Mayweather may be forced to fight!

First topic message reminder :

Watching KOTV last night I heard that Floyd Mayweather Jr may be forced to make a big money fight in the near future. Apparently he owes 9 million dollars in taxes (amount differs depending on source), and due to his gambling and court cases, current finances may not cover this. Do you think it will lead to the fight we all want to see?

Offensive.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:God almighty let's settle this.

Would you describe Roy Jones jr's style, in his prime, as defensive or offensive.

One word, offensive or defensive.

You're missing the point by a country mile.

HOW did Jones Jr avoid being hit?

WHAT did he do to negate incoming blows?

WHAT attribute/s did he rely on more than any other?

RJJ was an unorthodox power puncher with blistering speed and lightening reflexes.

He was an attacking combination boxer.

He was not a defensive boxer, it was not defensive skills that stopped him getting hit it was his lightening reflexes.

He could only get away with it because of his natural talents. Nothing to do with being great defensively or being a "defensive boxer".

D4thincarnation wrote:RJJ was an unorthodox power puncher with blistering speed and lightening reflexes.

He was an attacking combination boxer.

He was not a defensive boxer, it was not defensive skills that stopped him getting hit it was his lightening reflexes.

He could only get away with it because of his natural talents. Nothing to do with being great defensively or being a "defensive boxer".

Locche wasn't a great defensive fighter then D4? He did after all rely on reflexes to avoid punches

Slick defensive fighters like Mayweather can happily go on into their 40's

Well I just figured since we were talking about fighters with slick defensive skills who only improve with age...

No mate, I think you missed the point.

No you've definitely missed the point and that post unbelievably highlights it more than any other

The Mighty Atom wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:I don't mind the 'slick' comparison as long as people admit they've been retarted saying that Roy Jones was a defensive fighter.

You should possibly read what people have actually written before jumping in feet first

Saying Jones had slick defensive skills doesn't equate to 'Jones being a defensive fighter'

Jones didn't have slick defensive skills, he had amazing reflexes and a great radar thats what stopped him getting hit, not his boxing skills.

D4thincarnation wrote:RJJ was an unorthodox power puncher with blistering speed and lightening reflexes.

He was an attacking combination boxer.

He was not a defensive boxer, it was not defensive skills that stopped him getting hit it was his lightening reflexes.

He could only get away with it because of his natural talents. Nothing to do with being great defensively or being a "defensive boxer".

"it was not defensive skills that stopped him getting hit it was his lightening (sic) reflexes"...

...so he AVOIDED blows, meaning his DEFENSE was to move out of the way of incoming blows, utilizing his SPEED AND AGILITY.

Of course avoiding punches is linked to being defensive. Jesus wept.

The Mighty Atom wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:RJJ was an unorthodox power puncher with blistering speed and lightening reflexes.

He was an attacking combination boxer.

He was not a defensive boxer, it was not defensive skills that stopped him getting hit it was his lightening reflexes.

He could only get away with it because of his natural talents. Nothing to do with being great defensively or being a "defensive boxer".

Locche wasn't a great defensive fighter then D4? He did after all rely on reflexes to avoid punches

Locche used skills as well, techniques that are taught. No boxer trainer will teach you a defense like RJJ.

D4thincarnation wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:I don't mind the 'slick' comparison as long as people admit they've been retarted saying that Roy Jones was a defensive fighter.

You should possibly read what people have actually written before jumping in feet first

Saying Jones had slick defensive skills doesn't equate to 'Jones being a defensive fighter'

Jones didn't have slick defensive skills, he had amazing reflexes and a great radar thats what stopped him getting hit, not his boxing skills.

Of course avoiding shots using your reflexes is a defensive skill, what else could it be described as?
I'm dumbfounded by some of these comments

BALTIMORA wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:RJJ was an unorthodox power puncher with blistering speed and lightening reflexes.

He was an attacking combination boxer.

He was not a defensive boxer, it was not defensive skills that stopped him getting hit it was his lightening reflexes.

He could only get away with it because of his natural talents. Nothing to do with being great defensively or being a "defensive boxer".

"it was not defensive skills that stopped him getting hit it was his lightening (sic) reflexes"...

...so he AVOIDED blows, meaning his DEFENSE was to move out of the way of incoming blows, utilizing his SPEED AND AGILITY.

Of course avoiding punches is linked to being defensive. Jesus wept.

Not skills or boxing techniques, just his amazing reflexes. RJJ was not a defensive boxer.

D4thincarnation wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:RJJ was an unorthodox power puncher with blistering speed and lightening reflexes.

He was an attacking combination boxer.

He was not a defensive boxer, it was not defensive skills that stopped him getting hit it was his lightening reflexes.

He could only get away with it because of his natural talents. Nothing to do with being great defensively or being a "defensive boxer".

Locche wasn't a great defensive fighter then D4? He did after all rely on reflexes to avoid punches

Locche used skills as well, techniques that are taught. No boxer trainer will teach you a defense like RJJ.

What skills exactly, he relied on reflexes and notoriously didn't train very much

Try using facts rather than arguing for the sake of it

I think some people haven't been following the first two rules of 'special Club'.

No, look back.

I started this debate about slick defensive fighters.

BALTIMORA misunderstood this and though it was about fighters slick defensive skills.

And before anyone starts, yes there is a big difference.

An apology would suffice.

D4thincarnation wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:RJJ was an unorthodox power puncher with blistering speed and lightening reflexes.

He was an attacking combination boxer.

He was not a defensive boxer, it was not defensive skills that stopped him getting hit it was his lightening reflexes.

He could only get away with it because of his natural talents. Nothing to do with being great defensively or being a "defensive boxer".

"it was not defensive skills that stopped him getting hit it was his lightening (sic) reflexes"...

...so he AVOIDED blows, meaning his DEFENSE was to move out of the way of incoming blows, utilizing his SPEED AND AGILITY.

Of course avoiding punches is linked to being defensive. Jesus wept.

Not skills or boxing techniques, just his amazing reflexes. RJJ was not a defensive boxer.

Reflexes are a part of boxing, it is a skill to be able to use them to your advantage to avoid punches

Could you please read through and highlight where anyone has called him a defensive fighter please

The Mighty Atom wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:I don't mind the 'slick' comparison as long as people admit they've been retarted saying that Roy Jones was a defensive fighter.

You should possibly read what people have actually written before jumping in feet first

Saying Jones had slick defensive skills doesn't equate to 'Jones being a defensive fighter'

Jones didn't have slick defensive skills, he had amazing reflexes and a great radar thats what stopped him getting hit, not his boxing skills.

Of course avoiding shots using your reflexes is a defensive skill, what else could it be described as?
I'm dumbfounded by some of these comments

Jones would do a lot of things wrong but got away with it.

And Jones offence played a much bigger part in his career than the his defense. So to called RJJ a defensive fighter is absurd.

And his defence was not based in boxing technique as the likes of Hopkins, Mayweather, Wright are it was based on his reflexes.

Thats why when they faded he could not rely on technique like Hopkins has.

The Mighty Atom wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:RJJ was an unorthodox power puncher with blistering speed and lightening reflexes.

He was an attacking combination boxer.

He was not a defensive boxer, it was not defensive skills that stopped him getting hit it was his lightening reflexes.

He could only get away with it because of his natural talents. Nothing to do with being great defensively or being a "defensive boxer".

"it was not defensive skills that stopped him getting hit it was his lightening (sic) reflexes"...

...so he AVOIDED blows, meaning his DEFENSE was to move out of the way of incoming blows, utilizing his SPEED AND AGILITY.

Of course avoiding punches is linked to being defensive. Jesus wept.

Not skills or boxing techniques, just his amazing reflexes. RJJ was not a defensive boxer.

Reflexes are a part of boxing, it is a skill to be able to use them to your advantage to avoid punches

Could you please read through and highlight where anyone has called him a defensive fighter please

So what are we arguing about if everyone agree he was not a defensive fighter.

To say that:

"Not skills or boxing techniques, just his amazing reflexes. RJJ was not a defensive boxer"

truly marks you out as either a wind-up, or as a window-licker. I-nor anyone else, far as I can tell-have not been trying to claim Jones Jr was a defensive fighter. His defense however DID rely on the same attribu....oh, why am I even bothering?

