Would Glenn Johnson given Joe problems

[MACAQUEINBLACK]

Sorry, I meant ignorant fool.

[BetterCallSaul]

have you not followed his career? his whole "title" reign is a joke and everyone who has followed boxing knows this. he lost basically every other fight but was saved by the judges cause he generated huge ratings for british tv and to save his undefeated record. obviously he already has 5 losses but he lost to schommer, amaral costa, ray close twice, nigel benn 2, watson 1, sherry, and thorton and malinga could have easily been losses. obv you would have to watch these fights to know this. you will probably reply with "he won all those fights easily! hes da greatest!" but you will just be laughed at.

Just like Joe lost to Hopkins?

And I would never call Eubank the greatest. He was a good fighter, who would lose to the likes of Toney and Jones.

[daggum]

What? Stating that I don't think Joe would lose to a guy who has 12 defeats, and who has been outclassed by lesser opposition, is a flawed argument? I also stated that Joe usually performs well against come forward/pressure fighters, and his combo's and boxing skills would leave Johnson confused.

As for Gerald, I couldn't give a damn about that guy. I only care for the dogs he brutally tortured.

you also realize glen johnson is called the "road warrior" for a reason. he had to go to his opponents hometurf and anything can happen when a fight goes to decision. if calzaghe had to travel to his opponents hometown he could easily lose a somewhat close fight whether he deserved to or not. calzaghe wouldn't be getting any gift ko's in his opponents hometown either.

yea you were wrong the first time so why say it again? which come forward fighter did he perform well against? lacy? he sucks. that guy couldn't put 2 punches together to save his life.

[BetterCallSaul]

Sorry, I meant ignorant fool.

Gerrald was a great man and a credit to the human race. What would the world be without him?

The man is revered just because he wore a pair of boxing gloves. He was an animal.

[daggum]

Just like Joe lost to Hopkins?

And I would never call Eubank the greatest. He was a good fighter, who would lose to the likes of Toney and Jones.

well he did lose to hopkins according to almost everyone ringside and according to knowledgeable boxing fans who score fights based on the rules. clean punching, defnse, etc...you know hit and not be hit unlike calzaghe's don't hit and get hit strategy.

and you claimed someone with 12 losses is a bum and eubank in reality should have about 12 losses if judging was fair.

[MACAQUEINBLACK]

He was an animal.

Who's disagreeing? I made the exact same remark in the GMAT.



In boxing, that's a credit. This is a boxing forum, right? Or did I go crazy?

[Sick/]

have you not followed his career? his whole "title" reign is a joke and everyone who has followed boxing knows this. he lost basically every other fight but was saved by the judges cause he generated huge ratings for british tv and to save his undefeated record. obviously he already has 5 losses but he lost to schommer, amaral costa, ray close twice, nigel benn 2, watson 1, sherry, and thorton and malinga could have easily been losses. obv you would have to watch these fights to know this. you will probably reply with "he won all those fights easily! hes da greatest!" but you will just be laughed at.

[Paragon]

Would have given him problems? Yes

Would he have won? Probably not

[daggum]

eubank fan? sorry! you didn't know you were in the presence of the english sven ottke? you must feel so honored.

[Abstraction]

Didn't Joe pull out like 3 times against something?
That should answer your question