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.

Pure nostalgia. A bs list

crap list

You guys wouldn't know the first thing about half of these fighters yet you spout on like experts.

Know all know nothing types.

Show a bit of respect to genuine boxing historians even if you don't agree with them.

Lists on fighters from all eras are subjective, so it's a little juvenile trashing it like that.

crap list..

Strongback wrote:You guys wouldn't know the first thing about half of these fighters yet you spout on like experts.  

Know all know nothing types.

Show a bit of respect to genuine boxing historians even if you don't agree with them.

Then again considering you have Louis at 6.............I think I'm happy to know sack all..........

Strongback I find it highly ironic (my new favourite word) that you accuse others of not knowing half the fights on that list yet I doubt you do either if your posting history is anything to go by. The biggest issue with these lists is the blindspots of whoever is writing them, even the most avid historian will have fighters he doesn't know too much about. Gans and Langford always feature highly but how much do you actually know about them Strongy?

I'd also love to know who was a more viable option than Alvarez?

You don't really want to know do you, Hammer ..

I'm intrigued that somebody i've never known to have a strong interest in the sports history swears blind to all these historical lists.

Should perhaps be mentioned re the IBRO list that it was last updated in 2006 so if folk are describing it as crap due the the ommission of Manny, Floyd or both that is wy. If they still think it is crap would be intrigued as to why they view it as so crap and who the glaring ommissions are. Personally don't think it is too bad. Top ten is decent enough and whilst there are always a few that you disagree with for me this is about as good an attempt at a virtually impossible job as I have seen.

Louis at 4...........Duran at 7 is enough for me...........

But haven't too much problem with anything else..........

However would say that some people put too much emphasis on these lists........

Especially muppets that can't argue a case to save their lives..

Stringy has.........gone

You'd be hard pushed to find too many lists Truss that haven't got Duran in the top 8, rightly or wrongly and i'm in the former group he's a favourite of the historians.

I can never quite understand how people manage to put Duran higher than SRL on these things. SRL is far too low on here.

And I just can't see how the record and achievements of Louis could ever tie with Ali.

But, you can argue all day about these things. Too difficult to compare across eras, weights, and to see past you're own likes/dislikes - whether you're a respected boxing 'historian' or not.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Strongback I find it highly ironic (my new favourite word) that you accuse others of not knowing half the fights on that list yet I doubt you do either if your posting history is anything to go by. The biggest issue with these lists is the blindspots of whoever is writing them, even the most avid historian will have fighters he doesn't know too much about. Gans and Langford always feature highly but how much do you actually know about them Strongy?

I'd also love to know who was a more viable option than Alvarez?

The IBRO stands for the International Boxing Research Organisation. The list is not the result of one person but is voted on by the members of the IBRO many of whom are the most respected names in boxing writing.

As for what do I know about the fighters, well thats more for you, you're calling the list crap.

BTW I have done my homework on Gans and Langford, for sure not to the same extent at Rowley, but enough to appreciate why they are so important.


In terms of quoting my post history I'll just say looking at yours you won't by around long in your latest incarnation.

Well we can disagree Mate.......In fairness on my top 10 list thread he was in about 3 out of 35........

My view is he beat a stupid Leonard contentiously (A fight he gets huge kudos for) and mastered a poor lightweight division...Got beaten by every quality boxer he faced bar Buchanan and the 2-1 with dejesus...

and that no one but no one in any top 10 list should be humiliated like he was against Hearns.....

Hey.....that's me and I'm in the minority but thankfully the minority is growing..

Top 20 for me so I'm not begrudging his great standing........Just his position.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Louis at 4...........Duran at 7 is enough for me...........

But haven't too much problem with anything else..........

However would say that some people put too much emphasis on these lists........

Especially muppets that can't argue a case to save their lives..

The list just provides another voice to counter your latent Mayweather loving.


It just gets tiring arguing with a clown that has crap between his ears.

What has Louis done to be equal to Ali?

Where have I called the list crap?

