Mayweather and Pacquiao remind us why the world tuned out on boxing
by Scott Christ on Jan 7, 2010 2:43 PM EST
in Boxing Commentary & Opinion
Email
Print
They agreed to the split. They agreed to the gloves. They had a mostly for-show search for a venue that put them at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas, boxing's grandest stage. Hell, they even worked out whose name would go first on what promotional devices.
It was going to have both fighters earning up to $40 million or so when all was said and done, with $25 million guarantees, the largest ever. The fight would have a chance at breaking the all-time gate record in Nevada, and the all-time pay-per-view record.
It was a perfect fight. Floyd Mayweather Jr., the unbeaten immovable object, against Manny Pacquiao, the seemingly unstoppable force cutting through class fighters like he was fighting David Diaz every night. The potential for a bit of an ugly style clash was there, but so was the potential for a fight where both would be tested like never, ever before, by fellow fighters whose skill level was as good as it gets.
It isn't to be, apparently. Mayweather would not budge from his set demands for Olympic-level blood testing requests, and while Pacquiao was willing to give in a bit, it just wasn't enough for Floyd.
I am neither blaming Floyd nor Manny exclusively. Both of them and their teams have put a dent back in boxing that everyone in the sport had been working for about three years to take out. It started when Floyd and Oscar de la Hoya met in 2007, a fight that broke all the records and demonstrated to the promoters that when you work together on big fights, good things happen for the sport.
Shortly after, the Cold War between the two biggest promotional firms in the game, Top Rank and Golden Boy, was over. They were pitting their fighters against one another in major events. The first came when Manny Pacquiao rematched Marco Antonio Barrera. Following that, we had Miguel Cotto-Shane Mosley, Kelly Pavlik-Bernard Hopkins, Pacquiao-de la Hoya, Antonio Margarito-Shane Mosley, Pacquiao-Ricky Hatton and more.
More and more, detractors, naysayers and the mainstream media in general looked at boxing as a revitalized sport, where things could get done, where the mismatches and garbage main events had been at the very least greatly diminished, if not firmly cast aside. Things were happening again with arguably the oldest sport in the world.
Mayweather-Pacquiao would have trumped them all. Not since Sugar Ray Leonard and Thomas Hearns in 1982 had the two very best fighters in the world come together for a single showdown. And not only were they the best, they were the biggest stars, the sport's two clear money men.
But now, the short-sighted nature of boxing's promoters and fighters has reared its ugly head once again. I worried initially about what boxing would do after this fight; now, we have to wait to see if this fight will be made in September or something.
And even if it is, it won't be the same.
This entire fiasco has seriously damaged the credibility of boxing as a sport. The two will now move on to different fights on back-to-back weekends in March. Floyd Mayweather looks like he'll fight Paulie Malignaggi on March 13. Pacquiao will face Yuri Foreman on March 20.
I mean no disrespect to Malignaggi or Foreman, two fine boxers, but this is sort of like the Colts and Saints making the Super Bowl and deciding they'll skip on playing each other, and instead they'll face the Giants and Broncos.
Where else but in boxing can you get a catastrophe that will define the sport in the short term, putting it in a negative light, and then have everyone mud-sling instead of try and fix what's wrong? Bob Arum and Co. will spend their time calling Mayweather a coward, and Mayweather and Co. will spend their time pointing out that all Pacquiao had to do was agree to their demands.
I don't care about the blame game. I only care about what this does to boxing's image, and to the images of a couple of great fighters that I respect. Mayweather and Pacquiao are boxing's representatives to the general public, and depending on which side folks have picked, both of them have taken hits with this bungling. Neither comes out smelling particularly rosy, and when they fight their substitute opponents in March, there are going to be a lot of people that just say, "Who cares?"
All that goodwill that boxing has built up over the past few years is wasted with this one fight going under. Two men managed to captivate the public to an amazing degree, and then when it got right down to it, they backed off of the biggest fight there is.
So what do we as boxing fans do now? We move on. We look at upcoming fights such as Mosley-Berto, Luevano-Lopez, Gamboa-Mtagwa, Valero-DeMarco, Vazquez-Marquez IV, and the second stage of the Super Six World Boxing Classic. There's more to this sport than just Mayweather and Pacquiao.
But no matter what face I try to put on this personally, in the back of my mind on March 13, I'm going to wonder what it would have felt like to watch the two best in the world go nose-to-nose for the referee's instructions.
