Sullivan Barrera Turned Down Offer To Fight Sergey Kovalev, per Mike Coppinger

Floyd and Ward are boring, cheating DIVA boxers who cherry picked the majority of their careers. You can't even compare them to a boxer who fought Gary Russell Jr in his third pro fight, or to a boxer who offered to fight Artur Beterbiev as a fricken tune-up fight. There is no comparison. Plus, it's not about how much criticism someone gets, it's about who deserves or doesn't deserve the criticism they get. In other words, which boxers are getting treated fairly and objectively based on their careers? So when you compare GGG, Kovalev, and Lomachenko to Floyd and Ward, it's apples and oranges. They all get criticism, yes, but only some of them deserve the criticism they get. Some of the criticism is objective, fair criticism, and some of it is biased, unfair criticism. You're saying GGG, one of the most humble, most entertaining action boxers of the last decade, gets less criticism than Floyd, one of the most arrogant, least action-boxers in the history of the sport who is also a repeat woman-beater... well no sh1t, I would hope GGG gets less criticism than Floyd. That would only be logical. That's the nuance you don't seem to understand within this discussion. Boxers like GGG are good for boxing in every area where boxers like Floyd and Ward have been awful for boxing. If the sport was only full of boxers like GGG, it would be the most popular sport in the world. If the sport was only full of boxers like Floyd and Ward, it would be less popular than ping pong. Don't you understand that? So yes, GGG may get less criticism than Floyd, but the fact that it's even close tells you there is major bias at play. On the merits, it shouldn't even be comparison. Now, if you want to compare apples and apples, and make somewhat more fair comparisons, then you should compare the Klitschkos during their primes to Floyd during his run at welterweight, but even then, the Klitschkos fought all their mandatories, and didn't cherry pick fights. But, if there is any somewhat fair comparison, it is between the dominant Klitschkos, who the refs let hold a lot, and dominant Floyd, who the refs and judges and boxing establishment also protected. Style wise, Ward is also a good comparison, except while the Klitschkos dominated a division for a decade and fought all comers, Ward was cherry picking and retiring off and on and so on. The Klitschkos have like 50 fights each, Ward has 30. But style wise, that's another fair comparison. But if you look at how the fanbase that hates on GGG, Lomachenko, and Kovalev talks about Floyd and Ward, verses how they talk about the Klitschkos, you will see a huge double standard. That's the point. And then some posters will even bring up Lomachenko, GGG, and Kovalev as examples of boxers who are only popular because they're "white." And they will even mention Pacquiao in that group, even though he's not white. That's how biased some of these posters are. And yet, when you bring up the fact that if people were only rooting for white boxers, how come the Klitschkos, the most dominant white boxers of the last two decades, are not nearly as popular as GGG, Kovalev, or Lomachenko, these biased posters have no response. Because the truth is it's not about skin color to GGG fans, it's about exciting, clean boxers who will fight the best. TL;DR version... GGG, Kovalev, and Lomachenko fans are fans of exciting, clean boxers who fight the best, regardless of skin color. That's why they like those three fighters who happen to be white, but not the Klitschkos who are also white. On the other hand, Floyd and Ward fans seem to be fans of black skin color regardless of excitement or clean boxing or fighting the best. That's why they like any black boxer, no matter how much of a cheat or cherry picker they are. So there really is a big difference there. It's the opposite of what you seem to think. The double standard is not happening on the side of GGG fans, it's happening on the other side. This is what I mean by giving him an unfair bump. Loma fought russell in his 3rd fight because he turned pro at such a late age. When Loma was 26 when he fought Russell. when floyd was 26 he had fought castillo 2x, hernandez, corrales, and was champion in 2 divisions. ward had beaten kessler, bika, abraham. You can't pretend race isn't a factor in the popularity of these guys and the hate for the floyd and ward. Read the posts. As I said this goes way, way back. If you can't be honest about the fact race plays for some in GGG's fanbase there is no point to continue discussing. The point about liking black skin a lie often posted by some of the very scummiest posters in NSB to justify the racism spewed by white posters. Shamefully you are running with that.

Then i don't get why he would turn down (400K), I can understand him turning down that sort of money because of a title offer etc Even if it is due to the rematch clause 400K is still good money. But what do i know, it looked like he lost on both ends then, not a good business decision unless something comes up for him soon.He turned down because of the rematch clause. They offered the same amount for the hypothetical 2nd fight. You figure that if I beat up the A side I'll get a raise in the second one. But no, they want the rematch at the same price...

You'd think for a guy with logic in his name, he would stick to what is logical rather than forcing everything to fit some baloney racial victimization narrative. Beside money i no take this fight because i was next for elminator or title combat title is what i do this for term for kova fight no good— Sullivan Barrera (@sullivanbarrera) September 25, 2017 I'm just waiting for the threads bashing Kovalev for the low ball offer. Like the threads that bashed Ward cause they didn't want to pay Barrera half a mil. I know people on here aren't consistent though So they offered him less than when he fought Ward, for no title, and a rematch clause in there that he'd make the same money on? I see why he turned it down Some good posts itt

Cause these fighters are not black/latin Sadly, that seems to be the case. I haven't noticed the latin thing that much, but maybe you're right. Where I constantly notice bias is dirty, protected, cherry picking boxers still being defended just because they're black. Back in the days that Quillin was ducking GGG and Stevenson was ducking Kovalev, I kept encouraging other boxing fans to call them out for it and pressure them to fight the best, but instead many fans kept defending the duckers, and criticizing the ones being ducked, and back then I never understood why. It made no sense to me. Only once I realized that some black fans only cared about race, not boxing, did it start to make sense, and at this point it almost seems out in the open.

Don't be disingenuous. GGG, loma and Kov are favorites of the overwhelming majority of this site. What you and others do is pretend the the 20 threads from Mirko and Barrett equates to the 40 different members of the majority that created the threads I discussed in my post. They are the most popular fighters on this site. They get elevated unfairly because of it. They have a very low standard to meet to be given credit because of it as well. :hail::hail:

Kovalev was faking low blows during the fight from shots that landed on the navel. That's a fact. The guy wanted out. He already admitted defeat in that fight. DEAL WITH IT. :dance: Then why didn't Sergey just go down from the right hand if he wanted out so badly? That fight was a real good one and Sergey took a terrible beating to the body and although a blow or two coulda been low or borderline, he lost fair and square. I was wrong about Andre Ward, I didn't think he would be able to compete at the heavier weight against a fighter of Sergey Kovalev caliber. Great fight by Andre Ward.

