Floyd Mayweather's 2013 Plans Will Cement His Legacy in the Ring Sans Pacquiao
After the once-dominant Manny Pacquiao suffered two straight losses in 2012, a Pacquiao-Floyd Mayweather super showdown went out the window with them. Although nothing could help cement each fighters legacy more than a win over one another, Mayweather's proposed 2013 plans will still boost his legacy as his career winds down.
Mayweather has not officially named who he will fight in 2013, but it is widely speculated that he will meet the interim WBC welterweight title holder Robert Guerrero on May 4. If successful against Guerrero, then a showdown with one of boxing's top rising stars, Saul "Canelo" Alvarez, will follow in September (per BoxingScene.com).
Alvarez is also speculated to fight on the same May 4 card as Mayweather, likely against Miguel Cotto or Austin Trout, and will need to be victorious as well in order for the September showdown to take place.
Mayweather choosing a tough, seasoned opponent in Guerrero and a fighter thought by many to be one of the faces of boxing once Mayweather and Pacquiao are retired in Alvarez as his next opponents is a great thing for the legacy that many fans question.
If Mayweather can come out on top in both speculated bouts this year, then his legacy will receive a big boost, and he could retire at the end of the year and easily be known as his generation's best.
This is in contrast to Pacquiao, who is said to be fighting an April tuneup bout before taking on Juan Manuel Marquez in September for a fifth time (per BoxingScene.com).
Even if Pacquiao is victorious against Marquez in a possible fifth bout, then the series will be right back where it was before Marquez's vicious knockout of Pacquiao—an even series.
Pacquiao fighting Marquez for a fifth time will only help Mayweather's case that he is his generation's best pound-for-pound fighter, leaving Pacquiao behind in a distant second.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?