Mayweather question!

[Ant Live]

The "HATERS" will continue to hate. Some excuse on why Floyd won. Or some excuse that Floyd has less ring damage. Or some excuse to why he won't fight someone like Martinez. HATERS, keep on hating. Thats what makes a forum interesting!!!

[armyash]

Pac vs Pretty boy does need to happen but after a long time out he deserves massive respect for taking on Ortiz - potentially a lot tougher than pacmans last few opponents and more dangerous for him than a Marquez fight

[Manos de Piedra]

The haters will never be silenced, there's always an excuse but beating pac would prove he's the best of this era.

[TitoFan]

I wasn't a Floyd hater until he started ducking opponents and fighting every couple of years or so. I wasn't a Floyd hater until he started caring more about his damn "0" than the sport itself. I could care less about Floyd's antics outside the ring. There's plenty of other losers out there who are great fighters but lousy human beings. That's THEIR business. But while Floyd "honors us" with his presence every couple of years or so... there's plenty of other fighters who stay busy and don't depend on legions (well.... dozens) of nut-hugging fans to sing his praises while he's out there counting his millions and yanking on his fan-boys' strings.

I hope this helps.

[Tomato Can]

Meh haters gonna hate.

[fan johnny]

Are you freak'n kidding me? Of course they will say Pacquiao was too small and just say why didn't he man up and fight Martinez.

[BIG H]

Pac and Floyd need to fight. The winner is all time top 10 for me.

[marbleheadmaui]

In my view the following are true about Floyd (in no order)

1. He is a great fighter
2. He is perhaps a top 50 all-time in terms of accomplishment.
3. He had top ten all-time native talents
4. The gap between what he COULD have accomplished, given his talent, and what he ACTUALLY accomplished is as wide as any fighter I can think of who didn't die prematurley (Sal Sanchez, Stanley Ketchell etc.)
5. It is likely too late to meaningfully close the gap I talk about above.

[JazMerkin]

In my view the following are true about Floyd (in no order)

1. He is a great fighter
2. He is perhaps a top 50 all-time in terms of accomplishment.
3. He had top ten all-time native talents
4. The gap between what he COULD have accomplished, given his talent, and what he ACTUALLY accomplished is as wide as any fighter I can think of who didn't die prematurley (Sal Sanchez, Stanley Ketchell etc.)
5. It is likely too late to meaningfully close the gap I talk about above.

This I think is one of the key problems with rating a fighter while he & his opposition are still active or in our recent memory. I read a very interesting article from The Times about Ray Leonard (my personal fave of all time) just prior to the Hagler fight that made very similar assertions about him as I regularly see about Mayweather. It made the argument that he'd never beaten a prime great (it argued that neither Hearns or Benitez were actual greats) & that the Duran he beat was past his prime. It also argued that he'd ducked Pryor, Curry & Milton McCrory. As a fanboy, I think that's all utter shit , but what it did bring home was that guys really SHOULDN'T be placed historically until we have some perspective on their careers & those of their opposition.

I think the only one of these that can really be said to be true as of now is #1. The rest will be decided by history.