Quote Originally Posted by BoxingGod
pbf isn't as good as you think he is, well atleast not fully proven...you have only seen him against much weaker quality oppenent then pac, thats why pbf has look so amazing with his skills, but you really don't know mab and em or jmm if you think pbf would of just beat them too...its one thing to say pbf is good but to say his much better and would beat all three is stupid. yea i'll say pbf has skills but he has only shown that against weak oppenents. he look great against gatti and chico those are two stand out fights that he look good against. and the rest aren't even worth a mention...gatti was a hbo hype club fighter and chico was throwing only 2 punches, but if you stop being blind and watch if only chico got way more aggressive he would of knock pbf out, he caught pbf a few times. but he didn't do enough and thats why pbf just took advantage of how chico was being lazy.
What exactly would MAB, Morales or Marquez do to beat Floyd? In what areas do they have an advantage? Are they more skilled? Faster? Bigger? Better defense?
So let me get this straight, you think Corrales lost to Floyd because he decided to "get lazy?" You don't think it had anything to do with the fact that Floyd put on a boxing lesson for 10+ rounds?
You think Corrales only threw a couple punches at a time just because he didn't really feel like punching? I think it may have had something to do with the fact that he was facing an unhittable target. Was Corrales acting lazy the five times he got knocked flat on his back?
You do know that Mayweather-Corrales is one of the 2 or 3 most lopsided title fights of the last 20 years, right?

they are true to the game and know how to win
Does Floyd not "know how to win?" He seems to have known how to do it everytime so far.

PLUS YOUR ONLY AS GOOD AS YOUR OPPENENT
What does this mean? If you're only as good as your opponents, then Oscar De La Hoya must be the best fighter of the past 25 years, because he has the best list of opponents of anyone during that time.