Final thoughts on Mayweather and Pacquiao

dmar5143 wrote:

overrated greats of the past.interesting.interesting that todays fighters are bigger.today we have a huge 147 years ago it was a small puny 147.or 135 or 160..technicaly better...how..overeated greats of the past..like greb.pep.robinson.archie moore.duran.benny leanord.hagler.hearns.monzon.armstrong.barney ross.ray leanord.joe louis.larry holmes.ali.there all in the past.30 or more years.ali its been 46 years since the first liston fight..marcel cerdan ez charles mickey walker eder jofdre jimmy wilde sam langford ..which one is overated..why...if marble or i talk about great fighters of the past and yes 30 years is the past before you were born.who are we overating.lou ambers..if we call pac and floyd all time greats does that praise mean we are underating them.but based on 3 fights against so so competion folks want to rate pack as a all time great welter..whos overating who there..good debate huh

Dmar one I did agree with you on the Pac WW thing. But you do overrate a lot of old fighters. With current technology it makes a fighter more prepared, they ARE bigger faster and stronger than ever before. Why is it in every other sport everyone agrees that todays athlete is better than the old timers but in boxing somehow its different. And before you guys go off on American Boxing is not as big remember this is a world wide sport. So yes other nations have picked up the slack.

again sooner yes exerise equipment and nurtinal science is a plus..again how much bigger are the 175 lder or 160 ones or 168 or 112 how much bigger are they then the fighters over 50 years ago..faster..how.im not talking football basketball where that apllies...its boxing.160lbs is 160 lbs..how are they trained better..what new methods are far supier..what fighters are faster.dispite 150 or more amatuer fights etc etc name one or all the fighters that have far greater tech skills.pac is just starting to have a little balance..how much better do these fighters feigent..they dont know how..where are the great combination fighters where are 15 roundfighters.what do they do better..they doint fight.thats what they do better..come on.

dmar5143 wrote:

again sooner yes exerise equipment and nurtinal science is a plus..again how much bigger are the 175 lder or 160 ones or 168 or 112 how much bigger are they then the fighters over 50 years ago..faster..how.im not talking football basketball where that apllies...its boxing.160lbs is 160 lbs..how are they trained better..what new methods are far supier..what fighters are faster.dispite 150 or more amatuer fights etc etc name one or all the fighters that have far greater tech skills.pac is just starting to have a little balance..how much better do these fighters feigent..they dont know how..where are the great combination fighters where are 15 roundfighters.what do they do better..they doint fight.thats what they do better..come on.

How are they bigger? Are you kidding these guys dont have an ounce of fat on them. The nutrition alone makes them stronger and faster. Dmar how much experience do you have around gyms now days? I am not being a jerk this is a real question.

KrazyHorseBennett wrote:

He isn't afraid, he is simply delusional to the point of mental illness. He thinks everything can be done on his time, at his choosing. That everyone has to kiss his ass because he's the supposed cash cow of HBO. His excessive narcissism is what has ruined this, not fear of Manny Pacquiao.

It simply makes you guys feel better to say "Floyd is scared" so you can wrap the entire disaster of these negotiations in a nice little box with a nice little bow and package that into shitting over his entire career. It's also much sexier to say he's afraid as opposed to saying he's an enormous egotistical asshole that thinks the world revolves around him.

LOL, works for me!

KrazyHorseBennett wrote:

The only way I feel oldtimers are overvalued is in the amount of fights they had. It's not as if they were some sort of indestructible superhumans that miraculously healed faster than their modern day counterparts. So in my view that means one thing....the competition (excluding the highest levels) was not as good as some may think. There was a metric shit-ton of filler in those days led by guys who did it simply to add money on top of their their real-life jobs.

Now I will agree that through fighting more, the best top-tier fighters of that day became highly seasoned professionals and overall were more skilled than many of today's fighters. But using the fact that someone fought 1700 fights a year as a measure of how good they were is a bit short-sighted.

I think that is dead wrong. Think about how good one has to be defensively to just survive fighting once a month for a decade? There were a gazillion guys who weren't good enough to have 100 fights because they got hit too much. You also are forgetting some of the history of the sport I think. The day job situation didn't happen until the 1950's when TV began boxing's slide.

Now when you are looking at ATG's these are guys who fought top ten ranked guys 30+ times and in some cases 40+ times. That is when only 88 fighters were ranked. Today 177 fighters are ranked and NOBODY comes anywhere close to fighting ranked guys that often. Just think about how good one had to be to merely survive!

