The Instigator
Zuko
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
randolph7
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Floyd Mayweather is avoiding a fight with Manny Pacquiao

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/5/2011 Category: Sports
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,092 times Debate No: 17780
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)

 

Zuko

Pro

Good day to every one. This is y first time here, so please bear with me. I will try to do best. The debate in question is; that Floyd Mayweather does not want to fight, is avoiding a fight, with Manny Pacquiao. I will argue for this position, while Con will argue that Mayweather is avoiding a fight with/ is ducking Manny Pacquiao. Please keep it interesting, logical and we may stray a bit from the tic but as long as it is somewhat connected or supports our argument then why not.
1st rd is for acceptance, 2nd is for arguments, 3rd rebuttal, 4th rd is conclusions. Hoping for a great debate. Also, as much as possible lets avoid semantics and provide logical or rational arguments. Thanks a lot
randolph7

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
Zuko

Pro

I thank my opponent for accepting this challenge; Good luck to both of us and I hope this would be a fun debate. First let me state that neither I or my opponent really does know what Floyd is thinking or what his intentions are, only Floyd knows that. However, I will argue that Floyd does not want to fight or is avoiding fighting Pacquiao because of what he (Floyd) has shown in the past two years or so. I believe Floyd is avoiding a fight with Pacquiao because;
Mayweather and his camp made accusations that Manny Pacquiao uses steroids (1), just so he could ask for Random Blood Testing (RBT) knowing Pacquiao, Roach and Arum doesnt want it and doesnt want Mayweather ordering them anything. Roach even said that agreeing to RBT would be like giving away the first two rounds to floyd (psychologically).
Pacquiao was the only fighter he accused of steroids, after Floyd's 41 fight,s only Pacquaio was accused of steroids, even before Mayweather's accusation, no one accused Pacquiao of taking PEDs, and excluding Mayweather and his camp, no other CREDIBLE source has accused Pacquiao of steroids and no one, not even Mayweather stood by their accusations. Pacquaio was wrongly accused even if; 1. Floyd cant prove it, as shown by Mayweather intentionally ignoring a court ordered deposition (2), 2. Manny hasnt tested positive for anything ever, 3. Pacquiao wasn't even known to be associated with drug dealers, or users, unlike Floyd.(3)
Pacquiao even went further and accomodated Mayweathers request agreeing to testing (even though he doesnt want it, and even though he doesn't have to) just so they could fight (4). In fact if we examine it further, two of the reasons Floyd wants RBT to be done in all of his fights is for 1. To have an even playing field, and 2. To clean up the sport. But, how could it be an even playing field if Floyd was the one using PED's (8). And how can he claim to clean up the sport? What measures did he take, drug organizations did he speak to, sports commissions did he approach, lawmakers did he convince to change testing procedures for PEDs in boxing? None. Hence, what can be the reason for asking for RBT? It is carefully constructed ploy to avoid Pacquiao.
Floyd always says; "Just take the test". Yet when Pacquiao agreed to testing up to 14 days before the fight. We think that the fight would go on? No, floyd insisted testing the day up to the fight. However, in floyd's fight vs mosley, the cut off for RBT was 18 days before fight, way before Manny's agreed upon up to 14 days. Why is his 18 day cut off with Mosley acceptable but Pacquiao's 14 day cut off not acceptable? (5)
Floyd announced Ortiz fight after Pacquiao announced Marquez 3 fight, even though Floyd and Ortiz have already talked about the fight way before Manny announcement. Ortiz even announced it, even though floyd did not confirm it right away. This may mean when he announced his fight with Ortiz and critics assail him for not fighting Pacquiao, he could always say Manny is not available (7)
When the 2nd negotiations broke down between Floyd and Manny, Arum says there were negotiations that took place and even De la hoya said there was and the fight is nearly signed, but Floyd's camp said there were no negotiations that took place. However HBO's Greenburg confirmed there were negotiations that took place (6), what's unusual is that a usually outspoken guy like Floyd and his whole camp was unusually silent about the whole incident.
If we are to examine Floyd Mayweather's actions, during all these, He may say he wants to fight but his actions tell us otherwise. And we all know what they say about actions versus words.
Thank you all for reading.

References:
1).
2). http://www.thefightnetwork.com...
3). http://www.examiner.com...
4).
5). http://www.examiner.com...
6). http://beatsboxingmayhem.com...
7). http://www.examiner.com...
http://www.badlefthook.com...
http://www.pacquiaovsmayweather.net...
8). http://bleacherreport.com...
randolph7

Con

I thank my opponent for allowing me to discuss this controversial topic.