Let's just go back to bum-licking Manny for making his own packed lunches, and brushing his kids' hair.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

Slick defensive fighters like Mayweather can happily go on into their 40's

Well I just figured since we were talking about fighters with slick defensive skills who only improve with age...

No mate, I think you missed the point.

No, look back.

I started this debate about slick defensive fighters.

BALTIMORA misunderstood this and though it was about fighters slick defensive skills.

And before anyone starts, yes there is a big difference.

An apology would suffice.

Are you a twelve year old girl demanding an apology, after all it is you who has misunderstood everything that has been posted and you bringing up a subject does not give you the only say on it

The fact that Jones fought in an offensive manner does not change the fact that he had slick defensive skills, a slick defensive fighter must have these skills as well

Hopkins relies on know how rather than any specific skill, his skills have diminished a lot over the years but through experience (not a boxing skill or technique) he knows how to disrupt and spoil

As for saying 'Jones did a lot of things wrong, but got away with it'...with his physical attributes (ie SPEED) those things weren't so 'wrong', were they? Taking punches is 'wrong', but for fighters who can afford to absorb a few, it simply becomes part of their style, and not so 'wrong' after all. Naz is another example. Didn't people think Ali was doing the 'wrong' thing when he was playing rope-a-dope with Foreman? Turned out to be the right tactic after all, eh?

The Mighty Atom wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

Slick defensive fighters like Mayweather can happily go on into their 40's

Well I just figured since we were talking about fighters with slick defensive skills who only improve with age...

No mate, I think you missed the point.

No, look back.

I started this debate about slick defensive fighters.

BALTIMORA misunderstood this and though it was about fighters slick defensive skills.

And before anyone starts, yes there is a big difference.

An apology would suffice.

Are you a twelve year old girl demanding an apology, after all it is you who has misunderstood everything that has been posted and you bringing up a subject does not give you the only say on it

The fact that Jones fought in an offensive manner does not change the fact that he had slick defensive skills, a slick defensive fighter must have these skills as well

Not at all, like I said it was his natural attributes (reflexes & radar) that made him hard to hit not "slick defensive skills)

That why when those attributes faded the skills were not there to compensate. Hopkins defence based on slick skills and those his attributes have faded the skills don't and he can still compete on the highest level.

If you go back and look you will see who has misunderstood.

Anyway that doesn't matter because we are now all in agreement.

Roy Jones was not a defensive fighter.

Floyd Mayweather is a defensive fighter.

Therefore comparisons are irrelevant.

And now everyone can get along.

Are you now saying Jones' defence didn't rely on him being slick?

Of course comparisons are relevant especially when both rely on speed

BALTIMORA wrote:Are you now saying Jones' defence didn't rely on him being slick?

What does "slick" mean again?

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:If you go back and look you will see who has misunderstood.

Anyway that doesn't matter because we are now all in agreement.

Roy Jones was not a defensive fighter.

Floyd Mayweather is a defensive fighter.

Therefore comparisons are irrelevant.

And now everyone can get along.

They're only irrelevant if you have a piece of blancmange occupying the space where your brain should be.

D4thincarnation wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:Are you now saying Jones' defence didn't rely on him being slick?

What does "slick" mean again?

I thought you knew. Poor show.

Mayweather is fast, but he doesn't rely on speed anywhere near as much as Jones did. Speed was Jones' whole game.

Slick:

1.
smooth and glossy; sleek.
2.
smooth in manners, speech, etc.; suave.
3.
sly; shrewdly adroit: He's a slick customer, all right.
4.
ingenious; cleverly devised: a slick plan to get out of work.
5.
slippery, especially from being covered with or as if with ice, water, or oil.
6.
deftly executed and having surface appeal or sophistication, but shallow or glib in content; polished but superficial; glib: a writer who has mastered every formula of slick fiction.
7.
Slang . wonderful; remarkable; first-rate.


Which one?

He used speed to emphasise his skill much like Mayweather and Pacquiao do, take away their speed and they wouldn't be near the level they are/were.

If we want to judge the longevity of slick defensive fighters like Mayweather we should look at other slick defensive fighters like Toney and Hopkins. Not slick offensive fighters like Jones.