My final thought is Manny should never approach a Karaoke Machine again !!

Floyd didn't sign because he knew Manny was planning an after party karaokeathon and stopped hundreds of innocents ear drums from bleeding.

sooner to anser your question.for 30 years i worked out in gyms.knew many competitive body buil;ders and some i gave training advise to when they asked me..im very knowldgeable on nutrition what exersise works to build muscle and strenth and how to train..its been 20 years since i touched a weight..boxing gyms ive visted all my life as well as talks with many greats of the past one on one..living in charlotte now 5 years ive been to there boxing gym 40 times maybe.its were calvin brock trained if you call it that..having little body fat thats not a requirement for a great fighter is it..again how much bigger is that 126 pounder over a 126 pounder 50 years ago..ditto any weight class under the heavys..

marbleheadmaui wrote:

KrazyHorseBennett wrote:

The only way I feel oldtimers are overvalued is in the amount of fights they had. It's not as if they were some sort of indestructible superhumans that miraculously healed faster than their modern day counterparts. So in my view that means one thing....the competition (excluding the highest levels) was not as good as some may think. There was a metric shit-ton of filler in those days led by guys who did it simply to add money on top of their their real-life jobs.

Now I will agree that through fighting more, the best top-tier fighters of that day became highly seasoned professionals and overall were more skilled than many of today's fighters. But using the fact that someone fought 1700 fights a year as a measure of how good they were is a bit short-sighted.

I think that is dead wrong. Think about how good one has to be defensively to just survive fighting once a month for a decade? There were a gazillion guys who weren't good enough to have 100 fights because they got hit too much. You also are forgetting some of the history of the sport I think. The day job situation didn't happen until the 1950's when TV began boxing's slide.

Now when you are looking at ATG's these are guys who fought top ten ranked guys 30+ times and in some cases 40+ times. That is when only 88 fighters were ranked. Today 177 fighters are ranked and NOBODY comes anywhere close to fighting ranked guys that often. Just think about how good one had to be to merely survive!

I don't necessarily disagree because I don't feel I put forth the thought quite the way I wanted to. I just can't seem to express it the way I want to.

yep marble..they want to rank pac as a all time great welter..based on what..what greats of the past have you or i overated..read this thread and crasy arguments..unreal.

crasyhorse read back. i anser your question on that..im wondering still frank and sooner what greats of the past have i overated..i listed about 25 names.whos overated there.

dmar5143 wrote:

sooner to anser your question.for 30 years i worked out in gyms.knew many competitive body buil;ders and some i gave training advise to when they asked me..im very knowldgeable on nutrition what exersise works to build muscle and strenth and how to train..its been 20 years since i touched a weight..boxing gyms ive visted all my life as well as talks with many greats of the past one on one..living in charlotte now 5 years ive been to there boxing gym 40 times maybe.its were calvin brock trained if you call it that..having little body fat thats not a requirement for a great fighter is it..again how much bigger is that 126 pounder over a 126 pounder 50 years ago..ditto any weight class under the heavys..

Well in the 20 years that you have been away the advances in supplements has been so great its crazy. My point is that 126 today is not the same as 126 50 years ago. You are talking about guys who have a ton more muscle and strength. That doesnt include how much those supplements help those guys in reflexes and speed. There is no comparison. You think that Pac would be able to do the things he has done without supplements. I would say probably not.

Anyways I just think that the boxers today have a huge advantage over all those old fighters.

dmar5143 wrote:

crasyhorse read back. i anser your question on that..im wondering still frank and sooner what greats of the past have i overated..i listed about 25 names.whos overated there.

I just think sometimes you guys believe they walk on water. Everytime we mention a guy like pac(and i am just using this as an example) you try to make a list of 20 guys from 30 or more years ago that would KO him. Well How in the hell do you really know that. That is how you overrate them. Everyone is beatable. Could Pac beat some of the greats HELL YES. Would he beat some of the ones at 147 I doubt it. That is his maximum weight IMO and he could get hurt by some of the greats who was much bigger. Is Ali the best HW of all time? Probably. Do I think he would just walk in and kick the shit out of anyone? HELL NO. There are a ton of guys who could have kicked his ass.