102 comments
|
7 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Time to change the tag line again
Bad Left Hook: Paying for Mayweather-Malignaggi so you don’t have to.
This whole thing is a joke and makes me sick. I’m probably going to boycott both of those fights on principle, if they’re PPVs. Just an absolutely asinine point to sink the deal over.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
I'm boycotting...
…because they are both shitty fights.
I think an organized boycott
of these fights is in order. Someone get the website up and running.
by The Boxer Rebellion on Jan 7, 2010 3:12 PM EST up reply actions
BOYCOTT!!!
Every fighter has a game plan until he get's punched in the mouth.
-Mike
I know I won't be getting them.
It’s principle. They torpedoed the one fight everyone wants to see. Why should we reward them by paying for their lopsided, uninteresting replacement fights?
Sometimes the impossible can become possible if you're AWESOME!
by ZeroIndulgence on Jan 7, 2010 4:26 PM EST up reply actions
Two Thumbs Up SC.
Two Thumbs Down for everyone involved.
"Umm - it was - you know - umm - a good game. You know."
-Patrick Ewing
Definitely will not
pay to see either fight.
P.S. Good, smart writing.
Terrible, just terrible
What started out as a negotiation for what could have been the biggest event in boxing degenerated into a pissing contest between two millionaires who believe they’re bigger than the sport. They’ve conspired to rob the world of the pinnacle of all fights- the best vs. the best. More than anything, this is a slap in the face of boxing fans.
what could have been the biggest event in boxing
It’s not even just that — this would have been one of the very biggest sports events, period, in 2010.
Bad Left Hook
"If bulls**t was poetry, Ray 'Boom Boom' Mancini's name would be Shakespeare." -- Dennis Rappaport
Anyone who argues that, on paper,
this is anything less than the greatest superbowl or world series matchups is delusional. This had the potential to be a once-in-a-generation boxing event, the kind that spawns legions of new fans for the sport and gives it that desperately needed revitalization.
In the end, you’re exactly right. This whole thing has reinforced people’s negative impressions of boxing as a sport, and promotions as a whole.
Odd segue here, but Dana White’s hard-line stance on no co-promotion will most certainly get a massive bump because of this. Boxing had an opening here, and more than failing the fans, they failed the legacy of their own sport.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Also,
my sig-line has never been so appropriate.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
I'm all for a boycott too!
Can we organize a boycott against this crap?
I could tolerate watching Pac-Tim Bradley, but will probably wait for a re-play. I don’t see myself tuning in for Mayweather against Malignaggi even on reg. HBO though.
I still remember how surprised I was when the talk about Floyd-Manny began after Pacman demolished Cotto. I’m fairly new into boxing but had already found out that the big names duck other big names as a matter of course – and now, all of a sudden, one of those often-talked-about-but never-realised dream fights was going to be made! In all honesty, I was and still am on the ‘Floyd fears Manny’ bandwagon, but as March 13th drew closer and closer, I was actually starting to feel a little hopeful. Maybe, just maybe they manage to put this one together and we’ll end up seeing Mayweather and Pacquiao stare down in the middle of the ring.
I know who I am putting most blame on, but this sucks on so many levels it’s almost meaningless who’s to blame. The end result seems to be that we won’t see the best fight the best – not this time around, at least. Even if this fight did get made at some point down the road, it will still be tainted by what happened here.
by Monday Morning Martial Artist on Jan 7, 2010 3:23 PM EST reply actions
i dont see what the big deal is. sure its disappointing its not happening in march, but doesn’t mean its not happening ever. it can very well happen in july or november.
not to mention the fight was never signed or announced in the first place. i never got my hopes up. especially since floyd mayweather was part of the equation.
the talk of boycotting is hilarious. boycott assholes like france and ben and jerrys for supporting cop killers, not boxing because a fight hasn’t been made.
"Newspapermen ask dumb questions. They look up at the sun and ask if it is shining."
-Sonny Liston
@mikefareri on twitter.
i dont see what the big deal is. sure its disappointing its not happening in march, but doesn’t mean its not happening ever. it can very well happen in july or november.
It will never be the fight it could have been. If it happens in July or November, it means one of them has to cave. And then the question becomes, “Why didn’t you do that in January?” What will have changed their minds? They’ve turned off a lot of potential customers, people who aren’t even boxing fans but maybe could have been if not for their petty bullshit. Those people aren’t going to be easily convinced that they should care next time this comes up.
