The definitive Mayweather/Pac article

[amat]

It's an interesting viewpoint but let's not forget that Hauser has shown a propensity for dislike against Golden Boy in the past. The Judah-Mosley piece was interesting but I believe that was all Jin Mosley's fault. A Mosley-Mayweather matchup may be a little trying as far as how the testing goes.

[blegit]

After reading this very long article I'll just go over a couple of things. First off, I am a Pac fan but I like boxing better than any fighter and I like the truth better than boxing. So I truly keep it real as far as I see. With that said, this article was not fair or balanced. Both parties made bad statements that bit them later. Freddie Roach made a number of statements as to why Pac didn't like needles, blood drawn, etc and later shown to be apparently inaccurate. I am not condemning Pac and what he is doing can, and I hope, be truly natural. But as I bicker with fellow boxing fans I do not get offended for them thinking what they think because Pac is not exactly doing typical things since moving up. The author states what Pac is doing has been done before. Really? Maybe, but who are these fighters who did this before? Pac is the only fighter in boxing history to become world champ in 7 weight classes. In Pac's 5 fights before he started moving up in several weight classes he KO'd 2 of 5 opponents. Since Pac moved in 3 different weight classes in just 4 fights he has KO'd every opponent. 4 of 4. Pac has gotten stronger p4p and quicker since moving up. Even his conditioning coach states the quicker part. Its not the fact that Pac is beating the top guys at different weight classes but how he is doing it. He basically lost maybe 2 or 3 rounds in his 4 fights against bigger and mostly top fighters. Pac may be completely clean but it is asinine to think people are wrong for thinking otherwise. Clean, done before, or not what Pac is doing is at the very least almost never done. Even ousting proven steroid cheats. Achieving more than whats been done before in light of this being the steroid era. Thats where the speculation comes from. When Barry Bonds did what never had been done before by hitting 73 HRs,in the steroid era, if you weren't a die hard fan of Bonds you soon became suspicious. Why not? He ousted everyone even steroid cheats. The author also states what BHop is doing has never been done. WRONG. George Foreman. Since BHop has been 40 he has gone 4-3. Nothing exhilarating. George Foreman turned 40 and went 17-3. Not to mention going 9-0 as a 39 year old after coming off a 10 year retirement. None of this proves anybody is right in there speculation of Pac and since Pac will not accept the random blood tests no one can say he is proven clean. But this article definitely has a purpose of defending Pac and at the very least using misleading statements to do so.

[generalbulldog]

After reading this very long article I'll just go over a couple of things. First off, I am a Pac fan but I like boxing better than any fighter and I like the truth better than boxing. So I truly keep it real as far as I see. With that said, this article was not neutral. I am not condemning Pac and what he is doing can, and I hope, be truly natural. But as I bicker with fellow boxing fans I do not get offended for them thinking what they think because Pac is not exactly doing typical things since moving up. The author states what Pac is doing has been done before. Really? Maybe, but who are these fighters who did this before? Pac is the only fighter in boxing history to become world champ in 7 weight classes. In Pac's 5 fights before he started moving up in several weight classes he KO'd 2 of 5 opponents. Since Pac moved in 3 different weight classes in just 4 fights he has KO'd every opponent. 4 of 4. Pac has gotten stronger p4p and quicker since moving up. Even his conditioning coach states the quicker part. Its not the fact that Pac is beating the top guys at different weight classes but how he is doing it. He basically lost maybe 2 or 3 rounds in his 4 fights against bigger and better fighters. Pac may be completely clean but it is asinine to think people are wrong for thinking otherwise. Clean, done before, or not what Pac is doing is at the very least almost never done. Even ousting proven steroid cheats. Thats where the speculation comes from. The author also states what BHop is doing has never been done. WRONG. George Foreman. Since BHop has been 40 he has gone 4-3. Nothing exhilarating. George Foreman turned 40 and went 17-3. Not to mention going 9-0 as a 39 year old after coming off a 10 year retirement. None of this proves anybody is right in there specualtion or their defending of Pac. But this article definitely has a purpose of defending Pac and at the very least using misleading statements to do so.

Dude man give it up, you saying youre a Pac fan is like saying Bruce Lee is a Floyd fan. Almost all of your posts are about Floyd or something to do with 1 of FLoyd's prospective opponents. You ain't a boxing fan. But a fan of one fighter.
Back to the topic at hand. Since people are trying to discredit the writer. This guy is a pulitzer prize nominated writer, he ain't no nuthugger of anyone. The article is also very well researched. It's a neutral article. Just because it does not conform to your views, doesn't mean it's a shitty article or a shitty writer.

[blegit]

After reading this very long article I'll just go over a couple of things. First off, I am a Pac fan but I like boxing better than any fighter and I like the truth better than boxing. So I truly keep it real as far as I see. With that said, this article was not neutral. I am not condemning Pac and what he is doing can, and I hope, be truly natural. But as I bicker with fellow boxing fans I do not get offended for them thinking what they think because Pac is not exactly doing typical things since moving up. The author states what Pac is doing has been done before. Really? Maybe, but who are these fighters who did this before? Pac is the only fighter in boxing history to become world champ in 7 weight classes. In Pac's 5 fights before he started moving up in several weight classes he KO'd 2 of 5 opponents. Since Pac moved in 3 different weight classes in just 4 fights he has KO'd every opponent. 4 of 4. Pac has gotten stronger p4p and quicker since moving up. Even his conditioning coach states the quicker part. Its not the fact that Pac is beating the top guys at different weight classes but how he is doing it. He basically lost maybe 2 or 3 rounds in his 4 fights against bigger and better fighters. Pac may be completely clean but it is asinine to think people are wrong for thinking otherwise. Clean, done before, or not what Pac is doing is at the very least almost never done. Even ousting proven steroid cheats. Thats where the speculation comes from. The author also states what BHop is doing has never been done. WRONG. George Foreman. Since BHop has been 40 he has gone 4-3. Nothing exhilarating. George Foreman turned 40 and went 17-3. Not to mention going 9-0 as a 39 year old after coming off a 10 year retirement. None of this proves anybody is right in there specualtion or their defending of Pac. But this article definitely has a purpose of defending Pac and at the very least using misleading statements to do so.

