Khan v Mayweather - 5th May 2014 - EDIT: THIS FIGHT IS ON

First topic message reminder :

2014-05-03 Floyd Mayweather Jr 45(26)-0-0
MGM Grand, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA 12
WBC welterweight title
bout subject to change & commission approval


I wonder where Boxrec get their info? They do call some fights that don't get made Anyone think this one is a goer.

I have a feeling Khan is next for Money May. I thought the fight might have been in the UK but I don't know what the BBBofC rules are on injecting pain killers. Floyd talking about fighting in the UK may just have been to stir up interest and gauge the reaction.

Anyway, Khan is often suggested as being the man with the foot speed and fast hands to trouble Mayweather. Can Virgil Hunter be the man to finally put together a plan that Khan is able to understand and stick to?

The first few rounds could be interesting.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Don't be silly now Truss, you eulogise all his wins to an almost godlike level and then misinterpret any body countering you, from what i've seen only two people have called Alvarez a no mark neither of whom i'd take too seriously.

wasn't aimed at you Mate.....but a casual reflection of posts the day after by Toppy and strongy etc contained......

"Alvarez was overrated"..........."Mayweather picked an easy target"......You know as well as me that some will never accept a Mayweather opponent is quality......

You need to differentiate between those who know their stuff and those who know sod all, there are also those who rate him far too highly resulting in a backlash. D4 Pacquiao syndrome.

Now now...........I don't think it's too farfetched to say he's Top 5 material........

16 years at the top of a sport unbeaten with like it or not..... good quality victims and 5 p4pers is pretty much virgin territory......

I know how you feel about p4p but there still is a p4p..and he has beaten 5 memmbers who were in it at the time..

The p4p thing we can only compare to the last 30 years before which time not much emphasise was placed on it but even then when Hatton, Guerrero and Alvarez are being called top ten quality I don't trust it. Donaire may have lost to Rigondeaux but he's still on the top ten in the world and on that subject Rigo beats Donaire and he's only worthy of 10th spot, utter garbage, he should be top 5 easily.

Hatton was a near unified 140 champion and a 147 pound champion.......

we can discuss his style and faults but not his place as one of the best fighters around at the time..

retrospectively he lost badly to the two best fighters around........But he was a quality fighter......

Duran beat Buchanan and Leonard contentiously........Palomino and Cuevas weren't at the top of their game...........

So we can scrutinise anybodys record.

Hatton is one of those boxers who I don't rate that highly, he beat Tzuyu which is a really good win but from then until Mayweather it was a bit meh. He has that win over Castillo but he'd been to the well one too many times by then, I actually think he underachieved as opposed to overachieved, had stayed in shape he could have done so much more at 140lbs.

This is what gets me. People are clamouring for the Garcia fight. When Floyd spanks him those same people will say Garcia was only a 140 lber, much like they say about Hatton who outweighed Floyd even when he was at 140. Floyd is in a no win situation. A victim of his own brilliance.

Do the old timers get the same level of scrutiny? Hell do certain fan favourites get the same level of scrutiny? Hagler or Duran, let alone Ali or Robinson?

Hagler and Duran were blue collar favorites..........

When you don't like someone it's hard to rank them objectively..

Fleischer and Ali being a prime example..

I can't stand Leonard. But to me he's the best ever without doubt.

I swear I got called an average fan back there somewhere... Anyway, I look at Khan and appreciate his speed (yawn) but his last three fights were disastrous for a plethora of reasons. All of which Floyd will exploit.

I'm seeing this match up as a joke unless Khan gets past Devon first and marginally less of a joke if Floyd comes over here for it.

Despite a handful of half decent wins years ago Khan has no claim to this fight.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Hagler and Duran were blue collar favorites..........

When you don't like someone it's hard to rank them objectively..

Fleischer and Ali being a prime example..

You do know Fleischer died in 1972 when Ali was still fighting and it was before some of his biggest fights. Fletcher was 84 when he died.

How many guys in their 80's know their own name never mind be cognisant and prophetic enough to rate a fighter who is yet to have all his defining fights.

Cherry picking with the historians as well now huh?

I do know that Ali was at his best between 64-67.........well done..

as for the cherry picking.........Pot and kettle.

