Comments Thread For: Spence On Avoiding Tuneups: "It Shouldn't Take Another Fight For Me To Be Sharp and On Point"

[FaustoGeraci]

If you read the latest reports there is only one guy holding up the fight.......the same guy that ran from negotiations last time. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure this out, Crawford does not want the fight. He has no problem jumping through the ropes for an easy opponent .....why is that? He keeps saying he's pound for pound best and been blaming his old Promoter Arum and every other reason he can think of for not making the fight but what's his excuse now? Remember how badly Porter had to shame him to get him in the ring? Crawford even asked him to stop publicly calling him out. I think Porter had to make it clear to him he had health problems and was cashing out before Crawford reluctantly agreed. Even with all that it was a close fight until Shane's Daddy incredibly stopped the action. I hear a poster here talk about how he took Postol apart.....go rewatch that fight ...Crawford certainly won but he was running from Postol over the last few rounds as if he were Mike Tyson. Crawford IS good......he is NOT great....people who know boxing know this and more importantly he knows it. Expect him to run from negotiations again.....blame everyone else and then have another easy cash out fight.

Very well said. You know your stuff my friend. I wish the forum had more people like you.

[Oregonian]

I wasn't referring to you about Postol being a 50/50 fight. I'm merely saying that some fans actually considered it a 50/50 fight.

I remember Bud's opponents at 140 he unified belts with. Indongo was a unified champ who won his two belts (IBF and WBA, I believe) on the road. He was no chump. Postol had crushed Matthysse and was Danny's mandatory who Garcia wanted no parts of. Any fan who doesn't know who Crawford unified against at 140 isn't really much of a fan.

Interest in Crawford-Spence has died off a bit. If it doesn't happen by the end of July, even more fans will hop off the bandwagon.

——-
Interest in the Crawford-Spence fight has certainly cooled off but it’ll still be a big fight for real boxing fans.
That said, I’m assuming you agree with me about why Crawford fought Horn and why Spence fought Ugas. It was about belts and leverage.

[BlackRobb]

——-
Interest in the Crawford-Spence fight has certainly cooled off but it’ll still be a big fight for real boxing fans.
That said, I’m assuming you agree with me about why Crawford fought Horn and why Spence fought Ugas. It was about belts and leverage.

I see your point. My point is that neither Horn nor Ugas had any business with welterweight belts. Bud could be 36 by the time they fight, if they fight. Keep in mind that Spence is a very old 33, if you know what I mean...

[Oregonian]

I see your point. My point is that neither Horn nor Ugas had any business with welterweight belts. Bud could be 36 by the time they fight, if they fight. Keep in mind that Spence is a very old 33, if you know what I mean...

——-
I know exactly what you mean about Spence. Boxing is a very unforgiving sport. Hopefully they get to fight this year.

[Sid-Knee]

——-
I could go back and copy what you wrote me. But why waste my time with you. You literally insulted me. Because I disagreed with you. How juvenile are you?

Yes, you could. What you'd find is me asking you a straight question and find not one insult. You just went to deflection from the off. You've done nothing but.

We both know you can't answer the question. You would have done so already if you could.

[Oregonian]

Wait, i asked you to point out the names around today who Crawford should fight, but instead, you give me this load of fallacies and deflection to the actual question?

Do you want to try that one again? Ask your Mum to give you the help you clearly need as it's clear simple questions bamboozle you.

———
I’ve underlined and bolded the unnecessary response to a discourse about boxing.
That’s the reason ilI have no interest in debating you

[Oregonian]

Yes, you could. What you'd find is me asking you a straight question and find not one insult. You just went to deflection from the off. You've done nothing but.

We both know you can't answer the question. You would have done so already if you could.

——-
Here is what you wrote in bold and underlined.

Do you want to try that one again? Ask your Mum to give you the help you clearly need as it's clear simple questions bamboozle you.
—
Why should I engage you in a boxing conversation?

[Sid-Knee]

——-
Here is what you wrote in bold and underlined.

Do you want to try that one again? Ask your Mum to give you the help you clearly need as it's clear simple questions bamboozle you.
—
Why should I engage you in a boxing conversation?

Wrong again.

This is what i wrote that can be found at the top of page 6...

"Who do you think Crawford should fight then? Remember, they have to want to fight him. So, who have you got?"

This here was my first post to you. You deflected with every single one of them in desperation because i asked a question you knew you couldn't answer without making a fool out of yourself. The ironic thing is though, due to your lack of self-awareness, you've made a fool out of yourself with all the childish deflecting anyway.

[Oregonian]

Wrong again.

This is what i wrote that can be found at the top of page 6...

"Who do you think Crawford should fight then? Remember, they have to want to fight him. So, who have you got?"

This here was my first post to you. You deflected with every single one of them in desperation because i asked a question you knew you couldn't answer without making a fool out of yourself. The ironic thing is though, due to your lack of self-awareness, you've made a fool out of yourself with all the childish deflecting anyway.

———
You could have called me out on that without making it a personal attack. I copy pasted your response to me and underlined what you wrote.
Why would I want to engage you in a conversation?

[Sid-Knee]

———
You could have called me out on that without making it a personal attack. I copy pasted your response to me and underlined what you wrote.
Why would I want to engage you in a conversation?

I knew what your personality traits were when you deflected and knew what you were going to do. You didn't disappoint. It's predictable. The forum is filled with this personality trait.

You want to make comments you can't justify and go on a weird one when someone asks you a reasonable question, then good for you. But ask yourself why you do it? Why put yourself in that position in the first place? Why do you need for your lies to be taken as fact? Does the truth hurt you so much that you feel the need to do this then embarrass yourself in the process like a child? What is it about the truth that has you so emotionally scrabbled?

Think about it.