Bad Left Hook
"If bulls**t was poetry, Ray 'Boom Boom' Mancini's name would be Shakespeare." -- Dennis Rappaport
Also, remember Liddell/Wandy
I know it’s MMA, but this was a fight that had been hyped for years, and before it finally came to be both fighters suffered losses. Not to say that they were undefeated before, but it snapped their win streak and took some of the wind out of their sails. Thankfully, it turned out to be an amazing fight anyway, but it would have been so much better had it happened before their losses.
There’s something to be said for making the right fight at the right time.
chuck and wandy was about 2 years and 2 losses too late. this fight is going on months late. its not a big deal. talk to me summer time and if no progress has been made or no talks have resumed then they (everyone involved and boxing in general) would have missed the boat.
"Newspapermen ask dumb questions. They look up at the sun and ask if it is shining."
-Sonny Liston
@mikefareri on twitter.
i dont think so at all. you’re overreacting just a tad like everyone else. the same people who are interested in the fight in march will be just the same as people later in the year. the people who are supposedly turned off by what happens are not even statistically significant anyway.
i even think march was too early to have the fight anyway. the build up will be even greater if it happens later in the year.
not to compare the fighters involved but tyson vs holyfield happened about 6 years too late and it was still enormous and had just as much if not more intrigue had it happened in 1989 or 1990.
"Newspapermen ask dumb questions. They look up at the sun and ask if it is shining."
-Sonny Liston
@mikefareri on twitter.
It (Tyson-Holyfield) is a different situation, I think. But I do see what you’re saying. I think the build-up if and when they re-visit will and should be questioned greatly and never treated seriously until they’re actually at the weigh-in for the fight, but to each their own.
Mostly, my point is “Fuck this shit.”
Bad Left Hook
"If bulls**t was poetry, Ray 'Boom Boom' Mancini's name would be Shakespeare." -- Dennis Rappaport
way too early in the game to say fuck it.
like i said before. the fight was never on in the first place. if this happens after the fight is announced, maybe say, 2 weeks before the fight is scheduled then shit yea id be pissed off and embarrassed. but thats not the case, so im not.
"Newspapermen ask dumb questions. They look up at the sun and ask if it is shining."
-Sonny Liston
@mikefareri on twitter.
no one is suggested boycotting boxing
But refusing to buy pure garbage fights like Manny-Foreman and PBF-Malignaggi is a perfectly reasonable way for fans to make their feelings known.
by The Boxer Rebellion on Jan 7, 2010 3:59 PM EST up reply actions
well you do that if it floats your boat.
i’ll be watching the fights.
"Newspapermen ask dumb questions. They look up at the sun and ask if it is shining."
-Sonny Liston
@mikefareri on twitter.
Go watch them
Just don’t pay for them. I’d publicly advocate stealing this fight. They’ve stolen from us. Time to steal back.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
by Brickhaus on Jan 7, 2010 4:04 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs
the thing is
I hardly even WANT to watch PBF-Paulie. Manny-Kosher Krusher at least has some freak show value for the size differential.
by The Boxer Rebellion on Jan 7, 2010 4:08 PM EST up reply actions
If the parties involved lose out on money because of a public boycott of the fights
Then it creates an additional incentive for the fighters to actually make a fight the next time something like this happens. I’ve been saying this forever now, but as long as people keep buying shitty fights, the promoters will keep making shitty fights. If Mayweather waits until May instead and fights the Mosley-Berto winner, I’d buy that. If Pacquiao fights Bradley instead, I’d buy that. But it’s an affront to not make this fight and THEN make two crappy fights in it’s place. It’s adding insult to injury. It’s like making out with a hot chick and having her get you all worked up, then she handcuffs you to the bed, pulls a goat out of the bathroom and tries to make you screw the goat instead.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
by Brickhaus on Jan 7, 2010 4:02 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
lol
It’s like making out with a hot chick and having her get you all worked up, then she handcuffs you to the bed, pulls a goat out of the bathroom and tries to make you screw the goat instead.
Early candidate for Post of the Year.
by The Boxer Rebellion on Jan 7, 2010 4:07 PM EST up reply actions
If Mayweather waits until May instead and fights the Mosley-Berto winner
That’s what has got me steamed. You’re bailing from the biggest fight ever and you don’t even the decency to go give us the consolation prize?