To clarify, as mentioned by Zuko in the comments, “Con should argue that floyd is NOT avoiding and or ducking a fight with manny pacquiao.” This will be the position I will take. As per the defined structure in R1, I will make my arguments here and make my rebuttals to Pro’s R2 arguments in R3.

I agree with my opponent that neither of us are mind readers and so cannot know what Mayweather’s true intentions are.

Either Mayweather wants to fight Manny or he doesn’t. If he does then he is not avoiding the fight. I’d say the following points lead one to believe he wants to fight Manny:

1. As my opponent states, “… two of the reasons Floyd wants RBT to be done in all of his fights is for 1. To have an even playing field, and 2. To clean up the sport. “ Floyd wants a clean fight. Even if Floyd’s past has been colorful there’s nothing wrong with wanting a clean fight even if it seems over the top to others. The fact that he has put such effort into assuring it’s clean leads me to believe that he really does want a fight.

2. Mr. Mayweather says it best himself, “"I don't duck or dodge anyone. This is for the fans. This is for the Pacquiao fans too. Do I want the Pacquiao fight? Absolutely, if that is what the fans want. I want to give the fans what they want, but I have to take it one step at a time. I cannot overlook Victor Ortiz.[2]"

3. Floyd has a no loss record and so has nothing much to worry about from Manny. The bull doesn’t give flies buzzing around his undivided. No, he swats them away.

Thank you. I look forward to your reply.

Sources:
[1] http://www.boxingnews24.com...
[2] http://www.ballerstatus.com...

Debate Round No. 2
Zuko

Pro

I thank my opponent for his arguments and Ill be making my rebuttal based on his arguments in R2.
First I'd like to point out that while my opponent admitted that both of us cannot read Floyd's mind, neither
of us can also predict the future. Hence, when you read something like "they will eventually fight", is just pure opinion.

Con's first argument is that; "Floyd wants a clean fight. Even if Floyd's past has been colorful there's
nothing wrong with wanting a clean fight even if it seems over the top to others. The fact that he has put such
effort into assuring it's clean leads me to believe that he really does want a fight."
-- I believe when you want to fight someone, you'll do anything to make it happen. In this case, Floyd did just the
opposite. Instead of making the negotiations easier and just fight, he ADDED an obstacle by accusing his
opponent of cheating AND adding an invasive test that is not at all required by the governing sports
commission. And I have to disagree that Floyd wants it to be a clean fight because how about his reported use
of xylocaine? Pacquiao never has been linked to PEDs, before Floyd, yet Floyd was previously linked to
xylocaine even before Pacquiao. Is it a fair and clean fight if Floyd can use xylocaine? Xylocaine isnt
reportedly tested by Nevada commission, where Floyd has been fighting the last few years. While Pacquiao has
been fighting in Nevada and Texas the last few years, and has been tested by both commissions.

Mr. Mayweather says it best himself, ""I don't duck or dodge anyone. This is for the fans. This is for the
Pacquiao fans too. Do I want the Pacquiao fight? Absolutely, if that is what the fans want. I want to give the
fans what they want, but I have to take it one step at a time. I cannot overlook Victor Ortiz.[2]"
- What is the worth of Mayweather's words? Whenever he says "I fight for the fans", He then turns around and
says he fights for money and that the fans dont pay the bills (1), Floyd keeps on pointing at Pacquiao's 3
professional losses, the last of which happened 6 years ago, but in the same source provided by my opponent,
Floyd says; "I also want to say congratulations to Victor Ortiz. It's not easy to bounce back from a crucial
loss," Money May said. "He bounced back like a true champion. I take my hat off to him." Which is which? A loss is a loss, no matter who the fighter.

Floyd has a no loss record and so has nothing much to worry about from Manny.
- While Floyd does have no losses professionally, it is of no importance to this debate. It doesnt matter how
many losses you have, as long as you are willing to fight. A zero loss record is nothing new and not unique in boxing. My opponent also goes on to share that "Floyd has nothing much to worry about from Manny", this is purely the opinion of my opponent. It is his right to speculate that Floyd doesnt worry about Manny, just as it is my right to say that Floyd IS worried about Manny. The difference is how you prove your suspicions/speculations.

