Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why do people think Thomas Hearns would beat Floyd so easily?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by -MAKAVELLI- View Post
    on NSB, posters also think that noone could every possibly beat Floyd
    well that should tell you that we should stop asking questions about floyd because most of the answers we get are ******ed.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by The Big Dunn View Post
      well that should tell you that we should stop asking questions about floyd because most of the answers we get are ******ed.


      like ESPN's basketball list

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by larryxxx. View Post
        Floyd is better then Benitez tho
        True........

        Comment


        • #14
          The 78' reach and the powerful jab always made me think this guy would be all wrong for Floyd.

          Comment


          • #15
            Out of Hearns, Leonard, and Duran I think Hearns reach, piston like jab, and right hand would've given Floyd the most trouble. I think Pryor would've given Floyd a hell of a fight at 135.

            Comment


            • #16
              Horrible style matchup for Floyd plus Hearns is ****ing massive.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by -MAKAVELLI- View Post
                like ESPN's basketball list
                LOL. I responded to your post. I was happy Kareem finally got the respect he deserved. Frankly, he should probably be #1.

                But Lebron at #3 and Curry and Paul at 23 and 34 was just ****ing crazy. I mean I love Curry, the wife and kids watch with me and we all go crazy. He is must see TV no doubt. best shooter I've ever seen.

                But better than Isiah Thomas.

                I hate ESPN!!!

                Comment


                • #18
                  It's real simple, every decade you go back you add bonuses. If the fight is in black & white, they're at least twice as good as the boxers around today. That is because until colour they weren't able to capture the technique/skills exhibited in the bout properly. Something to do with frequency but back in the 30s they moved around the ring like they were on ice.

                  No one can really explain this phenomenon but it's correct and if you disagree, you don't know shit about boxing.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by The Big Dunn View Post
                    LOL. I responded to your post. I was happy Kareem finally got the respect he deserved. Frankly, he should probably be #1.

                    But Lebron at #3 and Curry and Paul at 23 and 34 was just ****ing crazy. I mean I love Curry, the wife and kids watch with me and we all go crazy. He is must see TV no doubt. best shooter I've ever seen.

                    But better than Isiah Thomas.

                    I hate ESPN!!!


                    as if you didnt have enough reasons to root against the guy...i will enjoy watching ESPN spin another LeBron failure in the playoffs this year

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by D-MiZe View Post
                      It's real simple, every decade you go back you add bonuses. If the fight is in black & white, they're at least twice as good as the boxers around today. That is because until colour they weren't able to capture the technique/skills exhibited in the bout properly. Something to do with frequency but back in the 30s they moved around the ring like they were on ice.

                      No one can really explain this phenomenon but it's correct and if you disagree, you don't know shit about boxing.
                      You think Mayweather beats Tommy Hearns, D-Mize?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP