prinzemanspopa

Malignaggi bigs up every f*cker who had their way with him (apart from Hatton - the shame of being outclassed by a perceived one-dimensional brawler is still too great to bear.) The only exceptions being Cano and Ngoudjo, because that would mean having to acknowledge that he got gifts against them.

An impressive, young black stud with a totally hot bod and a lovely, personable chap at that - where can you go wrong? :wave:

Are you talking about the Chavez/Vera fight? That wasn't just work rate. Vera landed more and controlled the pace of that fight. It was effective aggression. If you are talking about the sport in general, I agree. The numbers also tell us that Tony Thompson lander more punches than Wladimir Klitschko in their first fight, yet the actual bout itself was comprehensively one-sided. Why do you think the fight itself was an entirely different story to what the numbers gave us?

Vera get's robbed princepooper: what a perfect time for me to attention whore! and tell them about how great my boxing knowledge is go log your CJ Ross out persona and go fvck yourself You're the one attention whoring in my thread right now, lad. Not too dissimilar from that time you spent all night posting messages on my channel in response to a bit of red k. Now jog the f*ck on, son. Im not sure you know what work rate actually means in the context of scoring a fight It's got f*ck all to do with scoring a fight.

Go back to sherdog, lad.

That must have been it. Chavez deliberately looked like ass, and landed one punch at a time. He's a god damn boxing genius. Don't worry lad, you're not the first misguided individual to confuse plodding aggression with effective aggression. I was the same way when I started watching boxing two years ago.

Whining, crying, looking to the ref for help throughout the fight. Letting the smaller man out work you, push you back, out land you, and control the pace of the fight. What part of the whole 'work rate doesn't factor into professional boxing scoring' do you fail to grasp? There's no sense in attempting to educate a dunce who seems content to continue citing a scoring criteria that doesn't exist. Chavez deliberately threw one punch at a time and deliberately looked gassed while Vera pretty out fought him...you dont know sh1t Put your two inch pecker away and go instigate a circle jerk elsewhere.

poor example. klitschko knocked him out. He also dominated him on a round-by-round basis, so no.

I don't think that it's you who should be deciding how objective you are, see, cos' that automatically makes it subjective The simple fact is that the majority of people who watched the fight considered that Vera won enough rounds to win the fight or at the very least get a draw. Are all of them subjective yet your good self and the judges objective? And the simple fact is that a large portion of those disputing the decision - or even worse, crying robbery - are continually using a criteria that does not exist with regards to judging a professional boxing match. Besides, this topic goes far beyond the Chavez-Vera fight. This topic was mostly inspired by another topic on another forum that references the fact that this is a relatively new phenomenon. Something that coincided with the growing presence of the compubox system on television and the introduction of the computer scoring system in the amateurs.

So you're suggesting that Chavez controlled the pace of the fight? I mean, I saw you mention 'ring generalship' in another thread. Just wondering if you thought Chavez lead in that department as well. Since you're so quick to tell everyone else that they don't know how to judge a fight. Chavez deliberately fought at a measured pace, forced Vera into following him around the ring (Note: following, not cutting the ring off), picked his shots and delivered them with the sort of precision and accuracy that so clearly separated the two last night. Looking at this as objectively as possible, you'd really struggle to give Vera more than four rounds (and even that seems generous - much like the scoring from the two Mora fights that he benefited from.)

Bellew is fighting Stevenson on November 30th. It was agreed upon prior to the fight that he would be fighting the winner on that date.

This is clearly his way of avoiding a fight with Chavez. I think Ward is good enough to squeeze out a tight, highly-contested decision, and I think he wants the fight. But it's pretty obvious to me that this paranoid fruit loop doesn't want to risk his man against such a certified ring savage. Remember the Martinez fight? Virgil certainly does.

boxing_pundit85 knows what's up. #notoamateurscoring

What does it mean or take to be a member of the IBHOF? I seriously couldn't tell you. I loved Arturo Gatti fights. Always a fan favorite win/lose/draw he came to fight, but if you put him in the Hall of Fame, all of the above should be in the Hall of Fame as well. They've been lowering the bar for several years now. Barry McGuigan and Ingermar Johansson were the previous punching bags for the IBHOF critics, but they were a lot better than Gatti ever was. It's why I cringe when a fan of a certain fighter will cite his wins and then cite one of his wins as being a hall of famer, as if that somehow validates his quality.

I don't believe anyone genuinely thinks Tony would have beaten Mayweather then or now. But it would have been interesting to see how Mayweather would have dealt with an incredibly durable, supremely well-conditioned, relentless swarmer who had the will and determination that few others possessed. Mayweather had just moved up to that weight class, was relatively small for it at that particular time and it was a pretty compelling fight around 2006-2008. Floyd potentially could have whitewashed him and pitched a shutout, or he potentially could have found himself in a difficult, competitive bout against a man who could have zero respect for his power and who was capable of setting the sort of pace that would unsettle the smaller, economical counter-puncher and favour the bigger, perhaps stronger, high-volume punching pressure fighter. I'm not saying it would happen for certain, but Floyd wouldn't be the first outstanding talent to face adversity with regards to a fighter who's will is every bit as strong as his opponents considerable skill.

Nope. None of them. Unless you think those guys are in the league with These guys 118 names since 1943...about 2 fighters a year. At THAT rate, there's no room for those guys. When you have Floyd, Pac, Hopkins, Jones, K-bros, JMM (who isn't 100% for me at least), ETC., that are likely on their way in. I just don't think the exclusivity of that club allows the Hattons and Tarvers of the world in the Hall. Martinez, Judah, and Cotto aren't done yet; but I think they aren't likely to do anything to change my mind. Why would you have reservations about Marquez but none about including both Klitschko brothers? Both Juan and his brother are unquestionably better than Vitali.

The K-bros, are dominating the heavyweight division now, and have been for quite some time. Regardless of the strength of the era. I think that that type of dominance deserves to be recognized when remembering this era. As far as Marquez (Juan) goes, I'd say I'm 95% sure he's getting in. Maybe I should have left that "not being 100% sure" bit out. I agree that level of sustained dominance should be recognized, but it's Wlad that is dominating the heavyweight division right now and has done over the last seven years, not his brother. Vitali's merely a title holder.

Leonard didnt fight Aaron Pryor who begged for a fight, That may have something to do with he fact he was busy fighting the best available competition who were actually competing in his division. Fighters actually better and more accomplished, I might add. But even still, Pryor was offered a career high purse to fight Leonard in 1981, and he rejected it. So there goes your argument. And if Leonard's win over Hagler was the result of perfect timing, what you call Mayweather fighting De La Hoya, Mosley and Cotto well beyond their best years? None of those guys were universally considered to be the absolute best in the sport, and no intelligent beings were predicting Floyd to be destroyed by any of them. And more importantly: none of them are anywhere near as great as Hagler was.

I think we've all established that The Ring's pound for pound list is a complete and utter joke and it just seems too tedious and obvious to have to continually point that out. These lists have always been subjective, but there's no real logic behind Brother even being considered among the elite, let alone him being among he top five. The Ring is a promotional/marketing tool for Golden Boy Promotions at this point and nothing more than that. It really is quite irrelevant these days, unfortunately.

Nope. None of them. Unless you think those guys are in the league with These guys 118 names since 1943...about 2 fighters a year. At THAT rate, there's no room for those guys. When you have Floyd, Pac, Hopkins, Jones, K-bros, JMM (who isn't 100% for me at least), ETC. I agree with most of what you said, apart from the inclusion of both Klitschko brothers. Wladimir? Sure. Vitali? Rafael Marquez was better than him.