Not another one of these threads where someone in the majority acts like a victim. To pretend kov, Loma and ggg get more criticism than say Floyd or Ward or even Manny is fake victimhood of the highest order. Floyd and Ward are boring, cheating DIVA boxers who cherry picked the majority of their careers. You can't even compare them to a boxer who fought Gary Russell Jr in his third pro fight, or to a boxer who offered to fight Artur Beterbiev as a fricken tune-up fight. There is no comparison. Plus, it's not about how much criticism someone gets, it's about who deserves or doesn't deserve the criticism they get. In other words, which boxers are getting treated fairly and objectively based on their careers? So when you compare GGG, Kovalev, and Lomachenko to Floyd and Ward, it's apples and oranges. They all get criticism, yes, but only some of them deserve the criticism they get. Some of the criticism is objective, fair criticism, and some of it is biased, unfair criticism. You're saying GGG, one of the most humble, most entertaining action boxers of the last decade, gets less criticism than Floyd, one of the most arrogant, least action-boxers in the history of the sport who is also a repeat woman-beater... well no sh1t, I would hope GGG gets less criticism than Floyd. That would only be logical. That's the nuance you don't seem to understand within this discussion. Boxers like GGG are good for boxing in every area where boxers like Floyd and Ward have been awful for boxing. If the sport was only full of boxers like GGG, it would be the most popular sport in the world. If the sport was only full of boxers like Floyd and Ward, it would be less popular than ping pong. Don't you understand that? So yes, GGG may get less criticism than Floyd, but the fact that it's even close tells you there is major bias at play. On the merits, it shouldn't even be comparison. Now, if you want to compare apples and apples, and make somewhat more fair comparisons, then you should compare the Klitschkos during their primes to Floyd during his run at welterweight, but even then, the Klitschkos fought all their mandatories, and didn't cherry pick fights. But, if there is any somewhat fair comparison, it is between the dominant Klitschkos, who the refs let hold a lot, and dominant Floyd, who the refs and judges and boxing establishment also protected. Style wise, Ward is also a good comparison, except while the Klitschkos dominated a division for a decade and fought all comers, Ward was cherry picking and retiring off and on and so on. The Klitschkos have like 50 fights each, Ward has 30. But style wise, that's another fair comparison. But if you look at how the fanbase that hates on GGG, Lomachenko, and Kovalev talks about Floyd and Ward, verses how they talk about the Klitschkos, you will see a huge double standard. That's the point. And then some posters will even bring up Lomachenko, GGG, and Kovalev as examples of boxers who are only popular because they're "white." And they will even mention Pacquiao in that group, even though he's not white. That's how biased some of these posters are. And yet, when you bring up the fact that if people were only rooting for white boxers, how come the Klitschkos, the most dominant white boxers of the last two decades, are not nearly as popular as GGG, Kovalev, or Lomachenko, these biased posters have no response. Because the truth is it's not about skin color to GGG fans, it's about exciting, clean boxers who will fight the best. TL;DR version... GGG, Kovalev, and Lomachenko fans are fans of exciting, clean boxers who fight the best, regardless of skin color. That's why they like those three fighters who happen to be white, but not the Klitschkos who are also white. On the other hand, Floyd and Ward fans seem to be fans of black skin color regardless of excitement or clean boxing or fighting the best. That's why they like any black boxer, no matter how much of a cheat or cherry picker they are. So there really is a big difference there. It's the opposite of what you seem to think. The double standard is not happening on the side of GGG fans, it's happening on the other side.

He beat Shabransky and Joe Smith Jr. He deserves to get some good money.

The Risk being smashed by Krusher isnt worth 400k When he can opt with a title fight voluntary defense and a mando that could make him 5 times more Or take some step aside money

It seems Barrera dropped the opp to beat Kovalev at least one time for 800k. Wise?

:lol1: :lol1: you must be on a different forum to me.... Don't be disingenuous. GGG, loma and Kov are favorites of the overwhelming majority of this site. What you and others do is pretend the the 20 threads from Mirko and Barrett equates to the 40 different members of the majority that created the threads I discussed in my post. They are the most popular fighters on this site. They get elevated unfairly because of it. They have a very low standard to meet to be given credit because of it as well.

I don't think so because the Kov offer was rejected weeks ago but Jack only vacated days ago, so he rejected Kov before there was an indication that there would be an eliminator, and as it turns out there isn't an eliminator now even with Jack vacating, because apparently WBA upgraded Bivol from interim champ rather than having him fight someone for the vacant regular belt. Then i don't get why he would turn down (400K), I can understand him turning down that sort of money because of a title offer etc Even if it is due to the rematch clause 400K is still good money. But what do i know, it looked like he lost on both ends then, not a good business decision unless something comes up for him soon.

It's still never good enough? I'm trying to think of what exactly Lomachenko, Golovkin, and Kovalev have in common that they're constantly being hated on by the same subset of fans....... Sacs de Frappe

What can you say, the Cuban school of boxing management. they produce some amazing fighters. But to say most Cuban Pros are managed poorly would be an understatement.

