Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Was Julio Cesar Chavez Lucky Through Out His Career?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post

    Is it any different than Manny recently getting ranked and than a shot at a vacant 154 title? The ONLY difference is I would have been complaining had Roger been given an unjustified title shot without fighting at that weight, just as I did with Pac. Thoughts?

    WTF are you talking about? Roger Mayweather didn't fight for a welterweight title until 1994

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by SCtrojansbaby View Post
      WTF are you talking about? Roger Mayweather didn't fight for a welterweight title until 1994
      That doesn't mean his ranking wasn't justified before than!
      Last edited by JAB5239; 05-16-2011, 04:36 PM.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post
        That doesn't mean his ranking wasn't justified before than you moron!
        Ok first off where are these rankings you keep on blabbering about?

        Second nobody ranks somebody top 10 anticipating 5 years in advance

        Comment


        • #24
          Roger Mayweather had a few fight's at WW in the late 80's after he lost to Pernell Whitaker at LW, knocking out journey man and for some strange reason The Ring put him in their Top 10 Welterweight Rankings, maybe becase Roger Mayweather was a name and had initially moved to WW. He then down to Jr Welterweight and spent the rest of the 80's and early 90's there.

          Roger Mayweather was not a Top Welterweight in the 80's, by a long shot.

          Roger Mayweather was never a Top Welterweight in his entire career, infact.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by SCtrojansbaby View Post
            Ok first off where are these rankings you keep on blabbering about?

            Second nobody ranks somebody top 10 anticipating 5 years in advance
            http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Th..._Ratings:_1987

            http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Th..._Ratings:_1988

            Is there anything else I can help you with?

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post
              Jab. I seriously don't know why you even respond to this guy. It's not like he's mis-informed he just has the inability to take in any information that he doesn't agree with.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by SCtrojansbaby View Post
                My point is shots to the thighs are unavoidable though when a fighter like to crouch and as I said shots to the crotch are far more debilitating.

                That said Pernell had Chavez just about completely debilitated by hitting him to the nuts and Chavez was coming up in weight to make the fight AND STILL all Pernell could pull off was a draw? Looks like your the one making excuses.
                You are not allowed to hit below the belt, whether they crouch or not. The rules are the same for the hips, thighs, and groin. And this is the first time I have ever heard this weak excuse for that shameful decision.

                More and more you just seem like a fan who rationalizes everything to fit your agenda. The excuses are coming from you.
                Last edited by Scott9945; 05-16-2011, 05:00 PM.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by SCtrojansbaby View Post
                  Pernell Whitaker that fight should of never went past the 9th round Pernell landed at least 7 clean and blatant punches to Chavez's crotch. That is an undisputed fact. Its just goes to show that Pernell was not nearly as good as most thought that he could only get a draw against him after all those punches to the crotch. Not to mention Chavez moved up in weight to fight Pernell another advantage he had and still could only get a draw.
                  Dude seriously, if all your gonna do is tell us how crappy fighters are if they haven't fought in the 2000's and diss on great fighters like Whitaker who is IMO the greatest fighter of the last 20 years, then I don't think the history section is for you brah.

                  The history section is for debate and gaining new knowledge every day from the past, not trashing every great fighter that's fought before you actually started watching boxing.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by IronDanHamza View Post
                    Roger Mayweather had a few fight's at WW in the late 80's after he lost to Pernell Whitaker at LW, knocking out journey man and for some strange reason The Ring put him in their Top 10 Welterweight Rankings, maybe becase Roger Mayweather was a name and had initially moved to WW. He then down to Jr Welterweight and spent the rest of the 80's and early 90's there.

                    Roger Mayweather was not a Top Welterweight in the 80's, by a long shot.

                    Roger Mayweather was never a Top Welterweight in his entire career, infact.
                    All this is true, but he WAS rated and added depth to the division that SC claimed "absolutely terrible in the late 80's". My whole point is to show it wasn't as bad as he has claimed.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by Barnburner View Post
                      Jab. I seriously don't know why you even respond to this guy. It's not like he's mis-informed he just has the inability to take in any information that he doesn't agree with.

                      I need to entertain myself too bro!

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP