I just owned Top Ranks Matchmaker Bruce Trampler on Twitter

[IronDanHamza]

Based on what, him beating Hamed?



It is fair, the brass knew the futures would never be there for Barrera and chances were his best days were behind him.

Corrales was a pro for 5 years when he fought Floyd, Barrera was a pro for 14 years when he first fought Manny.

Corrales had been 12 rounds 3x, no hard fights, and had never been knocked down. Barrera had gone 12 rounds 13x, had several hard fights (add several wars), and tasted canvas 2-3x.

How in the world are you using Corrales as a model that represents Barrera and talking about logical sense?

Based on the fact that he was on the best run of his career including two wins over HOF'ers in the previous two. Wasn't your reasoning that he was coming off a loss in the last year? But he hadn't lost in years at that point.

We don't know what the brass knew though. That's an assumption on your part. What we do know is Barrera was favoured going in and was universally considered one of the 10 best fighters in the sport across all weights. How can that be a cherrypick under those circumstances? It literally can't be.

It's comparable to Floyd's fight with Corrales because Corrales was the favourite, and Corrales was a P4P fighter the same way Barrera was both of things. It was also Floyd's first big test against a P4P guy where he wasn't the favourite, the same way Pacqauio was against Barrera.

So from that standpoint it would be like someone claiming Floyd cherrypicked Corrales. It's an illogical idea.

How can you cherrypick a fighter the entire boxing world favour you to lose? It doesn't make any sense,

[War Room]

My point stands.

What point, the quote you twisted out of context that actually works in my favor?

Young or old a matchmakers job is not to make fights they think their guy is gonna lose, man. You know that I know that... of course if they're promoting both fighters most likely they'll have a good idea which one they want to win which will be the one they see most potential profit in.

What happens when you have 2 guys though, can you not read or would answering that destroy your entire argument?

In fact you'll note that Trampler says Arum himself was responsible for making most of the fights once a fighter has reached a certain level - at which point Tramplers job is already done, but again whether Arum or Trampler made MAB vs Pac it was still excellent matchmaking. Again.. you know that I know that.

A guy on his way out vs an up and coming guy who's really strong and his entire country stops while he fights, great matchmaking exactly. LOok at the algorith, it is exact for all of his big named wins. Debate that and lose miserably, try it?

Bookies? Absolutely I'm not an expert but MAB was a wide favourite yes? Therefore Trampler got it right and the bookies got it wrong. In the eyes of most of the booking world it was a big upset... or are you dis*****g that obvious fact?

4-1 is not that wide in the boxing world. 4-1's lose all the time without a proper cap on it. Wide is 8-1, 4-1 is competitive and they lose quite a bit. Trust me (or not), I know.

Guy, odds are set low and the rest is public opinion. Mexicans bet on Mexicans, got it lol?

And we're down to amateur hour insults are we now my high strung friend? Piece of shit huh? Perhaps you should have another little bump to take the edge off before you get back to me.

Amateur hour? Look in the mirror, you started it with all the insulting jabs, I'm just fighting fire with fire, stronger fire. Don't run your yap and you won't get slapped.

Me? I rarely complain about the fighters themselves at all TBH (I save my contempt for the promoters and sanctioning orgs), perhaps you can give me some examples of somewhere I've done so? I accept that it's largely manufactured top to bottom and treat it with the appropriate suspension of disbelief - but especially at the top. Part of the reason I like the smaller cards and the less high profile weight classses.

IDGAF about you, I'm talking people at large. You should be licking my boots for taking a stand.

And yeah. Whatever big man. You think anyone gives a shit about your 'likes' except you - or your imaginary twitter victories either?

Look, your thread was ****** and most of the folk who posted on it are just laughing at you... take from that what you will. Only person you 'owned' here was yourself. Either way I wasted too much time on this silliness already.

Of course you don't care because nobody likes you 1 in 10 to be exact. Don't you think that's low lol? That's fine, I can take it. I plant seeds, seeds of doubt, and don't expect them to flower every single time I plant them. I've said some outrageous things over the years and as time moves on I see people saying exactly what I said prior. Levels......

Based on the fact that he was on the best run of his career including two wins over HOF'ers in the previous two. Wasn't your reasoning that he was coming off a loss in the last year? But he hadn't lost in years at that point.

No, I was saying he was the only 1 to not have a devastating loss in the last year but was compounded with the two Morales wars and taking a lot of damage from Jones.

TBH, I don't see that run as impressive. Tapia was crazy over-stuffed at that weight and who the hell are Freitas, Valbuena, Salud, and Sanchez anyway? Obviously beating Morales was a great win, but other than that.