It's double annoying to me
I mean, if it can’t be March 13, so what??? Mayweather wanted it to be in May anyway originally. It was moved up to March because of Philippines elections. He can still have a huge fight if he wants to. Just wait a few weeks to start a training camp, and if Mosley doesn’t come through (I have no idea why he wouldn’t), then you still have Malignaggi or someone else crappy as a backup plan, and Pac won’t fight again until September anyway.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
The more I think about the more annoyed I am.
What the hell? Why not wait for the only other fighter people are even moderately interested in watching you fight? #2 vs #3 in the P4P category at least has a ring to it.
Well,
it all depends on what the goat looks like. Beyond our histories of bad (no pun intended, or I would have drawn out the ahhh) relationships, the right fight at the right time is often a true thing, but so is the fact that if this fight does get made after the now proposed “replacement” fights, it’s likely that neither Manny nor Floyd will have their win streaks dented. If some of the hype has been lost and they each make less money, so what? On the other hand, if Mosley wins big against Berto and Manny (somehow I don’t think it will be Floyd) faces him after the Krusher and the boxing gods demand that Floyd face someone real——well, Manny/Floyd will still be a big fight if they meet after that. Life will continue. I agree whole-heartedly with boycotting lousy PPV’s.
by Don From Prov on Jan 7, 2010 4:37 PM EST up reply actions
Above is
a reply to brickhaus that did not obey the “reply” command.
by Don From Prov on Jan 7, 2010 4:38 PM EST up reply actions
No it worked right. Your reply is in line.
Bad Left Hook
"If bulls**t was poetry, Ray 'Boom Boom' Mancini's name would be Shakespeare." -- Dennis Rappaport
How does the saying go?
A pig with lipstick is still Sarah Palin? Or something like that?
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
Well Said SC.
This whole situation is incredibly disheartening. This was a golden opportunity to not only cement boxing’s existing fan base, but build new fans… and instead we get the botch job of all negotiations, so that once again we’re the laughing stock of the sporting world. This is really unbelievable, and the proposed new match-ups for both guys are so unappealing that it just rubs salt in the wounds.
At this point...
I sincerely hope PBF fights Matthew Hatton. I mean, if you’re going to extend a middle finger to boxing fans everywhere, you should REALLY do it.
by The Boxer Rebellion on Jan 7, 2010 4:00 PM EST reply actions
No damage done!
The damage, question marks, and red flags all point to Pacquiao. There is no explanation for not wanting to take a blood test especially when you say that you are afraid of needles and evidence shows other wise. You can’t defend that stance at all. Again " BOTH" fighter will be subject to the same type of testing,whether it be random or not. There is definitely something going on in that camp. Their residence is crazy especially with that amount of money on the line and you claim you aren’t doing anything. I mentioned this before.. Had it not been for that press conference after the fight with the bandages on Pacman’s ear " NO" one would have known that Cotto actually damaged his ear canal during that fight. The point is this, during that fight Pacman was eating those punches and didn’t even seemed phased at all. Now I know for a fact from having a ear infection that it’s one of the most annoying feeling ever. Your ear feels like it’s about to explode. For that guy to keep getting hit in that ear and not seem affected is crazy. " DAMN THE JOKES"
If you always thought what you thought, then you wouldn't think what you knew.
I think we have a new winner of the "Golota Guy" award for next year
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
If you honestly believe that Mayweather, who has ducked every single great fighter of his generation, will not face any reputational damage for refusing to face Pacquiao, you’re crazy. I’m sorry. I don’t care whether you believe he’s in the right. I don’t care if you think Pac’s on roids. Look, I think Mayweather’s the bad guy here, and I think Pac’s clean. But even I realize that this does damage to Pacquiao’s reputation. That’s why he’s suing, although defamation suits are usually just shutting the barn door after the horse is gone. Again, for a lot of people after this fiasco, Pac looks like a cheater. For the rest, Mayweather looks like a coward. Both have been burned, fairly or unfairly. And boxing suffers for it.
by jmag on Jan 7, 2010 4:10 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
"who has ducked every single great fighter of his generation"
Give him credit for facing Corrales and Castillo. Castillo was probably the strongest of the LW titlists at the time when he moved up to face him, and Corrales was even a betting favorite. I still wish he had faced Casamayor and Freitas even at 130 though. He’s never cleaned out a weight class, but then again, neither has Pacquiao.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
Hatton looked like crap at 147 previously
If the fight had been at 140, sure, but the result of that fight was a pretty foregone conclusion.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
by Brickhaus on Jan 7, 2010 4:41 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah
But Floyd couldn’t make that weight anymore.
