Thread: In defense of Maidana/PBF

Originally Posted by p4pking

Hah, no need to hang people out for picking Broner in that one, I think most thought he'd win,

For sure, it's not my goal to hang people out to dry for bad picks because I've made my fair share of them, and I picked Broner to win as well.

I just think that if you thought Broner was going to dominate Maidana, you can't come back and say "oh yeah I always knew Broner wasn't shit, that wasn't a big win for Maidana".

I think Lara has as much if not more name value than Guerrero and Ortiz did at the time they were fighting Floyd

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

I think Lara has as much if not more name value than Guerrero and Ortiz did at the time they were fighting Floyd

How do you figure that?

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

I think Lara has as much if not more name value than Guerrero and Ortiz did at the time they were fighting Floyd

How do you figure that?

Well he's the guy who just destroyed the guy Canelo is about to face so is well known through that and also known to get a bad decision against Williams in his comeback fight after Martinez.

Guerrero was relatively unknown to casual fans and only known from his close win over Berto. Ortiz known from the foty with Berto an loss to Maidana but certainly a bigger name since fighting Floyd. I just don't see a huge difference in their name powers at the time of the fights.

I'm glad Maidana got the call I was calling for Quillin but Maidana has the better momentum

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Anyone who fights Floyd is a B-side.

We've agreed and disagreed on too many boxing topics over the years @Beanflicker to think that I wouldn't completely eat crow for my Maidana-Broner. I was wrong then and I'm sure I admitted as much, if I didn't my apologies. In retrospect, I'm an idiot because I should have seen the signs that Broner was overrated. At the time, I thought they were keeping Broner away from boxers after seeing how Paulie and Rees (for three rounds) did against Broner and picked Maidana for a reason. In any event, it was a great win for Maidana, but that doesn't mean he can win a round against Floyd.

Lara (coming off a complete dismantling of Trout), Kirkland (career is resurrected by reuniting with Wolfe and great win over Tapia), Trout (loss to Lara and Canelo but a southpaw, tall, and decent speed), the better Charlo brother, Andrade (former Olympian, has a belt, beat Vanes), even Molina (tough style, draws against Lara, beat Kirkland really, and beat Floyd's guy Ishe), even go for glory and fight Kid Choc for a middleweight strap. I'm not suggesting these guys beat Mayweather, but they're tougher challenges than Maidana at 14-1, they're not with Top Rank, and there are story lines they could gin up for the fight.

I'm not trying to throw you under the bus for a bad prediction - I've made plenty of them myself - just trying to illustrate that the upset over Broner was indeed a big win.

And I get what you're saying, there are a lot of guys out there who are tougher fights for Mayweather. But that's not how boxing works, man. You know that. No champion in the history of boxing fought guys just based on how tough they were. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying champions didn't want to test themselves against tough fighters, but there always had to be a significant amount of reward to go along with the risk.

Austin Trout? You're telling me you think a guy coming off of two losses should get a megafight with the sports #1 p4p? Come on.

Charlo? Come on man. He's a young prospect with less than 20 fights and is only now fighting for a world title against Molina. You mean to tell me you'd throw Charlo in there with Floyd before he had his first 12 rounder? Come on, that's insane.

I love James Kirkland, but he's still on the comeback trail in terms of his career. He isn't even ranked in the top 10. Do you really think Floyd should be fighting a guy not even ranked in the top 10 at 154? Where's the logic behind that. Nobody would give two shits about that fight.

Andrade is very promising but again, another young prospect with no name value who just fought and won his first world title (if you can call the WBO a "world title") against another solid fighter with very little name value.

Lara is the only realistic option out of those, and I agree he's the best test for Floyd at 154, but how do you sell that fight? Lara has no name value.

Unless his opponent his Pacquiao, Canelo, or Cotto, the B-side won't have too much effect on the overall sales of the event. Maidana and Lara versus Mayweather wouldn't do much different in sales.

Khan hadn't fought at 147 and isn't ranked at 147, and he was in the running until the very end for a fight against Floyd. Khan also lost two of his last five fights and both of his most recent fights against big name opponents. Maidana right now is ranked # 9 in the Ring Magazine's welterweight ranking. So, I don't think we can count out junior middleweights because they have lost recently or because they are ranked low or are unranked. Andrade also has a belt, for whatever's that's worth. Molina is in everyone's top five at junior middleweight and has been for a while and he beat Ishe Smith, a TMT fighter.

Let's just ask the easy question though: do you think Molina, Andrade, Kirkland, Charlo, or Lara wouldn't pose more of a challenge to Floyd than Maidana?