We don't know what the brass knew though. That's an assumption on your part. What we do know is Barrera was favoured going in and was universally considered one of the 10 best fighters in the sport across all weights. How can that be a cherrypick under those circumstances? It literally can't be.

Of course we can! 14 years are a pro, you're on the way out especially in a high activity weight class like that. Why will you not acknowledge a reasonable algorithm for a fighters lifetime? His earning potential was maxed, this all what the brass does. Ever hear of the term cashing out on a fighter?

It's comparable to Floyd's fight with Corrales because Corrales was the favourite, and Corrales was a P4P fighter the same way Barrera was both of things. It was also Floyd's first big test against a P4P guy where he wasn't the favourite, the same way Pacqauio was against Barrera.

So from that standpoint it would be like someone claiming Floyd cherrypicked Corrales. It's an illogical idea.

How can you cherrypick a fighter the entire boxing world favour you to lose? It doesn't make any sense,

Mayweather was a 6/5 favorite, Corrales wasn't even ranked by Ring and he wasn't in the P4P for 2001.

[IronDanHamza]

What point, the quote you twisted out of context that actually works in my favor?



What happens when you have 2 guys though, can you not read or would answering that destroy your entire argument?



A guy on his way out vs an up and coming guy who's really strong and his entire country stops while he fights, great matchmaking exactly. LOok at the algorith, it is exact for all of his big named wins. Debate that and lose miserably, try it?



4-1 is not that wide in the boxing world. 4-1's lose all the time without a proper cap on it. Wide is 8-1, 4-1 is competitive and they lose quite a bit. Trust me (or not), I know.

Guy, odds are set low and the rest is public opinion. Mexicans bet on Mexicans, got it lol?



Amateur hour? Look in the mirror, you started it with all the insulting jabs, I'm just fighting fire with fire, stronger fire. Don't run your yap and you won't get slapped.



IDGAF about you, I'm talking people at large. You should be licking my boots for taking a stand.



Of course you don't care because nobody likes you 1 in 10 to be exact. Don't you think that's low lol? That's fine, I can take it. I plant seeds, seeds of doubt, and don't expect them to flower every single time I plant them. I've said some outrageous things over the years and as time moves on I see people saying exactly what I said prior. Levels......



No, I was saying he was the only 1 to not have a devastating loss in the last year but was compounded with the two Morales wars and taking a lot of damage from Jones.

TBH, I don't see that run as impressive. Tapia was crazy over-stuffed at that weight and who the hell are Freitas, Valbuena, Salud, and Sanchez anyway? Obviously beating Morales was a great win, but other than that.



Of course we can! 14 years are a pro, you're on the way out especially in a high activity weight class like that. Why will you not acknowledge a reasonable algorithm for a fighters lifetime? His earning potential was maxed, this all what the brass does. Ever hear of the term cashing out on a fighter?



Mayweather was a 6/5 favorite, Corrales wasn't even ranked by Ring and he wasn't in the P4P for 2001.

Corrales was #5 P4P with The Ring Magazine when he fought Mayweather. I think you've checked the "Ring Annual Boxrec ratings" for 2001 but that's the "End of year" rankings. If you look at the end of year 2000, he was #5 which was the ranking he held when he fought Mayweather. Then after that loss he was removed, which is where you've read he wasn't ranked in the P4P list in 2001 where he infact was, in January 2001, when he fought Floyd.

Maybe going in he might have been the favourite. I'm assuming that's something else you've got from Google. But when that fight was signed Mayweather opened as the underdog.

You're asserting that the "Brass" knew this and knew that but the fact of the matter is you don't know that, you're assuming that and in all honesty it's alot of revisionist history here.

You're saying his run wasn't impressive from 2000-2003 but that's literally the run that got him a Top 5 P4P ranking across the board with 1 win over a prime ATG and another over a prime HOF'er amongst others in a 3 year span. You consider that to not be impressive, the reality is it is objectively impressive.

Him being 14 years as a pro is irrelevant to the fact that he was one of the best fighters in the world at that time. How exactly do you cherry pick one of the best fighters in the world?

[War Room]

Corrales was #5 P4P with The Ring Magazine when he fought Mayweather. I think you've checked the "Ring Annual Boxrec ratings" for 2001 but that's the "End of year" rankings. If you look at the end of year 2000, he was #5 which was the ranking he held when he fought Mayweather. Then after that loss he was removed, which is where you've read he wasn't ranked in the P4P list in 2001 where he infact was, in January 2001, when he fought Floyd.

