The ducking is heavy now, typical, oh he's crap but we don't want to fight him because he may just not be crap. Four fights a year,stop being so much a serious pro Tim, you are scaring the pretenders who just want one multi mil fight every year or so.
Keef needs to perform better than he did against Barrios to have any chance against the OP's top 5, maybe when the excitement wears off he will realise that. Or maybe he just wants a retirement pay out.
Khan is like Packy, he has spotted damaged goods and wants to get an easy win with little chance of getting hit. Broner should be somehow banned, he is a gutless disgrace to real pros.
Pacquiao is a Boxrec boxer, gets credited with landing lots of ineffective punches but when it comes to the KO he fails, it's too much for him. It's easy to beat Pac, just unload on him and keep down the number of his scoring pit pats. But he bluffs most boxers who then think that he's unbeatable :mad::mad::mad:
They have the same best wins. Porter and Danny.
If Thurman came back motivated ( I doubt), it would be tough fight to call.[/QUOTE
But that was then, this is now. Which makes predicting a present outcome based on past outcomes so tricky.
Dumb troll, you should stick to smoking the stuff that made Broner feel he beat Pacman.
Your'e too late for the Pacman party newb, take your rubbish somewhere else.
Ugas is not a big puncher going on this performance but it didn't ever need a big puncher to beat Packy, it just needed a current well ranked problem free boxer to beat him. Ugas has skills but not being a big puncher will hold him back as it has until now. Anyway I'm just glad to see the end of the last few years Packy fiasco, pity he didn't retire just after he reached his peak but money is money so as long as the fans are there why not keep going.
Wow
You need to contact someone in the govt.
You are borderline re tarded.
You might qualify for some kind of program.
Collect that check.
You were saying?
As an old school warrior, Manny Pacquiao has said numerous times that he missed toe to toe fights badly, he missed the pain--the smell of blood everywhere just like the old times. Well, he can get that in this fight plenty.
Laugh of the day :439: He got plenty of toe to toe and blood and guts against Jeff Horn but couldn't handle it and neither could his fans. The amount of bullship around Pacquiao just never ends, no wonder lots of real boxing fans avoid him.
Yeah Pacquiao could not handle all that. Horn was too much.
The ref was even about to stop the fight due to the beating Pacquiao was taking.
Oh no, wait, my bad. The ref went to Horn's corner and warned them of stopping the fight if he keeps getting his ass beat by Pacquiao.
Yeah, but no. Go on.
Thank you, I will go on. If you want to be real then don't pretend what did happen didn't. You see this is the problem, pactrads screaming and crying about Horn's rough treatment of their idol and Packy ducking the rematch are facts that show that the warrior claim is nonsense. Warriors simply don't duck and their fans don't sook.
This thread was obviously aimed at the people claiming Spence is ducking Manny or faked a eye injury.
So i was wondering if they favor Thurman now.....
I understand but was wondering who such people were. It would be good to call them out personally.
Supporting Pacman puts one in the same room as his ugly fans, that I cannot do. Besides he has only won some recent fights due to the over rated opposition who took dives or were happy to take a retirement payout.
There was probably always some degree of overrating fighters like that. But in general boxing was always a sport where the aggressor was rewarded, sometimes too much even, sometimes just for being the aggressor.
Overrating of defensive fighters today is probably the biggest pet peeve I have with the sport. It is a multi-step problem that encompasses 3 of the worst types of fans -
1) it isn't just the tribal fans - but that is part of it. 2) It also has to do with fans who are arrogant/have overall inferiority complexes, and want to act like they are seeing something with the defensive fighter that only a trained eye can see - that they are truly seeing 'the sweet science.' 3) And then also, some people seem to have sort of a fear/physical inferiority of the aggressive/big punching fighters. The way they combat this, is to overrate or overhype the defensive guys, either in mythical matchups or in their actual fight performances.
Rewarding the 'defensive' fighter with almost every round that is close/has little action, is just terrible for the sport. I don't think it comes down to race or even nationality with all of it either as the 3 biggest examples in my head are 1) Mayweather - a lot of his fights; 2) Ward - a lot of his fights, and then 3) Fury - his 1st fight with Wilder, and even some of his fight with Wlad (I snoozed through a lot of it and never really scored it.)
Also 4) most MMA guys, from all backgrounds, were picking Stipe to beat Ngannou - saying Stipe was just levels above him, when I feel like anyone who watched that first fight, could tell that some of those shots Stipe took, I wouldn't bet on him being able to take all of those again.
We need to get back to scoring each round for the guy who does the best work in that round, and leaving it at that. No extra points for dancing around, or because the defensive fighter didn't get beat up.
