Pavlik is lucky that Calz side stepped him IMO i dont get all these clowns jumping on the Calz is ducking Pavlik argument ,most of the people on NSB pre Pavlik v Lockett were of the same opinion that Calz would beat Kelly anyway ,to many angles to much movement etc
why are these people now trying to make out that Pavlik would of owned him and thats why Calz is ducking him dont u think u are being a bit hypocritical
BTW im not saying they should not fight or making excuses for Calz i just cant get my head around these fickle fans that change their argument to suit them
why are these people now trying to make out that Pavlik would of owned him and thats why Calz is ducking him dont u think u are being a bit hypocritical
BTW im not saying they should not fight or making excuses for Calz i just cant get my head around these fickle fans that change their argument to suit them
Comment