Dude man give it up, you saying youre a Pac fan is like saying Bruce Lee is a Floyd fan. Almost all of your posts are about Floyd or something to do with 1 of FLoyd's prospective opponents. You ain't a boxing fan. But a fan of one fighter.
Back to the topic at hand. Since people are trying to discredit the writer. This guy is a pulitzer prize nominated writer, he ain't no nuthugger of anyone. The article is also very well researched. It's a neutral article. Just because it does not conform to your views, doesn't mean it's a shitty article or a shitty writer.

Give what up? The truth? Speak intelligently about what I wrote. What did I say that was wrong? Lets break it down. I never said it was a shitty article or discredit the author's background. And it doesn't matter what a writer wins they are still human and susceptible to being wrong or partial. Be real. I am a Pac fan as I am of many fighters. I don't like Mayweather's act but I am merely a fan who doesn't know either guy. I am actually one of the guys who bashes Mayweather for his cherrypicking in the welterweight division and I get beat up by the Floyd die hards for pointing out facts. And Bruce Lee actually sided with Floyd on the testing situation. The only thing I have said bad towards Pac is about the testing situation and thats because die hard fans refuse to accept any wrong about Pac and go straight at bashing Mayweather. If you side with the truth its hard to sound like a Pac fan on here because everyone acts like he is God and PBF is the devil. One thing that gets me is some people think just because you are a fan of a fighter it means you have to ignore the truth of that fighter. I talk about Mayweather and I'm called a hater. I talk about Pac and now I'm not a fan. Hilarious. Well, I put boxing before any fighter's nuts. The sport has been my life since I was a kid. I pointed out what this writer was wrong about(BHop's and Pac's accomplishments) and backed it up with facts. Debate that. Not if I'm a fan of Pac. Are you a fan of Pac? Be honest, do you think he is wrong about anything in the Pac/PBF debacle? Both sides blew that fight for the fans its not just Mayweather's fault. Not a boxing fan Laughable. What you meant to say is I'm not a Pac nuthugger. I have been boxing, training, and coaching boxing accumulatively for over 21 years now. I guess I do that because I'm a Floyd fan and not a boxing fan.

[Kirkland Laing]

I really like Thomas Hauser, I've got a couple of his books but this article is a strange one. It starts off with Manny's personal trainer talking about what a unique athlete he isand how he's defying the ageing process. Go and google "Roger Clemens work ethic/special athlete" or "Barry Bonds age-defyingunique" and you'll get a million arse-kissing articles written by Pulitzer-prize winning American sports journalists before steroid-using exposure of Clemens/Bonds and then how-could-we-all-have-been-such-fools articles by the same writers excerpting their previous articles to show how they'd been fooled. Hauser is well aware of this, it's almost like he's repeating the cliche to let us know how he really feels.

Then you've got a whole load of history of steroids in boxing and the conclusion that, yes, it's probably quite widespread in boxing today and testing is a joke.

Then more about how dedicated Manny is in the gym, (so dedicated he spends half his time making films and records, campaining for election etc.) So far it's doing the cliche thing. It's almost like he's taking the piss out of Manny's steroid-free claims for his fellow sports journalists/whoever else is in on the joke.

The he changes tack, eventually echoes Al Bernstein making a false claim about when Mayweather started asking for random testing and uses this "fact" to try and make the case that Floyd killed the fight. Then he has a go at Oscar.

Definitely not a fair and balanced article and he's blamed Mayweather/GBP and exonerated Manny as much as he can while still leaving himself a little plenty-of-steroids-in-boxing and I-was-telling-you-he-was-juicing-in-a-knowing-way wiggle room to change his tune in future if Manny gets caught with a needle in his arse. You can't really blame these guys though. Manny is their biggest story and if he is caught or even badly damaged by speculation it damages boxing really badly.

[Mar]

The fights off...good. Screw both of them. The world doesn't revolve around floyd, no matter how much his haters with thier silly-ness try to keep him up there. Pac is fighting clottey. Where's the whole section dedicated to that. A fight that is happening. Man you guys hate (or really love) the guy this damn much ?? No wonder he's so rich. Why call this sport boxing. Just call it the ridiculous race to beat floyd any way we can, with anyone we can. Nevermind boxing is shorter.

[JJson]

I disagree with the slant that Mayeather didi not want the fight. It is a conjecture that is based on a complete transformation of logic. The condition for the fight to happen was for both fighters to subject themselves to random testing. It was Manny who rejected the condition, not PBF. So leaping over Manny's rejection of that condition in order to rationalize the obvious hatred many have for PBF might be sound plausible in the inner ear or mind, but it is ludicrous.

And now what will the naysayers come up with since Mosely has agreed to the very conditions that Manny rejected. I like to call a spade a spade. There is visceral hatred among some boxing fans for PBF because he is not supplicant. It is no coincidence that the fighters these people like are those who are supplicant, are not assertive, and because of that provide a level of psychological comfort they do not find with personalities like Muhammed Ali, PBF, Jack Johnson ets. It walks and quacks like a duck, this is no swan.