40 year old v's a 21 year old =

[Rantcatrat]

Michael Woods, the boxing writer for the New York Post, said this about the Shane Mosley versus Canelo Alvarez fight: "Ideally, the bulk of our interest in a fight shouldn't stem from curiousity if boxer is shot or not." It's 100% on point.

[Kev]

Michael Woods, the boxing writer for the New York Post, said this about the Shane Mosley versus Canelo Alvarez fight: "Ideally, the bulk of our interest in a fight shouldn't stem from curiousity if boxer is shot or not." It's 100% on point.

I don't know. Shane did no worse against Floyd than J M Marquez did, and he did no worse against Manny than Cotto did.

Both of those guys are still considered top fighters, in fact Floyd is fighting Cotto next and many think Marquez beat Pacquiao last time out.

Canelo wasn't able to stop Matthew Hatton I think Mosley is an ideal opponent for him at this stage.

Remember the goal is to give Canelo a decent test, but for him to not lose. They aren't about to pair him with anyone they think will beat him just yet. As Shane was considered an elite fighter only a couple of years ago and on his best day would probably stomp all over the current version of Canelo I think this fight has plenty of interest.

I'm much more looking forward to this fight for Alvarez than I was his fights against Hatton, Rhodes, Gomez and Cintron and I expect most other people are too.

It's a step up for him and as an undercard fight pretty intriguing.

[p4pking]

^^ Agreed. If Mosley keeps going this is the only kind of matchup you could expect, I kind of like it. The idea that this is coddling Alvarez is quite laughable given who he has fought thus far, I think if Mosley is able to muster up any kind of a last ditch effort this will be a hell of a fight. Alvarez would've been roadkill for Shane Mosley in the day and he may well not have the composure to put Shane into a shell like Floyd and Manny were able to do. Mosley can still be very dangerous in spurts if you want to fight with him I reckon.

[Rantcatrat]

Michael Woods, the boxing writer for the New York Post, said this about the Shane Mosley versus Canelo Alvarez fight: "Ideally, the bulk of our interest in a fight shouldn't stem from curiousity if boxer is shot or not." It's 100% on point.

I don't know. Shane did no worse against Floyd than J M Marquez did, and he did no worse against Manny than Cotto did.

Both of those guys are still considered top fighters, in fact Floyd is fighting Cotto next and many think Marquez beat Pacquiao last time out.

Canelo wasn't able to stop Matthew Hatton I think Mosley is an ideal opponent for him at this stage.

Remember the goal is to give Canelo a decent test, but for him to not lose. They aren't about to pair him with anyone they think will beat him just yet. As Shane was considered an elite fighter only a couple of years ago and on his best day would probably stomp all over the current version of Canelo I think this fight has plenty of interest.

I'm much more looking forward to this fight for Alvarez than I was his fights against Hatton, Rhodes, Gomez and Cintron and I expect most other people are too.

It's a step up for him and as an undercard fight pretty intriguing.

I heard a very funny line somewhere about this card. It went something like Floyd must have been required to do community service for senior citizens as part of his plea deal for beating his baby's momma and that is why Shane and Winky are on the card.

Anyway, you may be correct, perhaps I've been too harsh on this fight. Given Canelo's previous opposition, this is more of the same, but not any worse. It turned out Cintron was shot when he faced Canelo and I see the same thing happening here. Also, after Mosley's last two performances, I didn't want to see him on a major card again because I thought he stunk out the joint. Additionally, I would view a win over Delvin Rodriguez as a better win than one over this version of Shane and also better for Canelo's development, and he's not the only choice out there. I understand why they wouldn't want to put him in with James Kirkland. Fine. I wouldn't even hold it against Canelo. He's 21. I just think there are better choices out there from every perspective.

There's a chance that Shane is just more effective at 154 than he was at 147 at his age and he'll bring some pain to Canelo. I'll be rooting for Shane to win too.

Do you not remember Oscar trashing Shane before the Pacquiao fight? He was calling him shot and over the hill etc. Now Oscar goes and puts him in with his cash cow. It's just a reminder that promoters are promoters. One's no different from the rest.

[Kev]

Michael Woods, the boxing writer for the New York Post, said this about the Shane Mosley versus Canelo Alvarez fight: "Ideally, the bulk of our interest in a fight shouldn't stem from curiousity if boxer is shot or not." It's 100% on point.

I don't know. Shane did no worse against Floyd than J M Marquez did, and he did no worse against Manny than Cotto did.

Both of those guys are still considered top fighters, in fact Floyd is fighting Cotto next and many think Marquez beat Pacquiao last time out.

Canelo wasn't able to stop Matthew Hatton I think Mosley is an ideal opponent for him at this stage.

