Haney needs to retire - fake champion with no chin

[crimsonfalcon07]

Devin was a free agent. Arum didn't make the best offer. Its a business thing not a fear of Loma or losing thing.

It'd be ****** as a free agent to go sign a deal for less money to rematch a guy you officially beat in a close fight most ppl had 7-5 either way.

This is a business more than a sport esp for the boxers & promoters. Thats why Devin didn't accept an inferior offer & prob why Bob didn't make the biggest offer. The math didn't math for Devin or Bob. More upside for Devin to go towards bigger money & for Bob to push the narrative Loma was robbed instead of paying a lot to run it back & maybe risk Loma not winning & Devin being a free agent again.

Independently of offers, Bill Haney was saying immediately after the fight they would not rematch Loma. That's not based on offers that haven't even been made yet. That's saying, after the fight, "I know I won a questionable decision and I'm not going to give him a chance to get it back". He got booed out of the ring, and went straight to "I'm not going to give him a rematch". The only slack I'm willing to cut him was that he was clearly struggling to make weight. But he could have said "if the money's right, I'll rematch him at 140 because I can't make 135 anymore". But he was willing to fight Shakur at 135. He then had to go and throw dad under the bus for the post fight remarks, because they took so much crap for it.

[drablj]

This gets down to subjective scoring. I don't see how you can be winning a fight if you're not hurting your opponent. I mean at some point it has to be considered. No way was hanney winning this fight imo.

i absolutely disagree with this. you don't have to hurt anybody ever to win a round and a fight. that is a fact. there is no such rule. you can land 1 pitty pat jab and if your opponent doesn't land at all, you win a round despite not hurting anybody. 7 (or 6/10 or 5/8 or 4/6 or 3/4) rounds like this and you can win a fight. it wouldn't be exciting but it's legal and possible.

haney was definitely winning this fight 4-1. he took the lead but he blew it. it's his problem but the fact is he was winning. haney was better after 5, 6 rounds. he won them by default because ryan just threw several rounds. if anybody had ryan in front after 5, 6 rounds, he's just biased.

[billeau2]

i absolutely disagree with this. you don't have to hurt anybody ever to win a round and a fight. that is a fact. there is no such rule. you can land 1 pitty pat jab and if your opponent doesn't land at all, you win a round despite not hurting anybody. 7 (or 6/10 or 5/8 or 4/6 or 3/4) rounds like this and you can win a fight. it wouldn't be exciting but it's legal and possible.

haney was definitely winning this fight 4-1. he took the lead but he blew it. it's his problem but the fact is he was winning. haney was better after 5, 6 rounds. he won them by default because ryan just threw several rounds. if anybody had ryan in front after 5, 6 rounds, he's just biased.

In a professional price fight? When you're evaluating talent looking at the fights and not the scorecards? Sorry. For the amateurs different story entirely. Rules can be applied in different ways. When you talk about the ability to be good enough to control and dominate an opponent who's also considered elite that's greatness. That's why people have to learn to look at fights and not judges scorecards.

Again regarding Haney, I don't know what you mean by winning. He hit Ryan once with effect the whole fight pretty much. If you consider that winning you can make that judgment.

People do wi. fights according to judges decisions that way at times. Sometimes it's a deciding factor which makes sense, but sometimes? It's plain wrong. Your technique is supposed to have effect and I don't care what any rule says otherwise..

[MONGOOSE66]

Enough said

Another One of Garcia groupies has spoken.

[Code Red]

Haney was hurt from round 1, came back, won some rounds and got hurt again, I dont have a problem with his performance but no he can't go to 147

[Mammoth]

Lol everytime someone loses we get these threads. If Ryan retired after his loss he wouldn't have beaten Haney.

[drablj]

In a professional price fight? When you're evaluating talent looking at the fights and not the scorecards? Sorry. For the amateurs different story entirely. Rules can be applied in different ways. When you talk about the ability to be good enough to control and dominate an opponent who's also considered elite that's greatness. That's why people have to learn to look at fights and not judges scorecards.

Again regarding Haney, I don't know what you mean by winning. He hit Ryan once with effect the whole fight pretty much. If you consider that winning you can make that judgment.

People do wi. fights according to judges decisions that way at times. Sometimes it's a deciding factor which makes sense, but sometimes? It's plain wrong. Your technique is supposed to have effect and I don't care what any rule says otherwise..

someone's talent and level of his opponent is irrelevant. every fight/round should be scored the same way.

example: fighter A lands 350 punches in the first 3 rounds and then decides to coast/get on his bike because of complacency (meaning he already won). fighter B barely stands and is a bloody mess but he still tries to land. somehow fighter B lands 1 punch a round in rounds 4-12 and fighter A doesn't land anything.
who won the fight? fighter B won the fight 9-3 even if you give fighter A 3 10-8 rounds at the beginning. it doesn't matter who took more damage, who has more power, who's face looks better, who threw and landed more in the whole fight. you win the fight by winning more points which is usually the same as more rounds.

if EVERYBODY can't agree with this (i gave an EASY example to score) then abolish scoring altogether because it's meaningless.

note: this post has nothing to do with any particular boxer. i was talking in general.

[drablj]

Lol everytime someone loses we get these threads. If Ryan retired after his loss he wouldn't have beaten Haney.

some people here can't comprehend that there are fighters like bheki moyo https://boxrec.com/en/proboxer/323707 and kristian laight https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/216597 . these men continued their careers with zero wins in 74 fights and after 278 losses but haney (or anybody else ever) should retire because he lost once.

[djtmal]

Damn just last week he was a generational talent

[Carpe Diem]

Damn just last week he was a generational talent

NSB always overhyped any flavor of the week or month. I wouldn’t be surprised if some fans now believe that Ryan can beat Crawford or Boots. Truth to be told, Haney is a bit like Spence, a product of hard work, very basic with no special effects.