Any way you cut it, whether Maidana was or wasn't the best available pick for an opponent, doesn't mean the fight doesn't stink, man. It's already decided and the outcome is predetermined. $70 PPV for a fight where the odds are 14-1 is more like WWE than a boxing match.

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Originally Posted by p4pking

Hah, no need to hang people out for picking Broner in that one, I think most thought he'd win,

For sure, it's not my goal to hang people out to dry for bad picks because I've made my fair share of them, and I picked Broner to win as well.

I just think that if you thought Broner was going to dominate Maidana, you can't come back and say "oh yeah I always knew Broner wasn't shit, that wasn't a big win for Maidana".

It was a great win for Maidana and I get why it's put him here, it just doesn't really speak for his chances in this fight imo. I still think Broner is a great talent, just one with some big holes and a low output. Figured he'd be able to hurt Maidana first, but you kind of knew that was going to be a real fight. Mayweather won't engage Maidana, he'll jab, potshot, turn him, rake him coming inside over and over. It's perfectly acceptable on paper, but really not a good fight to me.

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Originally Posted by erics44

another point i dissagree with is that people thought maidana would be a push over for broner, its possible that they did, i didnt read it anywhere that they did and i definately didnt, i didnt bet on maidana because i thought it would go the distance and he would be robbed

Well let me quote from the original thread I replied to many months ago (the context of the thread was that Broner/Maidana was taken off PPV, and people were agreeing with the decision). You replied to this thread so you must have seen them.


I'm not that interested in Broner-Maidana. With all the big fights GB has around that weight for Broner, it seems like they are feeding Maidana too him.

Me neither.. this is a gimmie fight for broner really and gbp changing this to a non ppv event kind of shows that. They figured people arent going to pay for this mismatch so they backtracked.Broner-maidana is a Boxing after Dark level fight.. Easy fight for broner..

Maidana should be tailor made for broner but honestly if gavin rees can tag ya so can maidana, so hopefully broner doesn't tighten up his defense and eats one he doesn't seem comin but don't see it happenin.

Maidana is a tough dude, but styles make fights. Maidana is a mauler who leaves himself open. In my opinion, this is a fight to make Broner look good after the sour taste left in people's mouths from his last fight. I think they'll stay away from boxers for a while with Broner. As far as outcomes, I could see something comparable to Alexander - Urango

this kinda reminds me of mayweater v gatti. i think that might be what golden boy sees as well. but broner ain't floyd and marcos ain't arturo... hopefully it ends differently.

(Maidana) is so slow and robotic. Hes a tough guy but dont see him lasting past 7 or 8

Broners going to look good here imo, could even be a DeMarco type showing. He's not going to have to look for Maidana, he'll be able to get set and let his hands go to the body. The guy reminds me vaguely of Canelo as much as anyone else in truth, maybe I'm nuts there but he's not great on his feet and needs to plant them to get off, kind of punches in a shell etc. Still don't see Maidana winning this though, Broner can hurt him and will tee off.

Maidana's Achilles Heel is well-known, he's susceptible to speed and body punches. Broner will target the body early in the fight with his speed and stop Maidana. Boxers can beat Broner, but Maidana isn't a boxer. That's why this fight wasn't worth PPV.


And some from some different threads pre-fight…

"If ever there was a fighter tailor made for Broners style it is Maidana. I'm not sure the guy can even move laterally. Its going to appear that you are watching a fight split screen because the speed difference will be that obvious. His style feeds Broners. Look for a white object to be thrown in late and a defeated Maidana sitting on his stool looking like a human pincushion. Paulie and Rees gave Broner more trouble then Maidana will"

"I don't think he'll have any serious problems with Maidana, but almost anything can happen in the ring so I'll keep hoping he has some humility beat into his ass."

"Broner picks him apart."

"Great card. Maidana Broner will most likely be very 1 sided but Karas Thurman should be a war..."

"Broner wins by KO in 1st half. I love Maidana but he is tailor made for Broner"

fair enough, i dont read all the posts on the threads so i havent read them before

how did i reply to the thread?

im suprised people saw that fight this way after the pauli fight

i would put my house on mayweather maidana being 12-0

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Let's just ask the easy question though: do you think Molina, Andrade, Kirkland, Charlo, or Lara wouldn't pose more of a challenge to Floyd than Maidana?

I already answered that question: yes, I do think there are guys at 154 who pose more of a challenge to Floyd Mayweather than Maidana (Lara being one of them, I would debate Kirkland and Molina though). Would I pick any of those guys you listed to beat Mayweather? No, but I FULLY concede that a fighter like Lara would be a much more interesting matchup stylistically for Floyd than Maidana. I never argued that Maidana posed the greatest threat to Mayweather at 147-154. My argument was that - with Pac, Bradley, Garcia, and several others with fights already booked, and Floyd having beaten several of the other top contenders at 147 and 154 - Maidana was the best choice, in terms of him having momentum and being a legit opponent.