****ing LOL, theres a rumour Stevenson about to vacate aswell. Gunna fight Jack for the WBC Diamond. Alvarez gunna fight for the vacated WBC, maybe Barrera can get in that fight. Jesus what has Ward done.

https://twitter.com/MikeCoppinger/status/912370742808928257 Wonder what all the haters who said Kovalev was ducking Barrera, of all people, will say now. Something, I'm sure. Something stupid... Some new stupid thing to excuse the last stupid thing they said being disproved as usual... I guess now we'll find out. There's a strange pattern I've noticed with these people, too... "Lomachenko is ducking Walters" ... Nope. "Lomachenko is ducking Rigo" ... Nope. "Golovkin is ducking Jacobs" ... Nope. "Golovkin is ducking Canelo" ... Nope. "Kovalev is ducking Barrera" ... Nope. Why does it seem like they are always hating on Lomachenko, Golovkin, and Kovalev specifically, and no matter how many top boxers they continue to fight, over and over, more than practically any other boxers in the sport, it's still never good enough? I'm trying to think of what exactly Lomachenko, Golovkin, and Kovalev have in common that they're constantly being hated on by the same subset of fans....... :thinking: :thinking: :thinking: Not another one of these threads where someone in the majority acts like a victim. To pretend kov, Loma and ggg get more criticism than say Floyd or Ward or even Manny is fake victimhood of the highest order. It is getting ridiculous reading these fans whining and crying as they get their retarded logic thrown back in their faces. They immediately cry “race baiting” or imply the criticism are racially motivated even when the criticism is from someone that has the same race or ethnicity as ggg, Loma or kov. What is truly disgraceful is how these posters pretend their initial posting of all these criticisms wasn’t racially motivated but was just boxing related. It’s clear that a certain segment of posters that support these fighters realize that great fighters are the ones that get the most criticism so they inflate the criticism these fighters get to make them seem better than they actually are. Ggg, kov and Loma are very good boxers. They are talented and popular on NSB and espn because they fight for hbo. Just please stop with the fake victimhood. IMO they get an unfair bump by some fans because of their race not unfairly criticized because of it.

So they offered him less than when he fought Ward, for no title, and a rematch clause in there that he'd make the same money on? I see why he turned it down Beside money i no take this fight because i was next for elminator or title combat title is what i do this for term for kova fight no good— Sullivan Barrera (@sullivanbarrera) September 25, 2017

Not another one of these threads where someone in the majority acts like a victim. To pretend kov, Loma and ggg get more criticism than say Floyd or Ward or even Manny is fake victimhood of the highest order. It is getting ridiculous reading these fans whining and crying as they get their retarded logic thrown back in their faces. They immediately cry “race baiting” or imply the criticism are racially motivated even when the criticism is from someone that has the same race or ethnicity as ggg, Loma or kov. What is truly disgraceful is how these posters pretend their initial posting of all these criticisms wasn’t racially motivated but was just boxing related. It’s clear that a certain segment of posters that support these fighters realize that great fighters are the ones that get the most criticism so they inflate the criticism these fighters get to make them seem better than they actually are. Ggg, kov and Loma are very good boxers. They are talented and popular on NSB and espn because they fight for hbo. Just please stop with the fake victimhood. IMO they get an unfair bump by some fans because of their race not unfairly criticized because of it.

Both are main events fighters no? They are not a top tier promoter in terms of cash. But people need to stop saying certain fighters are ducking. Do fighters duck yes but every situation is not the same. They made a offer he said no and gave his reasons. Theres not much more to it except its a business decision on his part. Pretty much...... But it looked like he has missed out on the title fight he was hoping for now.

Is Barrera himself good enough? Beside money i no take this fight because i was next for elminator or title combat title is what i do this for term for kova fight no good— Sullivan Barrera (@sullivanbarrera) September 25, 2017 So he didn't take this fight because of an eliminator? Isn't that the same eliminator that he said he was over looked for by the WBA?