im on my way to bed..i see.suppliments give better reflexes and speed.realy..does it also make them take a better punch..lets see mosley and green both complained as an excuse they were overtrained..how come the suppliments didnt help them..how can a armstrong pep or a gasper ortega or greb fight over 25 times in one year without suppliments.how come they were not overtrained..im just wondering sooner.mosley also had a nutritionalist cook for the gang..who are these real fast fighters today .with great speed.there should be plenty if they took suppliments.extra fast relexces.they all or most of them should because of suppliments right.or do only certain fighters take them...name me 50 fighters who have this great speed and reflexes...please give me a list of theses wonder vitimins that the fda has approved for the main reason to develope speed..what suppliments are geared towards making you have great relexes and co ordination..whats there names soo we can check on the net where it says take this and your speed increases a lot.ditto relexes..how come we dont see these results in the ring by thousands of fighters if thses suppliments are so great..
surely there should be a suppliment on the market to make you a great puncher..not peds now...vitamin or suppliments..why isnt there a heavyweight that can throw faster punches then ali or holmes tyson or patterson.where is there great speed or footwork that embareses a tunney a ali a holmes..maybe heavys dont take suppliments..im not breaking them on you but the proff is in the pudding..by golly we have superman in the ring today...

.

sooner it started by placing pac as a ATG welter based on what 3 fights..you have him ranked number 7 of all time..thats overating.

i guess when marble and i rate both pac and floyd as elite greats that is the top 100 that dont count..ok.

soonermark890 wrote:

dmar5143 wrote:

sooner to anser your question.for 30 years i worked out in gyms.knew many competitive body buil;ders and some i gave training advise to when they asked me..im very knowldgeable on nutrition what exersise works to build muscle and strenth and how to train..its been 20 years since i touched a weight..boxing gyms ive visted all my life as well as talks with many greats of the past one on one..living in charlotte now 5 years ive been to there boxing gym 40 times maybe.its were calvin brock trained if you call it that..having little body fat thats not a requirement for a great fighter is it..again how much bigger is that 126 pounder over a 126 pounder 50 years ago..ditto any weight class under the heavys..

Well in the 20 years that you have been away the advances in supplements has been so great its crazy. My point is that 126 today is not the same as 126 50 years ago. You are talking about guys who have a ton more muscle and strength. That doesnt include how much those supplements help those guys in reflexes and speed. There is no comparison. You think that Pac would be able to do the things he has done without supplements. I would say probably not.

Anyways I just think that the boxers today have a huge advantage over all those old fighters.

Sorry, just dead wrong. 126 is 126. Supplements have made 5'6 feathers now 5'6 lightweights. They haven't made 126 better pounds, they have made MORE pounds. If you were correct we'd look back at feathers from yesteryears and they'd be fat compared to today's guys. Instead they are lean and fighting 15 round fights and getting in the ring ten times a year. So they obviously weren't out of shape. Muscle is denser and weighs more than adipose tissue so more muscle NECESSARILY means more weight in an already fit athlete. The math is inescapable.

soonermark890 wrote:

dmar5143 wrote:

crasyhorse read back. i anser your question on that..im wondering still frank and sooner what greats of the past have i overated..i listed about 25 names.whos overated there.

I just think sometimes you guys believe they walk on water. Everytime we mention a guy like pac(and i am just using this as an example) you try to make a list of 20 guys from 30 or more years ago that would KO him. Well How in the hell do you really know that. That is how you overrate them. Everyone is beatable. Could Pac beat some of the greats HELL YES. Would he beat some of the ones at 147 I doubt it. That is his maximum weight IMO and he could get hurt by some of the greats who was much bigger. Is Ali the best HW of all time? Probably. Do I think he would just walk in and kick the shit out of anyone? HELL NO. There are a ton of guys who could have kicked his ass.

The thing about considering guys who fought 100 times is there are ZERO mysteries. NONE. They have faced every conceivable style and every conceivable challenge. If they were able to be dominant over that length of activity it NECESSARILY means they had monumental talent and skills while facing men at the ATG's best weight. In today's game this simply isn't true very often. The issue with Manny is you want to compare him to gigantic welters. It's like comparing Mickey Walker to ATG light heavies and heavies rather than where he should be compared, welter and middle.

Manny is ENORMOUSLY disadvantaged at welter compared to best of the best like Robinson and Leonard and Barbados Walcott and Hearns etc. The issue then is comparing Manny at 135 to ATG's where he has had a single fight. At 126 and 130 he wasn't nearly as proficient technically as he has become so he can't be a top ten guy at 126 either, maybe at 130. The issue with Manny is is it fair to other guys to say IF Manny had today's technical skills while he was a featherweight how he'd do against Pep and Sanchez and Saddler and the like?

my final thought is Ken SHamrock just got obliterated who gives a shit right know

not me

Birdofthad wrote:

my final thought is Ken SHamrock just got obliterated who gives a shit right know

not me

Ken Shamrock is 137 years old.