When you're trying to create a big PPV event, there's more to it than just who boxing geeks like us consider the most risky fight. The fighter needs momentum and there needs to be drama and a good story to captivate a mainstream audience. Maidana brings that to the table. He's a credible opponent with a good name value and fan support, who just handed Floyd's "lil brother" his ass.

I'm not giving an opinion, I'm giving facts. Floyd can do bigger business fighting Maidana than Lara, Andrade, or anyone else at 154. To say any "B-side" will do the same buy rates shows a complete lack of understanding for boxing as a business.

And if anyone here wants to believe in the fairy tale nonsense about some past champion fighting "high risk/low reward" guys over "high or medium risk/high reward" guys, you can live in that fantasy world.

Do I think Maidana will beat Mayweather? No, but I don't think Lara, Andrade, Kirkland, Trout, ect would, either.

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Any way you cut it, whether Maidana was or wasn't the best available pick for an opponent, doesn't mean the fight doesn't stink, man. It's already decided and the outcome is predetermined. $70 PPV for a fight where the odds are 14-1 is more like WWE than a boxing match.

I don't agree that the fight stinks, like I said I think Maidana has certain attributes that have the potential to make the fight somewhat interesting, but I agree it's less than ideal.

To me, it's a stay-busy fight before the Pac/Bradley winner.

This fight isn't good at all. Khan would be more exciting . Mayweather is the best in the world and thus we have higher expectations. So what that Maidana beat Broner. Maidana got shutout by Alexander not that long ago. Why not Mayweather vs Porter that beat Alexander. On the other hand . Erislandy Lara beat Trout easy , Trout beat Cotto , Cotto gave a lot of problems to Floyd. Why not Floyd vs Lara? Unless there is a great undercard , this PPV should turn out to have low revenue.

Originally Posted by gest12645

On the other hand . Erislandy Lara beat Trout easy , Trout beat Cotto , Cotto gave a lot of problems to Floyd. Why not Floyd vs Lara?

So this is where we've ended up? We're using "fight math" to set up fights?

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Any way you cut it, whether Maidana was or wasn't the best available pick for an opponent, doesn't mean the fight doesn't stink, man. It's already decided and the outcome is predetermined. $70 PPV for a fight where the odds are 14-1 is more like WWE than a boxing match.

I don't agree that the fight stinks, like I said I think Maidana has certain attributes that have the potential to make the fight somewhat interesting, but I agree it's less than ideal.

To me, it's a stay-busy fight before the Pac/Bradley winner.

We can agree to disagree, my friend. Maidana is a 14-1 underdog for a $70 PPV. I can't even remember when the last time a PPV had fighters so unevenly matched (oh wait, maybe it was Floyd's Guerrero fight, but was only 7-1). It sucks. I don't really know what else to say. I'm a big fan of Maidana and he gives a lot of welterweights a tough out, but he's a more appropriate opponent for Paulie, Garcia, or Thurman, not Floyd Mayweather. When you make $40MM/fight, only fight on PPVs, and are the consensus number one boxer is the sport, do you get to have stay busy fights without some heavy criticism coming your way? I don't think so. Any crap Floyd gets on this fight, he's earned in my opinion.

And I agree with your boxing geeks comment, fights usually don't get made because they are the most compelling match-ups-high risk/low reward fights. Then again, Cotto is going up to 159 to face Martinez...but, that's a different discussion.

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Originally Posted by gest12645

On the other hand . Erislandy Lara beat Trout easy , Trout beat Cotto , Cotto gave a lot of problems to Floyd. Why not Floyd vs Lara?

So this is where we've ended up? We're using "fight math" to set up fights?

ok but it works sometimes. Maidana vs Floyd is better than Floyd vs Lara? Not by a mile

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Originally Posted by p4pking

Hah, no need to hang people out for picking Broner in that one, I think most thought he'd win,

For sure, it's not my goal to hang people out to dry for bad picks because I've made my fair share of them, and I picked Broner to win as well.

I just think that if you thought Broner was going to dominate Maidana, you can't come back and say "oh yeah I always knew Broner wasn't shit, that wasn't a big win for Maidana".

I picked Broner to win, as a lot of us did, and my estimation of Maidana went up some when he won.
I think it's natural to reassess fights, the fighters and past fights to determine where a fight or fighter should be placed in the scheme of things.
Some of don't like to admit we are wrong, so instead of saying we were wrong we say something stupid about the winner.
I'm glad I'm not like that.