Remember the goal is to give Canelo a decent test, but for him to not lose. They aren't about to pair him with anyone they think will beat him just yet. As Shane was considered an elite fighter only a couple of years ago and on his best day would probably stomp all over the current version of Canelo I think this fight has plenty of interest.

I'm much more looking forward to this fight for Alvarez than I was his fights against Hatton, Rhodes, Gomez and Cintron and I expect most other people are too.

It's a step up for him and as an undercard fight pretty intriguing.

I heard a very funny line somewhere about this card. It went something like Floyd must have been required to do community service for senior citizens as part of his plea deal for beating his baby's momma and that is why Shane and Winky are on the card.

Anyway, you may be correct, perhaps I've been too harsh on this fight. Given Canelo's previous opposition, this is more of the same, but not any worse. It turned out Cintron was shot when he faced Canelo and I see the same thing happening here. Also, after Mosley's last two performances, I didn't want to see him on a major card again because I thought he stunk out the joint. Additionally, I would view a win over Delvin Rodriguez as a better win than one over this version of Shane and also better for Canelo's development, and he's not the only choice out there. I understand why they wouldn't want to put him in with James Kirkland. Fine. I wouldn't even hold it against Canelo. He's 21. I just think there are better choices out there from every perspective.

There's a chance that Shane is just more effective at 154 than he was at 147 at his age and he'll bring some pain to Canelo. I'll be rooting for Shane to win too.

Do you not remember Oscar trashing Shane before the Pacquiao fight? He was calling him shot and over the hill etc. Now Oscar goes and puts him in with his cash cow. It's just a reminder that promoters are promoters. One's no different from the rest.

It's totally different though. In the former fight Shane was fighting the then best p4p fighter in the entire world. Now he's facing a 21 year old belt holder whose only notable win is against Kermit Cintron and it's an undercard fight.

If they were hyping this as a main event fight on a HBO card then sure, but as a chief support it's pretty intriguing.

Also I highly doubt the casual fan would rather see Canelo fight Delvin Rodriguez. I also think it's a matter of conjecture as to whether that is a tougher fight.

Shane was once world elite, only a couple fights ago he was fighting at the very top level, now he's a decent gatekeeper test.

Remember this is a fight Canelo is supposed to win, nobody is saying this is a 50/50 fight and it's not being hyped as such. For me the main event is a bigger farce seeing how comprehensively Manny dismantled Cotto not that long ago.

Still it's a card I will definitely be watching.

[Slim the BoxingManiac]

What bothers me is that we let the idea of what we think deems one as "shot" dictate whether or not they should be in a fight.

Shot isn't something that should be completely judging a fight. A shot 43 year old Foreman would have knocked out any version of Tyson, and I firmly believe that.

The Old Joe Louis who is often discredited as an opponent of Rocky Marciano's was still good enough to be cleaning house with every top heavyweight except Ezzard Charles.

As a matter of fact, Holyfield is still a good fighter at nearly fifty. I was one of the few people that predicted a Holyfield win when he fought Valuev in 2008. You can ask any sensible person who saw the fight, it is generally accepted that Holyfield was robbed.

Maybe we need to think more so along the lines of the old motto, "Styles make fights."

[Manos de Piedra]

I think Mosley is a shot fighter but it's still a step up for Canelo and I would like to see how he performs.

[Rantcatrat]

I think Mosley is a shot fighter but it's still a step up for Canelo and I would like to see how he performs.

This appears to be the consensus, Bilbo's point, and I see it. Fair play. I would prefer to have seen him in against a top ten competitor (Mosley's not even ranked at junior middleweight or welterweight any longer), but I understand why they're doing the fight.

[Rantcatrat]

Undercards don't sell ppvs. That's clear. The casual fan knows who Shane is and will like the fact he is on the card. We're not casual fans though. Listen, I hope I'm wrong, I sincerely do. I just see Shane going in survival mode once he feels a bit of Canelo's power and then putting on a snoozer for 12 rounds.

Shane also has a great record against Mexican fighters. Something like 36-1-1. Maybe styles do make fights and Shane would have problems with a fast southpaw in Manny and a fast boxer in PBF, but not have problems with Canelo.

My point regarding Oscar was that he is just a pure promoter and I don't buy any of his propoganda any more than I do other promoters. He put down Shane because Shane left GB to secure a Pacquiao fight. He disparaged Shane, not as a bad opponent for Manny, but as a shot, old fighter. Now he's putting him in against someone he promoters, and there's no problem. It's hypocritical was my point.

[Kev]

Undercards don't sell ppvs. That's clear. The casual fan knows who Shane is and will like the fact he is on the card. We're not casual fans though. Listen, I hope I'm wrong, I sincerely do. I just see Shane going in survival mode once he feels a bit of Canelo's power and then putting on a snoozer for 12 rounds.

Shane also has a great record against Mexican fighters. Something like 36-1-1. Maybe styles do make fights and Shane would have problems with a fast southpaw in Manny and a fast boxer in PBF, but not have problems with Canelo.

