WBC President REVEALS Pacquiao ranking was a MISTAKE!

[djtmal]

So by the same logic, all the others fighters mentioned are also hype jobs then, right?

Please a Floyd boy talking about logic

[IronDanHamza]

Please a Floyd boy talking about logic

Or you could just answer the question.

So by the same logic, all the others fighters mentioned are also hype jobs then, right?

[djtmal]

Or you could just answer the question.

I already justified why Errol Spence wasn't the #1 ww and Keith Thurman was

[El_Mero]

Rightttttt so we’re back to square one then now aren’t we?

If that is the criteria and logic for someone being “bogus #1” then;

Was Hatton a bogus #1 at 140 when Pacquaio beat him?

Was Barrera a bogus #1 at 126 when Pacquaio beat him?

Was Joe Frazier bogus #1 when George Foreman beat him?

Was George Foreman a bogus #1 when Muhammad Ali beat him?

Was Micheal Spinks a bogus #1 when Mike Tyson beat him?

Was Anontio Margarito a bogus #1 when Shane Mosley beat him?

Was **** Tiger a bogus #1 LHW when Bob Foster beat him?

All were ranked #1, and none of the above won a round all of the above were knocked out, or as you eloquently put it “got their **** pushed in”

Does that somehow mean they weren't ranked #1 going into those fights?

Since when does losing in a fight in dominant fashion and getting stopped somehow mean their previous accomplishments that lead to their #1 ranking disappears?

Oh yeah, it doesn’t, because it’s a dumb, nonsensical argument.

And back to my original response....did any of them make multiple excuses to not fight, as Errl did?

[IronDanHamza]

I already justified why Errol Spence wasn't the #1 ww and Keith Thurman was

Right, so, by that exact same logic, all of these other fighters mentioned were “bogus #1” and hype jobs too then, right?

It’s not a trick question but you’re having a mighty amount of difficulty answering it.

[djtmal]

Right, so, by that exact same logic, all of these other fighters mentioned were “bogus #1” and hype jobs too then, right?

It’s not a trick question but you’re having a mighty amount of difficulty answering it.

I already justified why Errol Spence wasn't the #1 ww and Keith Thurman was

[IronDanHamza]

I already justified why Errol Spence wasn't the #1 ww and Keith Thurman was

Right…………so………….by that exact same logic, all of these other fighters mentioned were “bogus #1” and hype jobs too then, right?

It’s not a trick question but you’re having a mighty amount of difficulty answering it.

[djtmal]

Right…………so………….by that exact same logic, all of these other fighters mentioned were “bogus #1” and hype jobs too then, right?

It’s not a trick question but you’re having a mighty amount of difficulty answering it.

I don't have to go any further than what i stated.

I already said Errol Spence was not the #1 ww as your sources reported. Maybe #2 or 3 but Keith Thurman was the guy.

Why you can't accept my position on this matter is your problem.

[IronDanHamza]

I don't have to go any further than what i stated.

I already said Errol Spence was not the #1 ww as your sources reported. Maybe #2 or 3 but Keith Thurman was the guy.

Why you can't accept my position on this matter is your problem.

Because your position is literally not reality. You can’t just want someone to be ranked #1 therefore they are now #1. That’s not how it works. Someone is either ranked #1, or they’re not. And in 2019, Errol Spence was ranked #1. That’s a fact.

And, if you then want to use the logic you are using to say he somehow wasnt #1, or his #1 was “bogus” and is a “hype job.

By that exact same logic, all of these other fighters mentioned were “bogus #1” and hype jobs too then, right?

It’s not a trick question but you’re having a mighty amount of difficulty answering it. is there a reason you are so cowardly avoiding the question?

[djtmal]

Because your position is literally not reality.?

Why isn't it.

Errol Spence going from being ranked #1 (allegedly) in the world to being totally dominated and stopped before the championship rounds, then falling off the map for two years is all truth.

So anyone labeling him a bogus hypjob is totally justified and needs no further justification