Terry Norris " Mayweather with all that slapping and running "

[Beanflicker]

You really cannot be objective when it comes to Floyd, when people point out weaknesees you do not accept them. OK, Terry may not have blasted out Floyd early but he would more than likely win.

For sure I can be objective about Floyd. I think he's as big a douchebag as everyone else does, but I'm not going to let the fact that I don't like him personally cloud my judgement of his in ring ability.

Like I said, if you think Terry Norris beats Floyd at 154lbs, that's completely fine. I have no problem with that. I'd pick Floyd to edge him out, but personally I think it's a toss up fight. In no way do I think it's a slam dunk for Mayweather. Terry could very well have knocked him out.

But the problem is, a lot of people either can't or refuse to grasp just how good Mayweather is in the ring. If you're comparing him to Meldrick Taylor, you really don't have a solid grasp of Mayweather's ability. If you're like Spicoli and you're saying that Mosley lost because he voluntarily stopped fighting after he rocked Floyd, you really don't have a solid grasp of Mayweather's ability. Not that I think you guys are ignorant, I just think you're letting your bias against Mayweather negatively effect your view of his in-ring abilities.

Floyd's flaws? What flaws were pointed out? That fast hands give him trouble? Who the fuck isn't troubled by fast hands? I don't consider it a weakness but as I said, Floyd has adjusted to every fast guy he's fought and dominated.

The guy's undefeated for a reason, and it's not the reason most people here believe (that he doesn't fight anybody good). He's been fighting on the championship level since 1998.

[Master]

You really cannot be objective when it comes to Floyd, when people point out weaknesees you do not accept them. OK, Terry may not have blasted out Floyd early but he would more than likely win.

For sure I can be objective about Floyd. I think he's as big a douchebag as everyone else does, but I'm not going to let the fact that I don't like him personally cloud my judgement of his in ring ability.

Like I said, if you think Terry Norris beats Floyd at 154lbs, that's completely fine. I have no problem with that. I'd pick Floyd to edge him out, but personally I think it's a toss up fight. In no way do I think it's a slam dunk for Mayweather. Terry could very well have knocked him out.

But the problem is, a lot of people either can't or refuse to grasp just how good Mayweather is in the ring. If you're comparing him to Meldrick Taylor, you really don't have a solid grasp of Mayweather's ability. If you're like Spicoli and you're saying that Mosley lost because he voluntarily stopped fighting after he rocked Floyd, you really don't have a solid grasp of Mayweather's ability. Not that I think you guys are ignorant, I just think you're letting your bias against Mayweather negatively effect your view of his in-ring abilities.

Floyd's flaws? What flaws were pointed out? That fast hands give him trouble? Who the fuck isn't troubled by fast hands? I don't consider it a weakness but as I said, Floyd has adjusted to every fast guy he's fought and dominated.

The guy's undefeated for a reason, and it's not the reason most people here believe (that he doesn't fight anybody good). He's been fighting on the championship level since 1998.

Just because the guy is undefeated does not mean he has no weaknesses.

[Beanflicker]

Just because the guy is undefeated does not mean he has no weaknesses.

I never said he didn't. But I don't know what his weaknesses are and I've never heard anybody point out a real legit "weakness". A "weakness" suggests that a guy has a trait/skill/ect that is below what you'd expect for a professional (or in this case, champion) boxer.

You said if a guy could match handspeed with him, it could give him trouble. I think that's true for any fighter that ever lived. Nobody wants to fight a guy who's as fast or faster than they are. Speed troubles everyone.

I'm no Floyd nuthugger, I'm open to any criticism about his skills. If you think he has a real weakness, let me know what it is. What does Floyd do shitty? His power is mediocre at the higher weights, but not to the point where I'd call it a weakness.

[Beanflicker]

He has weak hands that are prone to breaking, and he doesn't have one-punch KO power at 147 and above. That's all I can think of. If anyone has any others to add to the list, let me know.

[Master]

Just because the guy is undefeated does not mean he has no weaknesses.

I never said he didn't. But I don't know what his weaknesses are and I've never heard anybody point out a real legit "weakness". A "weakness" suggests that a guy has a trait/skill/ect that is below what you'd expect for a professional (or in this case, champion) boxer.

You said if a guy could match handspeed with him, it could give him trouble. I think that's true for any fighter that ever lived. Nobody wants to fight a guy who's as fast or faster than they are. Speed troubles everyone.

I'm no Floyd nuthugger, I'm open to any criticism about his skills. If you think he has a real weakness, let me know what it is. What does Floyd do shitty? His power is mediocre at the higher weights, but not to the point where I'd call it a weakness.

It is a weakness because it will not put off a great big light middleweight like Norris, Mcallum or Hearns. They would take chances that they would not ordinarily take just so they could hurt him.

[Spicoli]

You really cannot be objective when it comes to Floyd, when people point out weaknesees you do not accept them. OK, Terry may not have blasted out Floyd early but he would more than likely win.

For sure I can be objective about Floyd. I think he's as big a douchebag as everyone else does, but I'm not going to let the fact that I don't like him personally cloud my judgement of his in ring ability.

Like I said, if you think Terry Norris beats Floyd at 154lbs, that's completely fine. I have no problem with that. I'd pick Floyd to edge him out, but personally I think it's a toss up fight. In no way do I think it's a slam dunk for Mayweather. Terry could very well have knocked him out.

But the problem is, a lot of people either can't or refuse to grasp just how good Mayweather is in the ring. If you're comparing him to Meldrick Taylor, you really don't have a solid grasp of Mayweather's ability. If you're like Spicoli and you're saying that Mosley lost because he voluntarily stopped fighting after he rocked Floyd, you really don't have a solid grasp of Mayweather's ability. Not that I think you guys are ignorant, I just think you're letting your bias against Mayweather negatively effect your view of his in-ring abilities.

Floyd's flaws? What flaws were pointed out? That fast hands give him trouble? Who the fuck isn't troubled by fast hands? I don't consider it a weakness but as I said, Floyd has adjusted to every fast guy he's fought and dominated.

The guy's undefeated for a reason, and it's not the reason most people here believe (that he doesn't fight anybody good). He's been fighting on the championship level since 1998.

Dude is it really necassary for you to twist shit up like that Thats not what I said. Mosley was only winning that fight by a ko, he hurt him, his corner did not emphasis or push it...thats fighting a dumb fucking fight. If you honestly think us ignit folk cannot see Mayweathers ability regardless and think Mosley 'let him back in' you might be the one in need of a grip and sporting a bias?. I'm pretty aware of the cause-effect during a bout after almost 3 decades and one man over another deciding how it evolves. Clearly ya think a bias is simply saying another fighter has a chance cause he got nothing but respect form this one here ffs.