I have provided videos and links to Floyd's past actions that lead us to believe he doesn't want to fight
Manny. While my opponent just relies on Floyd's words, I talked about his past actions and behavior. Of course he will say he wont duck or doge anyone, of course he will say he will clean up boxing, of course he will say he wants a clean and fair fight. But what is he showing? What is his actions telling us? Using xylocaine fair? Weighing 2 pounds over weight against a lightweight (Marquez) fair!? Having the veracity of accusing a lawmaker of cheating without any proof AND having the nerve to snub the very platform to prove his accusations fair?? While it is not wrong to believe a
person when he says something, we must also consider the source. Mayweather has NO credibility whatsoever to have us just "take his word for it". Remember this is the same guy who cannot go to a single day in court for a deposition because he says he is "busy with training" but can go out partying every night, burn 100 dollar bills in the process, punch bouncers and such. No, when Mayweather says something, we should take it, not with a grain, but
a sack of salt.
Thank you everyone for reading. I look forward to my opponent's rebuttal of my arguments in rd 2.

Source:
1
randolph7

Con

My opponent has shown nothing but speculation as to whether he wants to fight. He says he wants to fight. His manager says he wants to fight. Without showing any kind of proof to the contrary my opponent cannot and did not show Floyd was avoiding the fight with Pacquiao.
Debate Round No. 3
Zuko

Pro

A my opponent said; We both do not really know what is on Floyd's mind, so in essence we are both speculating or in my case, extrapolating based on Floyd's past actions. My arguments weren't rebutted by my opponent, he just said it was all speculations. Meanwhile, his whole argument was based on Floyd's words, just because Floyd said so. Yet when I destroyed Floyd's credibility, my opponent did not rebut or challenge it. So, for the voters, it all comes down to words versus actions. Bottom line, Floyd says contradicting things, but does another. Thank you all for reading, and I thank my opponent for accepting the debate.
randolph7

Con

I want to thank my opponent for this debate, I can see my opponent is very passionate about the topic.

First I'd like to summarize my opponent's case and my rebuttals to it. There were many contentions made, so I've organized it into three main points:

1. Floyd is asking for testing to avoid fight
While certainly his actions are not consistent across fights, there are simply too many variables to adequately determine the reason why Floyd is more aggressively seeking testing in this one. I believe it is for the reasons Floyd says it is, unless Pro can prove otherwise (and he hasn't).

2. Floyd's past actions
Floyd has certainly had dubious actions and words. Maybe he's doped before maybe not; Floyd is unpredictable.

3. Floyd using PEDs
Neither WADA or the USADA test for xylocaine. Apparently, they aren't concerned it's being used as a PED. So I think this point is irrelevant.

But passion aside, this debate really boils down to whether Pro can prove that "Floyd Mayweather is avoiding a fight with Manny Pacquiao"; I contend he hasn't. Sure, Floyd who has certainly done and said many contradictory things. But if Floyd's actions and words are inconsistent then how can we possibly determine what his intentions are. And whether Floyd is avoiding the fight or not really comes down to Floyd's intentions which are ultimately unknowable. I contend if know one knows Floyd's intentions then the resolution cannot be proven.

Thank you, Vote Con
Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Zuko 6 years ago
Zuko
Lol, yeah. Was busy at work, but I didnt want or forfeit. I would have written a longer conclusion yet, I got the jist of what I want to say in round 4.
Posted by randolph7 6 years ago
randolph7
Wow. You got in there with what like 30 seconds to spare? :0) When I saw 6 mins left I thought for sure you were forfeiting.
Posted by randolph7 6 years ago
randolph7
That's fine I just wanted to be sure I understood what my position was. I kinda figured that; just checking.
Posted by Zuko 6 years ago
Zuko
You are correct randolph. Con should argue that floyd is NOT avoiding and or ducking a fight with manny pacquiao. Thanks for pointing that out. Sorry for the confusion, are we still on for the debate? If not just post comment to cancel (can I cancel a debate?)
Posted by jm_notguilty 6 years ago
jm_notguilty
This should be fun.
Posted by randolph7 6 years ago
randolph7
Maybe I've missed something but it seems like your defined pro and con positions are the same. What exactly is the positions being argued here, because I'm confused!
Posted by BlackVoid 6 years ago
BlackVoid
Floyd is definitely scared, but Pacquiao isn't helping the situation. If he really thinks drawing a couple samples of blood a month before the fight will weaken him, he's stupid. However, even if he did agree to the blood test, Mayweather would just find another excuse to not fight him. He's too scared to tarnish his record and prefers to fight noobs who have no chance against him.
No votes have been placed for this debate.