|09-09-2012, 12:02 AM||#1|
Join Date: May 2010
Quoted: 0 Post(s)Rep Power: 8
Total Points: 23,425.01
Demarco is the better fighter, right?
I haven't been watching boxing for the past 1 1/2 or 2 years (sport has gone to **** and fighters turned into ducks who just run their mouths, everyones waiting for their targets to get old) but what the f*ck has happened?
When I was still watching Boxing, Demarco (despite his loss to Edwin) looked like a sharp fighter overall. I saw his fight with kid diamond before his loss and loved his right hook. His straight left has always been no joke either. I was actually surprised that Linares fight was as competitive as it was since I was high off Demarco, and Linares is just a little guy, but Antonio pulled it off. That was a against a Freddy Roach fighter too, and I'm almost positive his entire stable is on that special juice because Linares started down at 125 didn't he? He was fast and strong at 135 early in the fight, but the truth caught up with him. He's not big enough for that division. He was fast and strong early, but again, the body didn't lie. He couldn't handle it for 12 rounds. The only reason why he would ever believe he belonged at 135 is because for whatever reason he felt stronger and faster than before and he looked it too.
So where is all this doubt in Demarco's abilities stemming from? I heard Broner was a hot commodity but I saw his fight with Ponce on some under card a long ass time ago and it was a flat out stinker. Ponce was on top of him early if I remember correctly.
Molina on the other hand fought Hank Lundry on ESPN and ended up knocking him out yeah, but Molina fought like garbage. Wide punches, unorthodox fighting style, not the sharpest of defenses.
If anything Broner would have an easier time with Molina. So am I missing something? The better fighter won tonight imo, but again I've missed a lot.
|Share This With Friends|
|demarco, fighter, right?|