So why not fight a great welterweight?
Instead of making someone come up in weight and blah blah blah
"Honey i forgot to duck" - Jack Dempsey
by Drunken cutman on Jan 7, 2010 4:47 PM EST up reply actions
Like who?
Who should he have fought instead of Hatton?
Mosley?
that would have been amazing! Or Cotto would have been a really good fight. Margarito would have been easy and a damn good win.
"Honey i forgot to duck" - Jack Dempsey
by Drunken cutman on Jan 7, 2010 4:50 PM EST up reply actions
Was everybody available and willing to fight at that time?
Would it have made him the most money? There’s factors there other then what fans think should be the best fight for someone?
Again, if this were a onetime occurrence, your excuses might be worth considering. But it is not a onetime occurrence, it has happened consistently for seven straight years.
Yes that is a wise and useful aphorism, but you are abusing it. Seven years of consistent correlation certainly suggests causation very strongly. Perhaps you have an alternative theory of causation, but I doubt that it will hold up to Ockham’s Razor.
lol
No I’m not abusing it. I’m using it just as it’s meant to be used.
I’m willing to bet you don’t know the circumstances behind all of the fights that never happened or why they never happened. It’s much easier to assume it’s all his fault.
In that case it appears that you do not understand it. While correlation does not prove causation, it is always evidence of causation. So, when correlation is observed, the appropriate response is to tentatively conclude that causation is probable while investigating whether something else might be the true cause and then weighing the likelihood of each possible explanation.
Here, I am at a loss to think of any alternate explanation for Mayweather’s consistent, seven-year-long failure to make the best fights, if it isn’t the fault of Mayweather himself. You might be able to explain one fight here, one fight there, by blaming it on other people or on luck, but it strains credulity to suppose that bad luck explains seven straight years of the same thing happening over and over again, or that many different fighters, all acting independently, all happened to screw Floyd over one after the other. There is no rhetorical aphorism that undermines the only logical conclusion that can be drawn from those facts.
it is always evidence of causation.
That’s just wrong. Flat out wrong.
So, when correlation is observed, the appropriate response is to tentatively conclude that causation is probable…
Probable yes, meaning that there is a chance it could be the cause, not that it is the cause until you find out otherwise.
You might be able to explain one fight here, one fight there, by blaming it on other people or on luck, but it strains credulity to suppose that bad luck explains seven straight years of the same thing happening over and over again, or that many different fighters, all acting independently, all happened to screw Floyd over one after the other.
That’s not what I’m saying at all. There is a middle ground. Was it Floyd’s fault sometimes? Yes. Was it other people’s fault sometimes? Yes. To blame it all on Floyd is just too simplistic and honestly is not fair to him at all.
Now it seems that you don’t understand what the word “evidence” means. You contradicted your own “flat out wrong” statement in your very next sentence.
You also seem to have a very low standard for holding people responsible for their actions. Yes, there were contributing factors in each individual case where he failed to make a fight he should have made. But he cannot blame anyone else for the consistent, uniform, seven-year-long pattern of failure. If external circumstances were really the explanation, then he wouldn’t have failed to make the fights every single time for seven straight years.
by taco pal on Jan 7, 2010 6:17 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I contradicted nothing but I’ll leave that alone because this portion of our little debate really has nothing to do with boxing.
I don’t know why you think I don’t hold mayweather responsible for the lack of top opponents. I do hold him responsible but he’s not solely responsible. Key word solely. It’s not fair to lay it all on his feet.
by erod on Jan 8, 2010 8:07 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Thankyou Brickhaus!
No one listens when I say this!
"Honey i forgot to duck" - Jack Dempsey
by Drunken cutman on Jan 7, 2010 4:46 PM EST up reply actions
plenty of people have said it
I’m one of them. But I do still give him credit for Hatton. They were both unbeaten fighters and reigning, real world champions. I don’t think it’s an amazing win, but it was a good win.
Bad Left Hook
"If bulls**t was poetry, Ray 'Boom Boom' Mancini's name would be Shakespeare." -- Dennis Rappaport
Yup
I sure agree with you a lot!
"Honey i forgot to duck" - Jack Dempsey
by Drunken cutman on Jan 7, 2010 4:49 PM EST up reply actions
I agree with this. There wasn’t anything wrong with the Hatton fight, but so what? What we have here is a topic where Mayweather’s boosters always try to “move the goalposts.” To meet minimum expectations, it isn’t enough for a fighter to sometimes fight acceptable fights. What great fighters are expected to do is to fight the best fights, at least sometimes. Mayweather has never done that.