Honestly, I think it depends on what old timers you're talking about. I like Jack Dempsey just as much as the next guy, however it's not odd to see Jack falling all over the place when throwing punches. Max Baer was clumsy too. Gene Tunney might've been the best HW up to the time he existed. Joe Louis was great and would've destoryed both Klits on the same night. I haven't seen enough of Benny Leonard but Willie Pep was a great figther. Reminds me of Hector Camacho. Ray Robinson? I don't think anyone will ever do it better. Ali, same thing. My point is that it's not the era, it's the fighter. As far the number of fights a boxer has, Archie Moore had 130 KO's. Sure, he hit hard but is he the hardest puncher in Light Heavyweight history? No. Bob Foster didn't have a quarter of the fights Moore had but may've hit as hard. Julio Chavez had over 100 fights didn't he? I don't like Floyd Mayweather, but does anyone think he would've had much trouble with Chavez at any weight division? I think an honest look at individual fighters proves that it's the quality, not quanity of fights that prove a fighter's merit. Ray Leonard proved that. I watched Duran and Aaron Pryor in their primes. Great fighters. However, I think that anyone who watches Manny Pacquiao and says there's no comparison is in denial of what they're seeing. Just my take.

Ali_1748 wrote:

My final thought is Manny should never approach a Karaoke Machine again !!

Floyd didn't sign because he knew Manny was planning an after party karaokeathon and stopped hundreds of innocents ear drums from bleeding.

Ali, you've been all over Manny and his singing ability ever since I've known you. Have you ever heard "Larry Holmes and The Knockouts", or Ali howling "Stand By Me?" Ever see Ray Robinson tap dance? They all suck. LOL. Manny wouldn't qualify for "American Idol" but at least he can get through a song and stay somewhat close to the right key. The only other fighter I knew who could do that was Joe Frazier. He may've been the best singer/boxer I ever heard. Believe me, that's no compliment. These guys ain't Luther Vandross.

dmar5143 wrote:

im on my way to bed..i see.suppliments give better reflexes and speed.realy..does it also make them take a better punch..lets see mosley and green both complained as an excuse they were overtrained..how come the suppliments didnt help them..how can a armstrong pep or a gasper ortega or greb fight over 25 times in one year without suppliments.how come they were not overtrained..im just wondering sooner.mosley also had a nutritionalist cook for the gang..who are these real fast fighters today .with great speed.there should be plenty if they took suppliments.extra fast relexces.they all or most of them should because of suppliments right.or do only certain fighters take them...name me 50 fighters who have this great speed and reflexes...please give me a list of theses wonder vitimins that the fda has approved for the main reason to develope speed..what suppliments are geared towards making you have great relexes and co ordination..whats there names soo we can check on the net where it says take this and your speed increases a lot.ditto relexes..how come we dont see these results in the ring by thousands of fighters if thses suppliments are so great..
surely there should be a suppliment on the market to make you a great puncher..not peds now...vitamin or suppliments..why isnt there a heavyweight that can throw faster punches then ali or holmes tyson or patterson.where is there great speed or footwork that embareses a tunney a ali a holmes..maybe heavys dont take suppliments..im not breaking them on you but the proff is in the pudding..by golly we have superman in the ring today...

.

Are you fucking kidding me Dmar. You really think they dont? Just look at all the other sports in the world. Somehow just because its boxing it doesnt help. OK makes sense.

It took some arm twisting from me but a couple of weeks ago I got my wife to agree to a new punishment for our 3 year old.

When Peyton acts up, we put him in his room, turn a computer on, and play Manny singing Nothing is gonna change my love for you on Jimmy Kimmel.

captainanddew wrote:

It took some arm twisting from me but a couple of weeks ago I got my wife to agree to a new punishment for our 3 year old.

When Peyton acts up, we put him in his room, turn a computer on, and play Manny singing Nothing is gonna change my love for you on Jimmy Kimmel.

LMAO

marbleheadmaui wrote:

Birdofthad wrote:

my final thought is Ken SHamrock just got obliterated who gives a shit right know

not me

Ken Shamrock is 137 years old.

exactly just think if he was still a prime 93 year old