Strongy I find you completely humorless and completely oblivious to how stupid some of your arguments are......

It's like you are in denial 24/7..........

I don't give a crap about the IBRO.........

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Well we can disagree Mate.......In fairness on my top 10 list thread he was in about 3 out of 35........

My view is he beat a stupid Leonard contentiously (A fight he gets huge kudos for) and mastered a poor lightweight division...Got beaten by every quality boxer he faced bar Buchanan and the 2-1 with dejesus...

and that no one but no one in any top 10 list should be humiliated like he was against Hearns.....

Hey.....that's me and I'm in the minority but thankfully the minority is growing..

Top 20 for me so I'm not begrudging his great standing........Just his position.

You just can't take it that Tommy isn't there and Duran is.


That punch were Barkley stand over Tommy and nails him to the canvas is one of my favourite punches of all time.

Roy Keane played over 500 games in the premiership and predicted UTd would win the league two years ago.......

I predicted City would.................City won the league........

I'm a greater expert at soccer than Roy Keane..........simples.........

The IBRo have Louis at 4.......Archie Moore didn't rate him...........Moore is an alltime great......

Archie Moore is a know nothing just like us..........Larry Holmes reckoned Ali was the greatest heavy ever.....He is a know nothing like us........

All hail the IBRO......................

Do you not think your time would be better spent trying to formulate an opinion rather than trying to rile fellow posters?

As far as the IBRO go with regards to Mayweather, it's pointless as their list is 7 years old.

Believe me after trying to debate with this guy....

He's better off trying to rile other posters..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Strongy I find you completely humorless and completely oblivious to how stupid some of your arguments are......

It's like you are in denial 24/7..........

I don't give a crap about the IBRO.........

You don't give a crap about being fair and reasonable. You're a horrible cretin, a nasty liitle piece of sh1t.

You can hit the mod alert button again now. You've always been a coward. Run to the mods you little fairy.

Well you can't say fairer than that........

And the straight right Tommy landed on Duran? That elevates him? Or do we airbrush it away?

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Do you not think your time would be better spent trying to formulate an opinion rather than trying to rile fellow posters?

As far as the IBRO go with regards to Mayweather, it's pointless as their list is 7 years old.

My point if you read back is there is no rational argument for placing cherry pickin Mayweather ahead of Leonard who has wins against greats and the same skill level as Mayweather.

I haven't heard one good argument for placing Mayweather over SRL.

Do we honestly need to go over the same old arguments time and time again?

Strongback wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Do you not think your time would be better spent trying to formulate an opinion rather than trying to rile fellow posters?

As far as the IBRO go with regards to Mayweather, it's pointless as their list is 7 years old.

My point if you read back is there is no rational argument for placing cherry pickin Mayweather ahead of Leonard who has wins against greats and the same skill level as Mayweather.

I haven't heard one good argument for placing Mayweather over SRL.

I'm really upset you disagree..mate.

azania wrote:And the straight right Tommy landed on Duran? That elevates him? Or do we airbrush it away?

He was way outside his weight class and a hell of a lot smaller in height.

Also it's not like Hearns is an average fight like Mayweather has been picking out.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Do we honestly need to go over the same old arguments time and time again?

You havnt been here very long I take it?

Strongback wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Do you not think your time would be better spent trying to formulate an opinion rather than trying to rile fellow posters?

As far as the IBRO go with regards to Mayweather, it's pointless as their list is 7 years old.

My point if you read back is there is no rational argument for placing cherry pickin Mayweather ahead of Leonard who has wins against greats and the same skill level as Mayweather.

I haven't heard one good argument for placing Mayweather over SRL.

This is where you're wrong, just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it's not rational, Leonard has the better wins but very little longevity while Mayweather has numerous very good wins, more lineal titles and far greater longevity. Leonard beat Benitez, Duran, Hagler and Hearns but he struggled against each of them to an extent as he did against the woeful Lalonde and Kalule.

