 Who is true boxer of decade (2001-2010) |
 |
 Aug 16 2011, 09:36 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Amateur Group: Members Posts: 45 Joined: 14-June 11 Member No.: 12,555  |
Mayweather or Pacquiao?What you think about it.Remember BWAA named Pacquiao before his fights versus Margarito and Mosley.
|
 |
 
|
 |
Replies
(1 - 9)
|
Aug 16 2011, 09:41 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Amateur Group: Members Posts: 45 Joined: 14-June 11 Member No.: 12,555 |
My choice - Mayweather.Ideal boxer.Undefeated.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 16 2011, 10:04 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Super Featherweight Group: Members Posts: 653 Joined: 11-April 10 Member No.: 10,849 |
I go with Calzaghe even though he wasn't able to complete up to 2010. Undefeated. Beat a real living legend.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 16 2011, 10:52 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Junior Middleweight Group: Members Posts: 2,120 Joined: 23-May 11 Member No.: 12,366 |
bernard hopkins. his losses to jermain taylor and calzaghe dont look good. but he beat calzaghe, that was just plain bullshit
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 16 2011, 11:22 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Lightweight Group: Members Posts: 987 Joined: 15-May 11 Member No.: 12,125 |
Mayweather. Look at his fights from 2001 on up. Just because you have punching power and your fights are more "exciting" to watch (casual fan) does not make you the boxer of the decade. Look at the type of competition that each fighter fought in their career. Just because you are media friendly and a feel good story does not make a person fighter of the year. Its like Dennis Roddman being elected in the basketball hall of fame, look at his states and the level of basketball that he played and not the popularity contest and the off the court chaos. Fighter of the Decade rewards a fighter who has displayed mastery inside the ring, not a hype job created by the media.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 16 2011, 03:21 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Flyweight Group: Members Posts: 178 Joined: 16-May 11 Member No.: 12,191 |
Mayweather because he's went undefeated and Pacquiao has a loss and 2 draws since 2000
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 16 2011, 03:24 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Junior Middleweight Group: Team BU Posts: 2,498 Joined: 25-July 10 Member No.: 10,970 |
QUOTE (Allmenjoi8 @ Aug 16 2011, 12:22 PM)  Mayweather. Look at his fights from 2001 on up. Just because you have punching power and your fights are more "exciting" to watch (casual fan) does not make you the boxer of the decade. Look at the type of competition that each fighter fought in their career. Just because you are media friendly and a feel good story does not make a person fighter of the year. Its like Dennis Roddman being elected in the basketball hall of fame, look at his states and the level of basketball that he played and not the popularity contest and the off the court chaos. Fighter of the Decade rewards a fighter who has displayed mastery inside the ring, not a hype job created by the media. why are you picking Mayweather then? i would have to go with Hopkins. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 16 2011, 03:40 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Team BU''s Little Play Thing...LOL Group: Members Posts: 580 Joined: 27-May 08 From: Chicago Member No.: 7,451 |
QUOTE (gravytrain @ Aug 16 2011, 04:24 PM) why are you picking Mayweather then? i would have to go with Hopkins. Hopkins wins from 2000-2010 Jones Jr Ornelas Pavlik Wright Tarver DLH Allen Joppy Hakkar Trinidad Holmes Echols Vanderpool Mayweather wins 2000-2010 Mosley Marquez Hatton DLH Baldomir Judah Mitchell Gatti Bruseles Corley N'dou Sosa Castillo Castillo Hernandez Corrales Augustus Vargas When put like this, i have to say Mayweather's wins are as impressive as Hopkins. Hopkins best wins are Trinidad, DLH, Tarver, Pavlik, and Wright. Mayweather's are Corrales, Castillo 2x, Judah, DLH, Hatton, JMM, and Mosley. I think the better resume goes to Mayweather, even Mayweather's secondary opponents outweigh Hopkins'. Before i put this together i favored Hopkins but now i lean towards PBF, Hopkins gets no credit for his losses |
|
|
|
|
Aug 16 2011, 04:06 PM
Post
#9
|
|
|
I fucked with the wrong monkey... Group: Guests Posts: 524 Joined: 5-July 11 Member No.: 12,696 |
I don't know. It's obviously a contest between Pacquiao, Mayweather, and Hopkins. Obviously, a Pac-Mayweather fight will go a long way to helping posterity decide who's name was writ most boldly in this era. Hopkins has marks against him because he wasn't as popular, but he's certainly been just as extraordinary, and perhaps even more extraordinary considering his age and his lack of latent physical talent. This "best of the decade" stuff is just journalist bullshit. doesn't mean a thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 16 2011, 05:11 PM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Lightweight Group: Members Posts: 781 Joined: 14-July 11 Member No.: 12,788 |
I'm not sure if this is an actual reward, but shouldn't the decade be 2000-2009? Since in previous decades it should be something like 1980-89, 1990-99... anyway, from 2000-2009 hands-down goes to Mayweather.
|
|
|
|
 |
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 21st May 2013 - 04:34 PM |