So cleaning out the division and beating Liston twice means little and dempsey rated higher? Old Nat had issues with Ali. He let his personal feelings cloud his judgement. Little bit like you.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Don't be silly now Truss, you eulogise all his wins to an almost godlike level and then misinterpret any body countering you, from what i've seen only two people have called Alvarez a no mark neither of whom i'd take too seriously.

wasn't aimed at you Mate.....but a casual reflection of posts the day after by Toppy and strongy etc contained......

"Alvarez was overrated"..........."Mayweather picked an easy target"......You know as well as me that some will never accept a Mayweather opponent is quality......

Behave yourself steroid monkey.

After the fight I said Alvarez's performance was poor and before it I said Mayweather let himself down with the catchweight which was unnecessary (and hypocritical) but I NEVER said Alvarez was over-rated and ALWAYS said he was the best fight out there for Floyd to take.

Try getting your facts right before flinging your Floyd-doll out the pram.

Alvarez fought the best Floyd allowed him to.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Don't be silly now Truss, you eulogise all his wins to an almost godlike level and then misinterpret any body countering you, from what i've seen only two people have called Alvarez a no mark neither of whom i'd take too seriously.

wasn't aimed at you Mate.....but a casual reflection of posts the day after by Toppy and strongy etc contained......

"Alvarez was overrated"..........."Mayweather picked an easy target"......You know as well as me that some will never accept a Mayweather opponent is quality......

Behave yourself steroid monkey.

After the fight I said Alvarez's performance was poor and before it I said Mayweather let himself down with the catchweight which was unnecessary (and hypocritical) but I NEVER said Alvarez was over-rated and ALWAYS said he was the best fight out there for Floyd to take.

Try getting your facts right before flinging your Floyd-doll out the pram.

You went further than saying he was poor Mate.......forget the exact abuse you aimed at him.......but it was out of order..

But I forgive you as you were upset Mayweather won.........and you were writing with your heart instead of your head.

I said Alverse had feet of stone before the fight and I was right.


Alverez is a Golden Boy hype job and will lose again in the not too distant future. He struggled with Trout. Another loss is coming.

Alverez is the kind of meat Floyd loves......easy.

Strongback wrote:I said Alverse had feet of stone before the fight and I was right.


Alverez is a Golden Boy hype job and will lose again in the not too distant future.  He struggled with Trout. Another loss is coming.

Alverez is the kind of meat Floyd loves......easy.

Nice to have an objective opinion on here..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Don't be silly now Truss, you eulogise all his wins to an almost godlike level and then misinterpret any body countering you, from what i've seen only two people have called Alvarez a no mark neither of whom i'd take too seriously.

wasn't aimed at you Mate.....but a casual reflection of posts the day after by Toppy and strongy etc contained......

"Alvarez was overrated"..........."Mayweather picked an easy target"......You know as well as me that some will never accept a Mayweather opponent is quality......

Behave yourself steroid monkey.

After the fight I said Alvarez's performance was poor and before it I said Mayweather let himself down with the catchweight which was unnecessary (and hypocritical) but I NEVER said Alvarez was over-rated and ALWAYS said he was the best fight out there for Floyd to take.

Try getting your facts right before flinging your Floyd-doll out the pram.

You went further than saying he was poor Mate.......forget the exact abuse you aimed at him.......but it was out of order..

But I forgive you as you were upset Mayweather won.........and you were writing with your heart instead of your head.

Stop talking out your titanically fat arris.

You just get your knickers so desperately in a twist it clearly cuts your circulation and denies oxygen to your pea brain. I even had to say this on that thread too, my words to describe Mayweather's performance were 'masterclass' 'peerless' 'majestic' and the like. Hardly mud-slinging!!

And why would I be upset PBF won? I'd already backed him to win anyway. Never upset to be right.

Cotto got to PBF better than anyone since ODLH, who in turn had got to Floyd better than anyone since Castillo I. Canelo's poor performance wasn't simply down to Floyd's brilliance, it was his appalling decisions to go for low work rate (despite the 3 aforementioned fighters all having high work-rate success) and not to use his 1 advantage over Floyd - size.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Strongback wrote:I said Alverse had feet of stone before the fight and I was right.


Alverez is a Golden Boy hype job and will lose again in the not too distant future.  He struggled with Trout. Another loss is coming.

Alverez is the kind of meat Floyd loves......easy.

Nice to have an objective opinion on here..

irony of the day......

Mate only you and strongy..........Abused Alvarez.......

Whilst I have Mayweather top 5............My Mayweather top 10 thread shows that at least 30 others have him top 10 also......and five others top 5.......

Only you and strongy think he's a useless, cowardly ducking muppet that hasn't fought anybody......

Then again as Hammer pointed out when I mentioned you and strongy.......earlier in this thread or another like it..

"Distinguish between the knowledgeable posters and the know-sod all posters"

and I think he's right..........  

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Mate only you and strongy..........Abused Alvarez.......

Whilst I have Mayweather top 5............My Mayweather top 10 thread shows that at least 30 others have him top 10 also......and five others top 5.......

 

Inlcuding me, you prat.

Again, do you research!

Which makes it even more laughable you rate a cowardly ducker who's never fought anybody in your p4p top 10........ 

Less of the abuse..........or make it more original.

Alvarez's performance v Floyd was about a 4/10.

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:Alvarez's performance v Floyd was about a 4/10.

If Floyd wasn't as good, Alvarez would look like an 8, and Floyd would get more credit.

Disagree, nothing to do with Floyd's performance, Alvarez was just a bit Poopie.

I'd give Cotto a 7/10 vs Floyd. Even though he got beaten worse than Alvarez.

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:Disagree, nothing to do with Floyd's performance, Alvarez was just a bit Poopie..

With analysis like that I imagine the guys on HBo are worried about their careers..

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:Disagree, nothing to do with Floyd's performance, Alvarez was just a bit Poopie.

I'd give Cotto a 7/10 vs Floyd. Even though he got beaten worse than Alvarez.

It's just what you're allowed to do. Or do you believe everyone just happens to have the worst night of their careers vs Wlad?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:Disagree, nothing to do with Floyd's performance, Alvarez was just a bit Poopie..

With analysis like that I imagine the guys on HBo are worried about their careers..

Lampley and Merchant should be permanently worried about their careers...and Kellerman, where the Frak did they dig him up from. I would rather listen do Glenn McCrory and Johnny Nelson than those half-wits.

Scottrf wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:Disagree, nothing to do with Floyd's performance, Alvarez was just a bit Poopie.

I'd give Cotto a 7/10 vs Floyd. Even though he got beaten worse than Alvarez.

It's just what you're allowed to do. Or do you believe everyone just happens to have the worst night of their careers vs Wlad?

No. It's all about what a fighter is capable of and what they actually produce on the night. If Peter Buckley went 12 rounds vs Floyd, losing a clear 120 - 108, that'd be a 10/10 performance from him. Alvarez was capable of a lot more, but he put in a poor performance. Cotto, and even Hatton, put in better performances than Alvarez.

Cotto is a better boxer than Alvarez.

At this stage, no he isn't. 5 years ago, yes probably.

Not saying he is fighting at a higher level, but he is a better boxer: he has more to offer, less easy to predict, more variety i.e. not quite as much made for Floyd.

Alvarez did ok. But he was massively overhyped. I thought he lost to Trout to be honest. You could tell by the cards in the fight that Trout never had a chance. Alvarez had too much star power.

Wouldn't say Cotto was the better boxer. Look at their respective performances vs Trout.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Which makes it even more laughable you rate a cowardly ducker who's never fought anybody in your p4p top 10........ 

Less of the abuse..........or make it more original.

Except I never said any of those things.

It's just the hyperbole you make up so you don't feel so much of a twit.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Which makes it even more laughable you rate a cowardly ducker who's never fought anybody in your p4p top 10........ 

Less of the abuse..........or make it more original.

Except I never said any of those things.

It's just the hyperbole you make up so you don't feel so much of a twit.

No but it's a general summation of your Mayweather contribution...........But unlike some you do contribute..........

I may know more than you...Have more Boxing knowledge...Be better looking..........But rest assured I'm not always right..

Your day will come..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Which makes it even more laughable you rate a cowardly ducker who's never fought anybody in your p4p top 10........ 

Less of the abuse..........or make it more original.

