Dude get some facts. You have a lot of catching up to do.
Na I'm right I'm one of those people who ate everything when i was a kid and never got fat while not always exercising. Now i work out all the time but i have to watch what i eat or i get fat.
Some people even comment about me and say I'm on steroids when they seen my arms lol. I would never do nor do i even know where to get that stuff.
Sounds like you just have bad genes sorry buddy
good question..
Brook has the best win
Degale has the deepest resume
Crawford and ggg have a lot of solid wins, but no signature win to date..
1. degale
2. ggg
3. crawford
4. brook
Brook only has one top level win, but the rest of his opponents have been trash
I'd say beating Dirrel > beating Porter mainly because of the style matchup
How does one measure excellent genetics? Where is the evidence? What studies actually support your theory? Typical broscience bull****. I'm sure you'll next tell me that some people can eat anything they want without gaining weight because of their metabolism. Right?
Yea a lot of people can eat whatever they want up to a certain point in their life but eventually it'll catch up to you if you keep doing it. You can't downplay genetics look at Shaqs son, Dwade son,LeBrons son for example. Genetics is a foundation and if you put in the work like Tyson or the kids i mentioned you get the most out of it
yeah, but porter was on a terror when brooks beat him..
Dirrel is not the same fighter he was when he fought froch...
Agree on both parts its a toss up to me
I always found the fight fascinating but of course the aftermath is horrible. Even when you go back and watch and you see things like the mouthpiece sticking out its crazy.
Maybe Spence likes them because they are Americans, posters go for those countrymen all the time. Im sure him and Wade were amateurs at the same time anyways so they might know each other.
Lara has close fights to Canelo and Paul Williams which resulted in losses. Close fights with Vanes and Carlos Molina which were draws. Wins over Angulo and Trout among others. That's a lot of top JMW on his resume without being clearly beat
Read the title and I thought this was a joke but turns out posters actually serious lol. Ggg has shown power to ice pretty much anyone. Even if he doesn't do it every fight it's still there
Are you simply not watching?
Hopkins - knocked out
Paulie - knocked out
Brook - knocked out
Khan - knocked out
Haye - knocked out
Gentili - knocked out
Ugunoh - knocked out
Cota - knocked out
Hatton - knocked out
Duhaupas - knocked out
What the hell more do you want?
I'm talking about real top fights like Degale-Jack or Crawford -Postol none of those fights are really big fights except for ggg-brook or khan-canelo which were mismatches.
Also lol if that's the best list you could give me.
Ummmm what real top fights have they been in? What makes you think they will still be KO'ing opponents as they step up? Wilder's only "top fight" was vs Stiverne and I didn't see any KO there.
I was referring to the future. Hopefully they keep up the kos because boxing needs fighters like that.
Well if you want Thurman to fight Wilder level of opposition he will get more KOs. If you want to see the best fight the best then you need to learn to appreciate their entire skill package offensively and defensively
Stfu who says i don't appreciate the skill all I'm saying is a fighter shouldn't only be able to ko bums especially if there one of the best fighters in the world. All I'm saying is these guys are hyped as big punchers but we only see then ko "tomato cans".
You just did. It doesn't get much bigger than Canelo/Khan and Golovkin/Brook. You're just not happy because they were mismatches. But they were knockouts.
Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. They'll both tell you they were juicing, because it was legal back then.
You saying Thurman and Garcia weren't the two top welters?
Klitschko/Povetkin. Two top heavys, no knockout.
Klitschko/Fury. Two top heavys, no knockout.
Wilder/Stiverne. At the time, two top heavys, no knockout.
That's my problem with your argument. It doesn't make sense. Just because guys are "top" does not assure you a knockout and you should not expect such.
What you should be doing is be happy with the knockouts you do get, and follow these up and coming fighters who are giving you the knockouts you want rather than pining over the "top" fighters who don't. You don't get it. Your argument is exactly why boxing is struggling - failing to support up and coming knockout artists and complaining about guys at the top of the game.
The sweet science isn't going away. If you don't like it don't watch those fighters. It's their job to win however they need to, period.
That exactly what i mean about all those fights you named,we always get these fights with alot of hype that are somewhat underwhelming not necessarily last night.
It's nothing special to ko an overmatched fighter like Canelo or ggg did or like most top prospects do. I know you can't always expect a knockout at the top level but if these guys are as good as they're hyped they should be able to ko elite fighters.
That's honestly why boxings losing popularity. We're all boxing fans here but 3.5/4 out of people watching don't give a fvck about someone's footwork or using there reach or defense. If Leonard can ko hearns or holyfield can stop Tyson is it too much to ask in this day and age for one elite fighter to stop another?