Khan would systematically break Trinidad down and probably force him to quit on his stool.Khan would glide around the ring with grace,and pump a mean,persistent,thumping jab in Trinidad's face while doing so.And once he's bloodied and broken up Cheato's face,he'll work his way inside and start breaking him down with crunching hooks and uppercuts to the body. This is a fight that Trinidad could not even hope to win.Trinidad is made to order for Khan,and his only way of ever beating Khan would be on a computer game.

He isn't shit without his plaster. Floyd beats him at any point in their careers, Margarito didn't earn his shot fairly. The great Andre Berto wasn't a viable name back then,I'm afraid. And it's a shame Mayweather doesn't share the same confidence in his abilities as his fans do.He may have seen able to carry his success over from fantasy fights into actual fights if he did.

As I'm sure some have already noted,it's a tad difficult to build up a strong resume when virtually no other top fighter in your division wants a piece of you.Mayweather may be the most notable name,but he sure as hell wasn't the only one. And for the retards that continue to spit out this "Tony ducked Williams" bollocks,just understand that it was Williams who didn't want the rematch.He only wanted to fight Tony after the great one became Billy big balls after beating Cotto.And Tony ignored him,just like Williams did to him - in spite of the fact that Tony could have easily have ignored Williams himself. Tony Margarito is the greatest.:headbang:

There was a middleweight fringe contender in the early 80's by the name of Frank Fletcher.Guy was in three FOTY contenders in 1982 alone.A bit forgotten now, but a ridiculously exciting fighter he was.

Beating a guy like Chatchai Sasakul pisses on anything Martinez accomplished during the first decade or so of his career.And Pacquiao beat him when he was a teenager. Martinez is better than Pacquiao has ever been. Martinez knows how to utilize and use a jab. Manny never could and that's why Manny got KO'd over his flickering, fake, faint jab(s). Martinez is skillful, tactical, technical and can adjust to win. If a fighter ain't charging Manny then he is having a tough time. Not even a comparison. When you take one quick glance at their respective resume's, this is particularly true.

Bradley was a boxer type and after the "ripoff" he and his team went after JMM yet again instead of getting the "easy" revenge win over Bradley; there is a reason for it. They knew Tim would adapt in a rematch whereas PAc would not be able to. But according to you, Pacquiao regressed in every rematch that he had with Marquez (I've pointed this out in the past myself) because of Marquez's ability to adapt to Pacquiao's style.Surely Pacquiao is to receive more credit for rematching a guy that had caused so much trouble in their three previous meetings (the last one being particularly controversial) than a guy that an overwhelming majority felt was beaten by Pacquiao comfortably? Martinez has faced the best, most accomplished competition out of any boxer in the world over the last 4 years imo. Sure, because there was such widespread joy throughout the boxing forums when fights with Barker and Macklin were announced, right? And Dzinziruk? Yeah, plenty of people loved the prospect of the supposedly third best fighter in the sport fighting a guy that had fought just once in nearly two and a half years.:fing02:

Martinez would do a hell of a lot more than just 'outbox' Cotto.And by the way, why would Cotto need a catchweight? Wasn't one of the reasons he turned down a Pacquiao rematch related to him not feeling that a catchweight was fair?

Holy sh^t, it's Matthew Hatton!

Probably.There's more to it than that, but I think most of the blame for that fight not happening will be dumped on his shoulders.Whether it's right or not, It's always been him, by and large, that's been perceived as not wanting the fight.It was a huge fight that would have generated the level of interest that not only transcended the sport of boxing, but sport in general.And I think most will blame him for the fight not happening. But even without Pacquiao, his career has been such a disappointment over the last decade.I mean, after he beat Castillo in the rematch, his two best wins over the next three years were Corley and a faded Gatti.He's still picked up some good and solid wins then, but nothing truly significant. If you can objectively look at what he's accomplished, he's still an ATG, but nowhere near the level that he should have been.

was this? http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c217/natas206/accuracy.gif Late stoppage,if anything. I'll never forgive Calzaghe for ruining promising career of Peter "Mad Maniac" Manfredo.