If Floyd had fought Hatton in the context of a career where he also made a bunch of better matchups, then that would be perfectly fine. When fighting Hatton at 147 is the best matchup you can point to over a span of seven years, well then you’ve got some explaining to do.
Well….DLH may not have been against the very best…but you can’t fault him for going for the payday….
See SC’s post for why the Judah fight….
And it’s worth noting that Arum rejected a Cotto fight againt Floyd…
140 was probably the one weight class where he didn’t really fight anybody of note…
I don’t fault him for the DLH fight, or for any particular individual fight. I fault him for having had seven years to make the best fight available to him at least once and still failing to do it.
Mosley,
Cotto, Margarito, Clottey; to name but a few. We already did this, remember? Please let’s not let this turn into cyclical reiteration.
"Honey i forgot to duck" - Jack Dempsey
by Drunken cutman on Jan 7, 2010 6:05 PM EST up reply actions
Hatton (at 140), Tszyu, Casamayor
Doesn’t really matter though.
People forget that there was a lot of noise for Mayweather to fight Hatton when he was at 140 as well. Ended up working out for the better for him anyway, but it was there.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
It’s not cyclical. I was speaking of 140 and none of those are 140 pounders.
Hatton should have happened at 140. I already said it’s his fault he never got any good opponents at that weight class.
Mosley never wanted to fight mayweather until now. Floyds being trying to make that fight for years.
Clottey would have been good but cmon there’s no money there really.
Margarito could have happened if bob arum would have flexed on the date. But he didn’t.
by erod on Jan 8, 2010 8:14 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, “ducked every single fighter” isn’t fair. The right way to put it is that Mayweather has consistently failed to fight the best opponent available to him for the last seven years straight. Not all of his matchups during those seven years was bad, but he hasn’t once made the best possible matchup in that time, and that simply can’t be a coincidence.
but he hasn’t once made the best possible matchup in that time, and that simply can’t be a coincidence.
But of course it’s always his fault though, right?
Well, you know, the one constant through Floyd’s seven consecutive years of failing to make the biggest fights has been Floyd.
If it were just two or three years, it would be fair to entertain excuses or attribute it to bad luck or other actors, but after seven years of consistent results, I think it’s fair to start assigning blame to the man himself.
Okay, that’s a better way to put it. I didn’t mean he had only fought cans, only that he had never fought the best. And erod, I put that on him. If a fighter misses one or two chances to fight the best at the right time, it could be scheduling issues, or whatever else. But it’s happened too consistently to be anything other than an issue with Floyd.
He tries to make fights
He gets turned down too, but nobody ever notices that. And when it does get reported that a fight didn’t get made, people automatically assume it’s his fault anyway.
No middle ground?
Seriously man. You’re either one extreme or the other.
Irony much?
"Honey i forgot to duck" - Jack Dempsey
by Drunken cutman on Jan 7, 2010 6:05 PM EST up reply actions
I give Floyd this: He meant to fight Judah, who was the king and real champion at 147, in April ’06. Judah losing to Baldomir screwed up the significance of that fight, obviously, but Floyd DID intend to fight The Man at 147, and after he went through with Judah for the money anyway, he did fight Baldomir.
The neat thing about Floyd is you can kind of rationalize just about everyone he’s ever fought. I don’t think that’s a fluke, either. This guy was for money, this guy was an opponent to see how he’d feel at a new weight, this guy held a title, this guy was the real champion, etc.
Bad Left Hook
"If bulls**t was poetry, Ray 'Boom Boom' Mancini's name would be Shakespeare." -- Dennis Rappaport
mayweather
i truly believe mayweather is afraid of not just losing…but losing badly.
Great post SC
really confused how I got here after clicking on a Boxrec link but now I truly believe some of the best writing in boxing is on this site
Bruce Seldon > Ali
BoxRec simulates Google News on their front page and at the moment we happen to be the top site listed.
Bad Left Hook
"If bulls**t was poetry, Ray 'Boom Boom' Mancini's name would be Shakespeare." -- Dennis Rappaport
Foreman out as potential opponent?
Michael Marley says so.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
Excellent post. I think another reason that this sucks is that the Winner of Mosely – Berto could fight the winner of the Pac – Mayweather fight in what would be the second super – fight of the year. Am I incorrect in think that it would be a welterweight unification bout?