P4P is trash, but he wasn't on it, didn't my link support that?

Maybe going in he might have been the favourite. I'm assuming that's something else you've got from Google. But when that fight was signed Mayweather opened as the underdog.

Where did you get Corrales was the favorite, like you're going to tell me you remember from 22 years ago? You would never be able to find that info on a 2001 version of the internet. At the end of the day Floyd was the favorite at pretty close to pickem lines and was probably close to pickem in the opening lines as well.

You're asserting that the "Brass" knew this and knew that but the fact of the matter is you don't know that, you're assuming that and in all honesty it's alot of revisionist history here.

Of course they did, they're a company open for business with a proven track record and did the most work with smaller weight fighters in their respective golden era's. Use your brain and look at the entire package of that moment in time.

You're saying his run wasn't impressive from 2000-2003 but that's literally the run that got him a Top 5 P4P ranking across the board with 1 win over a prime ATG and another over a prime HOF'er amongst others in a 3 year span. You consider that to not be impressive, the reality is it is objectively impressive.

P4P rankings are dogwank mate, it's all bullshit. Stop bringing up P4P, it makes people look less. Like right now, DAZN has Stephen Fulton Jr. ranked #7 P4P. Ring has Josh Taylor as #8. lol

Him being 14 years as a pro is irrelevant to the fact that he was one of the best fighters in the world at that time. How exactly do you cherry pick one of the best fighters in the world?

Being pro for 14 years which is like almost career over historically, taking a ton of damage along the way, past your earnings zenith, probably bringing in less and less for the company, it's time to use his name to push our next star.

Again P4P is trash, its a dead debate. Keep bringing up P4P and I'm done replying. You're parakeeting certain things that are highly debated throughout the entire sport and it's annoying. It's like some pleb using Compubox to make a point. It's a faulty system and only neophytes use it for reference. I can't be dragging to those lower nevels.

[IronDanHamza]

P4P is trash, but he wasn't on it, didn't my link support that?



Where did you get Corrales was the favorite, like you're going to tell me you remember from 22 years ago? You would never be able to find that info on a 2001 version of the internet. At the end of the day Floyd was the favorite at pretty close to pickem lines and was probably close to pickem in the opening lines as well.



Of course they did, they're a company open for business with a proven track record and did the most work with smaller weight fighters in their respective golden era's. Use your brain and look at the entire package of that moment in time.



P4P rankings are dogwank mate, it's all bullshit. Stop bringing up P4P, it makes people look less. Like right now, DAZN has Stephen Fulton Jr. ranked #7 P4P. Ring has Josh Taylor as #8. lol



Being pro for 14 years which is like almost career over historically, taking a ton of damage along the way, past your earnings zenith, probably bringing in less and less for the company, it's time to use his name to push our next star.

Again P4P is trash, its a dead debate. Keep bringing up P4P and I'm done replying. You're parakeeting certain things that are highly debated throughout the entire sport and it's annoying. It's like some pleb using Compubox to make a point. It's a faulty system and only neophytes use it for reference. I can't be dragging to those lower nevels.

Corrales was on it mate. He was ranked #5 P4P when he fought Mayweather. What link did you share to suggest otherwise?

22 years ago is not that long ago But yeah I do remember. Corrales opened as the favourite that's 100% factual. He was also #5 on the P4P list but you said he wasn't ranked. It's just more of the theme of revisionist history here in all honesty.

You can assert that "Of course they did" but again you're assuming that, and you have no actual evidence to suggest any "brass" knew anything and what their intentions were. They might have, they might not have.

Well, no, not really. P4P rankings are certainly something to consider, it means that at least they're highly touted across the board. There's a reason that beating a P4P ranked guy is a rarity.

[War Room]

Corrales was on it mate. He was ranked #5 P4P when he fought Mayweather. What link did you share to suggest otherwise?

Chico was only ever in the Ring P4P ratings 1x in 2000. Diego fought Floyd in 2001, so no he wasn't ranked. Either way, it doesn't transcend to your value at the bookie window now does it lol?

If Diego ever was a favorite over Floyd it was opening day and the line probably looked like Chico -110 | Floyd +105. Based on that other figure I gave you, would reflect -120 for Floyd.

22 years ago is not that long ago But yeah I do remember. Corrales opened as the favourite that's 100% factual. He was also #5 on the P4P list but you said he wasn't ranked. It's just more of the theme of revisionist history here in all honesty.