The Mighty Atom wrote:He used speed to emphasise his skill much like Mayweather and Pacquiao do, take away their speed and they wouldn't be near the level they are/were.

Mayweather does not heavily rely on his speed like RJJ, nowhere near.

Hopkins is a much better example.

Mayweather also likes to spoil.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:If we want to judge the longevity of slick defensive fighters like Mayweather we should look at other slick defensive fighters like Toney and Hopkins. Not slick offensive fighters like Jones.

Look, your original point was that fighters who rely on a slick defense tend to have a greater longevity than those who adopt other styles. I mentioned Jones Jr to highlight the fact that your statement did not ring true. Fighters who rely on SPEED AND AGILITY will see a drop in their performance in line with diminishing speed and agility.

Slick fighters: Jones, Mayweather, Whitaker, etc. Even Malignaggi.

Not slick fighters: Clottey, Abraham, Hatton, etc.

The Mighty Atom wrote:He used speed to emphasise his skill much like Mayweather and Pacquiao do, take away their speed and they wouldn't be near the level they are/were.

Jones' defence was speed based. He lost speed he got hit and KO'd.

Mayweather's defence is skills based.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:If we want to judge the longevity of slick defensive fighters like Mayweather we should look at other slick defensive fighters like Toney and Hopkins. Not slick offensive fighters like Jones.

So we use the example of one fighter in Hopkins, Toney has no real longevity at the top level so i'll ignore him

So using one boxer as an example, most notably one who's never relied on speed this somehow shows that Mayweather isn't past his best?

Every boxer is different, some last longer than others but this doesn't alter the fact that Mayweather appeared to have lost something in his fight with Mosley

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:He used speed to emphasise his skill much like Mayweather and Pacquiao do, take away their speed and they wouldn't be near the level they are/were.

Jones' defence was speed based. He lost speed he got hit and KO'd.

Mayweather's defence is skills based.

I wonder if they will even argue this point.

I think everyone will agree that Pacquiao slowing down will effect his game much more than Mayweather slowing down.

D4thincarnation wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:He used speed to emphasise his skill much like Mayweather and Pacquiao do, take away their speed and they wouldn't be near the level they are/were.

Jones' defence was speed based. He lost speed he got hit and KO'd.

Mayweather's defence is skills based.

I wonder if they will even argue this point.

Quite easily. If your skills rely on reflexes, then they'll diminish accordingly. Not difficult.

His defence is based on the philly shell and shoulder roll but take his speed away and he would be unable to move around the ring with such ease nor would his shot accuracy be so high if he didn't have blistering hand speed.

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:If we want to judge the longevity of slick defensive fighters like Mayweather we should look at other slick defensive fighters like Toney and Hopkins. Not slick offensive fighters like Jones.

Look, your original point was that fighters who rely on a slick defense tend to have a greater longevity than those who adopt other styles. I mentioned Jones Jr to highlight the fact that your statement did not ring true. Fighters who rely on SPEED AND AGILITY will see a drop in their performance in line with diminishing speed and agility.

Slick fighters: Jones, Mayweather, Whitaker, etc. Even Malignaggi.

Not slick fighters: Clottey, Abraham, Hatton, etc.

See, and I don't want to start another arguement, I didn't say fighters who rely on a slick defence. I said slick defensive fighters. There is a big difference and that is where all this has stemmed from. I agree with the bit about fighters who rely upon speed and agility. Fighters who rely mainly upon skills often have very long careers though.

BALTIMORA wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:He used speed to emphasise his skill much like Mayweather and Pacquiao do, take away their speed and they wouldn't be near the level they are/were.

Jones' defence was speed based. He lost speed he got hit and KO'd.

Mayweather's defence is skills based.

I wonder if they will even argue this point.

Quite easily. If your skills rely on reflexes, then they'll diminish accordingly. Not difficult.

And do you think that applies to Mayweather?

I'm gone. I haven't the patience for this. Go back to the same old sheyt as always.

Lads - you can debate this in the morning.

This is perhaps draconian - but if it saves you all the hassle of official warnings its worth it. I'm locking the thread now, it will be back on tomorrow.

So who is a slick defensive offensive fighter then?