How can he be outside his weight class when he went on to win a belt at a higher weight? Plus didn't he win a belt at the weight Tommy starched him at when he beat davey moore?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Do you not think your time would be better spent trying to formulate an opinion rather than trying to rile fellow posters?

As far as the IBRO go with regards to Mayweather, it's pointless as their list is 7 years old.

My point if you read back is there is no rational argument for placing cherry pickin Mayweather ahead of Leonard who has wins against greats and the same skill level as Mayweather.

I haven't heard one good argument for placing Mayweather over SRL.

I'm really upset you disagree..mate.

You're also really thick.

If you didn't raise the post count by wumming the board I'm sure you would have been put out of your misery long ago.

You really are going for it tonight.......... 

azania wrote:How can he be outside his weight class when he went on to win a belt at a higher weight? Plus didn't he win a belt at the weight Tommy starched him at when he beat davey moore?

Use your eyes. Davey Moore isn't Tommy Hearns by any means or description.

Save your redundancy for somebody else.

Why dont you just wait twenty years when Mayweather is retired and post lists to your hearts content instead of posting lists that arent even considering him for nomination.

"Mayweather isn't top 10 because he never had a defining fight".......Louis = 6

"Mayweather never beat a top fighter"      Louis = 6

Ali and Louis = joint 6.........

Well you can't beat logic like that........

IBRO HAVE Ali and Louis joint fourth.

Your knowledge compared to the collective knowledge of the IBRO doesn't even register on the minuscule scale.


You're a propagandist. You've spent too much time on the Labour Party Internet forum. You're brainwashed.

Strongback wrote:

azania wrote:How can he be outside his weight class when he went on to win a belt at a higher weight?  Plus didn't he win a belt at the weight Tommy starched him at when he beat davey moore?

Use your eyes.  Davey Moore isn't Tommy Hearns by any means or description.

Save your redundancy for somebody else.

It's the same weight class. Plus he beat the guy who beat Tommy.

So now you add height as a factor. Is there a top 10 who lost to a laign type boxer whilst in their prime? Or do we have another excuse for the airbrush again?

Too much nostalgia for the oldies. The airbrush is always brought out for them.

Wum, Thickhead, Propagandist, brainwashed, cretin, Sh1t, vile, crap between my ears,

Apart from that I guess you think I'm okay.....

So If any expert disagrees with the IBRO he's talking crap..

You really are something........

Foreman, Lewis, Holmes, Moore, Quarry......All thought Ali was the best heavy ever..

They are wrong because the IBRo are always right......  

LEAVE IT OUT...............

Strongback wrote:IBRO HAVE Ali and Louis joint fourth.

Your knowledge compared to the collective knowledge of the IBRO doesn't even register on the minuscule scale.


You're a propagandist.  You've spent too much time on the Labour Party Internet forum. You're brainwashed.

In fairness the IBRO have Moore above Charles at light heavyweight so they're not an oracle not to be questioned, they're right more than they're wrong but still they're fallible.

I'm confused Hammer.............Haz says Bob Mee is the bible of all information and this guy thinks IBRO are the fountain of all wisdom.......

Who should I believe...........Because my opinions, Your opinions and anyone elses don't count.

Strongback wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Strongy I find you completely humorless and completely oblivious to how stupid some of your arguments are......

It's like you are in denial 24/7..........

I don't give a crap about the IBRO.........

You don't give a crap about being fair and reasonable.  You're a horrible cretin, a nasty liitle piece of sh1t.

You can hit the mod alert button again now.  You've always been a coward.  Run to the mods you little fairy.

We can debate the merits of strongy's boxing arguments, but his judgement of character is peerless

Then you have Bert Sugar who thought that Fitzsimmons deserved a placing of 66, a man who's word must be taken as red.

Meltdown alert!!!!

Thanks for the compliment Milky...

and I object to little.......210 pounds of meat..

"You can't take it that Tommy isn't there and Duran is"

Tommy wasn't in my list on the top 10 thread.......I don't have him in my top 20..

This guy is something.........