If you remember so clearly (which I honestly don't), what was the exact money line? Your rating is off, he was ranked #4 in 2000 (they fought in 2001). Any revisionary notes are 100% coming from you.

You can assert that "Of course they did" but again you're assuming that, and you have no actual evidence to suggest any "brass" knew anything and what their intentions were. They might have, they might not have.

Well, no, not really. P4P rankings are certainly something to consider, it means that at least they're highly touted across the board. There's a reason that beating a P4P ranked guy is a rarity.

Everything I say is a calculation of my experiences and knowledge of the industry. Every horse owner is dialed into the condition of his horse. P4P is trash and you still chose to ignore it is

right now, DAZN has Stephen Fulton Jr. ranked #7 P4P. Ring has Josh Taylor as #8. lol

That's like a literal fart joke. Whoever the hell Fulton is, like you're a nobody and #7. Taylor, come on now, p4p is aids and you keep parakeeting caw p4p, caw caw...lol.

[billeau2]

My point stands. Young or old a matchmakers job is not to make fights they think their guy is gonna lose, man. You know that I know that... of course if they're promoting both fighters most likely they'll have a good idea which one they want to win which will be the one they see most potential profit in.

In fact you'll note that Trampler says Arum himself was responsible for making most of the fights once a fighter has reached a certain level - at which point Tramplers job is already done, but again whether Arum or Trampler made MAB vs Pac it was still excellent matchmaking. Again.. you know that I know that.

Bookies? Absolutely I'm not an expert but MAB was a wide favourite yes? Therefore Trampler got it right and the bookies got it wrong. In the eyes of most of the booking world it was a big upset... or are you dis*****g that obvious fact?

Ergo that was some great matchmaking by Trampler (or Bob), correct? That was my sole point. Of course this isn't something that happens every day - mostly the favourite will win and great fighters are usually the favourites. All I'm saying is that it takes a very good eye to know when the bookies favourite is ready to be taken. Trampler has that eye.

And we're down to amateur hour insults are we now my high strung friend? Piece of shit huh? Perhaps you should have another little bump to take the edge off before you get back to me.

Me? I rarely complain about the fighters themselves at all TBH (I save my contempt for the promoters and sanctioning orgs), perhaps you can give me some examples of somewhere I've done so? I accept that it's largely manufactured top to bottom and treat it with the appropriate suspension of disbelief - but especially at the top. Part of the reason I like the smaller cards and the less high profile weight classses.

And yeah. Whatever big man. You think anyone gives a shit about your 'likes' except you - or your imaginary twitter victories either?

Look, your thread was ****** and most of the folk who posted on it are just laughing at you... take from that what you will. Only person you 'owned' here was yourself. Either way I wasted too much time on this silliness already.

you know... someone once said you can tell the quality of the intellect by what a man accepts as proof of a contention. If we abide by this axiom War room has attained the status of a brilliant 4 year old.

[IronDanHamza]

Corales was only ever in the Ring P4P ratings 1x in 2000. Diego fought Floyd in 2001, so no he wasn't ranked. Either way, it doesn't transcend to your value at the bookie window now does it lol?

If Diego ever was a favorite over Floyd it was opening day and the line probably looked like Chico -110 | Floyd +105. Based on that other figure I gave you, would reflect -120 for Floyd.



If you remember so clearly (which I honestly don't), what was the exact money line? Your rating is off, he was ranked #4 in 2000 (they fought in 2001). Any revisionary notes are 100% coming from you.

Ok, I'll explain to you again, you are going off The Ring Annual Boxrec ratings for your P4P lists.

Those lists are compiled at the end of that calendar year; 31st December.

So yes Corrales wasn't on the P4P at the end of 2001. He was however ranked #5 in January of 2001, when he fought Mayweather. So, he in fact was ranked #5 on the P4P list when he fought Mayweather. Did you not watch the fight? They spoke about his P4P ranking enough times.

Everything I say is a calculation of my experiences and knowledge of the industry. Every horse owner is dialed into the condition of his horse.

P4P is trash and as I indicated and you still chose to ignore it is



That's like a literal fart joke. Whoever the fuck Fulton is, like you're a nobody and #7. Taylor, come on now, p4p is aids and you keep parakeeting caw p4p, caw caw...lol.

You can make calculations as much as you like, it still doesn't change the fact that you're asserting something that's entirely an assumption.

Your post is the literal epitome of revisionist history. You're arguing that a fighter cherry picked a fighter who was considered one of the best fighters in the world across the entire sport. How can those two things be correct at the same time? They can't.