My favourite nagging point, Jeff Horn in his fight with Packy was rewarded for his aggression, even perhaps for just being the aggressor, yet look at the reaction to him being awarded the win. To me this shows that most fans don't give a shit as long as their boy wins, oh some will try to contrive other reasons why Horn didn't win but underneath that veneer it's still 'my boy won whatever, he was robbed'. Which is the sort of selfish fan attitude which drags boxing down as a sport.
On defence being boring, it depends. To me a boxer who can attack to KO standard yet still be defensively responsible is the pinnacle of boxing skill. Crawford is a great example of this but because he is so good potential top opponents shy away from fighting him so we are yet to see his best. To see boxers like him at their best depends on the quality of the opposition which is the same in any sport, the best show their skills against quality opposition.
Thanks for the topic, it's a good one. :)
It's not rocket science man - you only score points by what you LAND. That's how a fight goes. If you dodge 10 punches, and I dodge 2, but neither one of us lands a punch - you are trying to say that you won that round? Lol, nothing happened
What happened to points for aggression?
Does it mean Crawford`s resume is garbage? Is Crawford a hype job?
You can`t say Crawford is p4p star but when 2 of his last 3 opponents discuss a possibility to fight people say it is garbage fight.
Crawford showed the world that both Brook and Khan were rubbish as if that was needed, real fans knew that they were rubbish well before then but the majority casuals 'thought' otherwise. Crawford made some spending money at no risk to himself, win win for him.
Fighting in the US will finish George off even if by some miracle he's still standing. Like almost all Aussie fighters his defence is lacking, particularly a defensive awareness at the same time as he's throwing punches. Good luck to him of course, fighting above his talent level may do it for him.
Not so long ago there were real fans who appreciated skill and ability above all else, not which country the boxer came from or what race he was or how he rated on social media. See the difference to now, it's obvious even here on this forum, anyone who has a keyboard has an opinion, no IQ or maturity required.
He is between a rock and a hard place, Spence recovered from his car accident and TC is not injured at all, Manny talked it up and now he has to find somebody of note he can beat to appease the public, its taking time because he needs to find a patsy, maybe he should consider Thurman again, he has had more surgery and will be easier than the first time, the average boxing fan will approve Thurman .
Yes, he's running out of name opponents who won't end his career.
Anyone who Packy has beaten in recent times is not a worthy opponent for Crawford. I mean, c'mon, Keef is just looking for a retirement payout, of course he's keen.
And that is kind of my point - if we were watching two guys fight on the street, and neither one landed - how would we call that fight? We would say 'Draw, neither guy did sh.it'
It should be the same for any other type of fight we see, in the boxing ring as well obviously. When you start to ACTIVELY score anything else other than the punches that land, then you get into a real dangerous spot, where now you can try and rationalize a guy winning any round, and rounds they have no business winning.
And that gives way to terrible scorecards from judges being accepted as well. I could say 'well this guy was effective with his aggression, he didn't let the other guy land or even hardly throw a punch in that round, he won.' You could say 'no this guy won, he avoided more punches and showed better defense' Meanwhile neither guy landed a punch.
Yes, it can get tricky but look at it this way. If there were two defensive fighters neither doing much except making sure that they did not get hit what sort of fight would that be? Is that the sort of fight that people would pay to see? Which is why I lean towards rewarding aggression even if it does not result in much but is genuine. Boxers are in the ring to fight each other and try to get a decisive win but sometimes that is not possible, particularly when one is a spoiler. In that situation should the other boxer who is trying to make a fight of it not be rewarded for his (crowd pleasing) efforts?
Spence's best chance is a round 1 KO, Crawford is a bit show to start, he likes to work his opponent out and this leads casuals to think that Crawford is not as good as he is. But Spence would make a show of it compared with those who have 'fought' Crawford before, Horn took him the furtherest but never looked like winning
What have PBC got to gain if one of theirs fights Crawford? Nothing much really but they do have a lot to lose if one of theirs loses to Crawford, the value of the particular fighter to PBC will drop and so will his potential income. So all PBC have to do is pretend that they are trying to set something up with a hidden agenda to continue avoiding Crawford.
Why is this so hard to understand? I guess that conspiracy theories, rumour, tribalism and talk catch the attention while sense is just too hard.
Ho hum, not the Horn robbery thing again, thing is Horn surprised everyone with his performance and some could not accept that the hyped up Pacquiao could be beaten by an 'unknown'. Pac didn't do his due diligence and paid the price, note that he has done his DD since that fight, lesson learnt.