Except I never said any of those things.

It's just the hyperbole you make up so you don't feel so much of a twit.

No but it's a general summation of your Mayweather contribution...........But unlike some you do contribute..........

I may know more than you...Have more Boxing knowledge...Be better looking..........But rest assured I'm not always right..

Your day will come..

Well, as Meatloaf would say, 2 out of 3 ain't bad.......

Can't see how Floyd is Top 10 when he hasn't beaten a top class live opponent in over a decade. The REAL greats don't have this black mark on their log book.

Floyd's pushing for the P4P number one CHERRY PICKER of all time.

He's still afraid of Pacquiao.

Like Joe Louis who is 6 in your list........

you're like a battered housewife who won't leave the home...

Whatever scurrilous accusations you invent to cast dispersions on Louis you will never get away with saying he cherry picked.

He fought every No.1 contender during his long reign bar one who was only number one for a couple of weeks. Joe Louis never cheery picked. He fought ex-champ and behemoth Primera in his first year as a pro

I take on board what you say.......Let's just leave it because you contradict yourself ad nauseum..

"Mayweather has never had a defining fight" Louis = 6

"Mayweather has never beaten anybody"...........Louis = 6

Level with Ali = 6.........       

I'll debate a Monkey at the zoo instead.......Get more sense out of it..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I take on board what you say.......Let's just leave it because you contradict yourself ad nauseum..

"Mayweather has never had a defining fight"       Louis = 6

"Mayweather has never beaten anybody"...........Louis = 6

Level with Ali = 6.........       

I'll debate a Monkey at the zoo instead.......Get more sense out of it..

Just get a nit comb rather than make up reasons to visit monkeys.

I think someone earlier put Mayweather in the 8-15 bracket with a host of other greats which is fair enough though i'd have him at the lower end of the ten. ali is the only hw who ever makes it to the p4p top 10. Louis surely cant be at 6? Alvarez was the best fight available so Mayweather shouldn't be put down by Canelos stupid attempt to outsmart him.

Scottrf wrote:Cotto is a better boxer than Alvarez.

Not a better light mid though.

azania wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Cotto is a better boxer than Alvarez.

Not a better light mid though.

Yet he performed a lot better at LMW against a common opponent in Mayweather.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

azania wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Cotto is a better boxer than Alvarez.

Not a better light mid though.

Yet he performed a lot better at LMW against a common opponent in Mayweather.  

Mayweather was willing to engage the lesser and avoided doing the same against Alvarez who didn't help himself.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

azania wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Cotto is a better boxer than Alvarez.

Not a better light mid though.

Yet he performed a lot better at LMW against a common opponent in Mayweather.  

Can't say that about his and canelos fight with Trout.

Mayweather was on top form against Canelo, he knew he could be in trouble if he wasn't. Don't think he had the same respect for Cotto

ShahenshahG wrote:I think someone earlier put Mayweather in the 8-15 bracket with a host of other greats which is fair enough though i'd have him at the lower end of the ten. ali is the only hw who ever makes it to the p4p top 10. Louis surely cant be at 6? Alvarez was the best fight available so Mayweather shouldn't be put down by Canelos stupid attempt to outsmart him.

There were better match-ups than Canelo and that goes for the last 10 years as well.

Floyd is never getting ahead of Ray Leonard who doesn't make the 10 in many lists.


The most credible list is voted on by numerous historians, the IBRO.


Here's their Top 20:


1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Harry Greb
3. Henry Armstrong
4. Muhammad Ali       (Tie)
4. Joe Louis                 (Tie)
6. Sam Langford
7. Roberto Duran
8. Benny Leonard
9. Willie Pep
10. Bob Fitzsimmons
11. Joe Gans
12. Ezzard Charles        (Tie)
12. Sugar Ray Leonard (Tie)
14. Jimmy Wilde
15. Eder Jofre
16. Mickey Walker
17. Archie Moore
18. Jack Dempsey
19. Jack Johnson
20. Gene Tunney
Just missing the cut: Stanley Ketchel, Barbados Joe Walcott, Rocky Marciano, Tony Canzoneri, Barney Ross, Ike Williams, George Dixon, Sandy Saddler, Roy Jones Jr., and Larry Holmes.