It would almost certainly pair the #1 and #2 ranked welterweights in the world if it happened that way, which would make for a real world champion again at the weight.
Bad Left Hook
"If bulls**t was poetry, Ray 'Boom Boom' Mancini's name would be Shakespeare." -- Dennis Rappaport
I think you posted too early Scott
Arum’s the only one that mentioned the fight is off so far and he’s known for saying crazy things. It’s not over until they sign contracts with other fighters and do not pull a Haye. Even in the LA Times blog, they mention:
Another source, however, disputed that description of events, and said the fighters still have time to strike a deal before a “business deadline.”
I would be thrilled to be wrong.
Bad Left Hook
"If bulls**t was poetry, Ray 'Boom Boom' Mancini's name would be Shakespeare." -- Dennis Rappaport
So what do we as boxing fans do now? We move on. We look at upcoming fights such as Mosley-Berto, Luevano-Lopez, Gamboa-Mtagwa, Valero-DeMarco, Vazquez-Marquez IV, and the second stage of the Super Six World Boxing Classic.
Very well put, Scott. Frankly, I’m so sickened by the ugly pie these idiots baked up that the fight has already lost a lot of luster for me. Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao are both fine fighters, but they aren’t bigger thanBoxing On the other hand, I think if anyone profits from this farce now it might do actual damage to the sport.
Maybe the collective lesson these clowns should take away from this is that when you jump down into the sewer during the buildup, your payday is going to disappear. It’s a sign of how low the sport can sink when only winner of this affair is Paulie “Boxing is Bullshit” Malignaggi.
"This fight'll be the nastiest thing you'll ever see. I been sober for six weeks, and that makes me vicious."
-- Randall 'Tex' Cobb
They may not be bigger than boxing
but I think to most people (not most people here, most people), they are boxing.
but I think to most people (not most people here, most people), they are boxing.
Personally, I’ve long given up caring what "most people" think about boxing. What’s the point? I am a fan, not a caretaker of the whole damn sport.
Boxing writer: "Iran, what are you going to do when you retire?"
Iran Barkley: "Rob your house"
For me it's like this...
Floyd and his team are serious when they say they think Pacquiao is on the Juice. I mean, that’s the only explanation why they tried to do that random blood testing shtick in the 1st place.
They want the fight but unless they prove without a doubt that Pacquiao is squeaky clean with random blood tests, no fight bro.
If I wake up tomorrow and see that the world has ended, then that means God has finally granted my prayers.
GO Armageddon!!!
To suggest, or believe that anabolic steroids,
or any other kind of steroids can enhance a fighter’s abilities to the point where he becomes dangerous to fight is really quite ludicrous. Blood doping, and other forms of aerobic-enhancing stimulant/enhancement methods have been discussed at painful length here and elsewhere.
The bottom line is the steroid accusations had nothing to do with keeping the fight fair. It had to do with trying to discredit Manny and give Floyd an out. So far, Floyd’s 2-2, which is sad considering all he did was slander the greatest fighter in boxing and probably won’t get called to task for it.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Yeah
Some people act as though steroids are like “Popeye spinach,” usually people who don’t know a damn thing about them. Coke is a better single-night performance enhancer then steroids are. So is weed, for that matter.
"This fight'll be the nastiest thing you'll ever see. I been sober for six weeks, and that makes me vicious."
-- Randall 'Tex' Cobb
That Floyd was able to play off of this public ignorance
is the saddest part of the whole debacle. Many people (I disagree with some here who think it’s most) will be swayed to his ‘side’ of the situation because of the absolutely horrific job the big sports leagues have done in ‘educating’ the public about the realities of steroids and other PED’s.
It’s a sad day for boxing, and competitive sports generally.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
It's unprecedented in sports
to refuse to compete simply because you suspect your opponent is on the juice.
Bad Left Hook - The SB Nation boxing blog
"Baseball is played on the field, not on a calculator."
i agree with the once in a generation or even 2 generations bit. that last part might be over-exaggeration. it was def the megafight for a generation. two guys who have looked nigh unbeatable in a fight that would have in that word we love to use, “transcended” the sport and hardcore fans.
Gatti. Dekkers. Pele. Aoki. Kang. Vanderlei. Basillio. Harry Greb.
by theworldsoldestsport on Jan 18, 2010 11:45 PM EST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