My point regarding Oscar was that he is just a pure promoter and I don't buy any of his propoganda any more than I do other promoters. He put down Shane because Shane left GB to secure a Pacquiao fight. He disparaged Shane, not as a bad opponent for Manny, but as a shot, old fighter. Now he's putting him in against someone he promoters, and there's no problem. It's hypocritical was my point.

I don't see how it's hypocritical. Someone can easily be said to be a soft choice of opponent against the then world's number 1 p4p fighter on a HBO PPV but then not a soft choice for an emerging 21 year talent who Matthew Hatton comfortably went 12 rounds with last year.

Look, I think Cotto is a soft choice as a PPV main event fight for Floyd. The result is virtually guaranteed imo. I think Cotto is past his best too.

But that doesn't mean if Floyd beats him handily as expected that I'd denigrate him as an opponent for Saul Alvarez. On the contrary I'd see that as a very dangerous fight.

You're putting all your emphasis on Shane no longer being world class elite level and ignoring the fact that Alvarez hasn't demonstrated he is at that level himself yet anyway.

It's a step up fight in his developing career. They are bringing him along. As such this makes for a great matchup, in my opinion the outcome is a lot more in doubt than the main event.

[bestjabwins]

Michael Woods, the boxing writer for the New York Post, said this about the Shane Mosley versus Canelo Alvarez fight: "Ideally, the bulk of our interest in a fight shouldn't stem from curiousity if boxer is shot or not." It's 100% on point.

.

Also, after Mosley's last two performances, I didn't want to see him on a major card again because I thought he stunk out the joint. .

This ^^ Pacquiao vs Mosely was the last time i was waking up at 4 in the morning for a mosely fight.

[Master]

Michael Woods, the boxing writer for the New York Post, said this about the Shane Mosley versus Canelo Alvarez fight: "Ideally, the bulk of our interest in a fight shouldn't stem from curiousity if boxer is shot or not." It's 100% on point.

.

Also, after Mosley's last two performances, I didn't want to see him on a major card again because I thought he stunk out the joint. .

This ^^ Pacquiao vs Mosely was the last time i was waking up at 4 in the morning for a Mosley fight.

I will stay up for this mainly for Cotto but might as well see how Shane does against the young pretender.

[bestjabwins]

Michael Woods, the boxing writer for the New York Post, said this about the Shane Mosley versus Canelo Alvarez fight: "Ideally, the bulk of our interest in a fight shouldn't stem from curiousity if boxer is shot or not." It's 100% on point.

.

Also, after Mosley's last two performances, I didn't want to see him on a major card again because I thought he stunk out the joint. .

This ^^ Pacquiao vs Mosely was the last time i was waking up at 4 in the morning for a Mosley fight.

I take it that it will be the big undercard fight? I haven't read up on who else is fighting.
I will stay up for this mainly for Cotto but might as well see how Shane does against the young pretender.

I take it that this is the main undercard fight to be shown before the big one?

[Master]

Michael Woods, the boxing writer for the New York Post, said this about the Shane Mosley versus Canelo Alvarez fight: "Ideally, the bulk of our interest in a fight shouldn't stem from curiousity if boxer is shot or not." It's 100% on point.

.

Also, after Mosley's last two performances, I didn't want to see him on a major card again because I thought he stunk out the joint. .

This ^^ Pacquiao vs Mosely was the last time i was waking up at 4 in the morning for a Mosley fight.

I take it that it will be the big undercard fight? I haven't read up on who else is fighting.
I will stay up for this mainly for Cotto but might as well see how Shane does against the young pretender.

I take it that this is the main undercard fight to be shown before the big one?

Yes Cotto v Floyd is the main event

[Manos de Piedra]

Michael Woods, the boxing writer for the New York Post, said this about the Shane Mosley versus Canelo Alvarez fight: "Ideally, the bulk of our interest in a fight shouldn't stem from curiousity if boxer is shot or not." It's 100% on point.

I don't know. Shane did no worse against Floyd than J M Marquez did, and he did no worse against Manny than Cotto did.

Both of those guys are still considered top fighters, in fact Floyd is fighting Cotto next and many think Marquez beat Pacquiao last time out.

Canelo wasn't able to stop Matthew Hatton I think Mosley is an ideal opponent for him at this stage.

Remember the goal is to give Canelo a decent test, but for him to not lose. They aren't about to pair him with anyone they think will beat him just yet. As Shane was considered an elite fighter only a couple of years ago and on his best day would probably stomp all over the current version of Canelo I think this fight has plenty of interest.

I'm much more looking forward to this fight for Alvarez than I was his fights against Hatton, Rhodes, Gomez and Cintron and I expect most other people are too.

It's a step up for him and as an undercard fight pretty intriguing.

definitely agree with that.