him nonetheless.

with the 1st barrera fight, pac was clearly the better man as he won via tko. but to discredit a great pac win and say that barrera is past prime and shop-worn is soooo reaching and lame. bear in mind that barrera notched a string of good wins after their fight, inclusive of the streak and quite notably, mab won his 3rd fight with morales. their 2nd debacle was not that significant anymore as mab chose to play safe and be contented to lose via ud.

when morales won the 1st pac fight, morales still had it. but i must say morales was already slipping in their 2nd and 3rd fight. but if there's one thing that stood out in this trilogy was the fact that both fighters showed true gut and bravado. morales' win over pac cemented even more his legacy. but pac's tko win in their 2nd and 3rd fight must not be overlooked as well as he officially handed morales' 1st ever knockdown and tko loss.

putting, hypothetically, pacquiao in roger's era doesn't prove that pacquiao would not stand out, much less, fair well. And if we also hypothetically put roger on this era, there is no way of proving that he will emerge as a good fighter, much less, a journeyman. Why so? because it didn't happen, simple as that.

but I do believe that pacquiao will starch roger because with all other factors and intangibles considered, pacquiao has great speed and power while roger has a weak chin.

 

the fact is, you claimed to spell era as "e-r-r-o-r". How did that happen?atsch

i won't go astray as im only sticking to the facts kiddo.

 

well, if i have to choose whom to believe between you and relentless, don't you think i'd pick the obvious? It's a no-brainer you dummy. Relentless puts more sense to his post than all your silly little posts combined.

it's not even close i tell you...:yep

 

still all better fighters

barrera, morales, marquez are all atg's roger is not.