Fun fact, Mikey Garcia has beaten the same amount of reigning world champions as GGG and Loma combined

[Smash]

My man, do you understand the concept of what the A side is?

I'm really not sure that you do.

i dont think u do

[Smash]

My man, do you understand the concept of what the A side is?

I'm really not sure that you do.

u mention charlo but i also remember a very su****ious fight v korobov i think it was a clear as day robbery actually

[Smash]

not to mention all the help a siders get in the ring as well, like the rolly fight and andre ward with tony weeks wow is all i can say

[IronDanHamza]

i dont think u do

No, I really don't think you do.

You've just deemed JEFF HORN the A side vs MANNY PACQUAIO, who at the time was still one of the biggest PPV stars in the sport, because the fight was in Australia.

You've then deemed Amir Khan as the B Side vs Lamont Peterson, because the fight was in Washington.

Let me ask you, when Devin Haney fought George Kambosos, who was the A side in that fight? It's give you a hint, not the person from Australia.

When AJ fought Andy Ruiz, who was the A side in that fight? I'll give you another hint, not the person from the USA.

When Lomachenko fought Luke Campbell, who was the A side in that fight? I'll give you ANOTHER hint, not the person from the UK.

I could go on. Shall I? Or have you grasped it?

The A side is the fighter who get's the bigger split, the fighter who brings more money to the table. That's who the A Side is. The fact you've just tried to call Jeff Horn the A side in a fight vs MANNY PACQUAIO is legitimately one of the most comical things I've ever read.

And on top of that, this is besides the point that your position is nonsensical and just stupid, really. You're asserting that Haney was the A side and "favoured by the promoter" on the basis that he was awarded the decision. Does that actually make sense in your head? Because if it does you should be worried.

I've just given you a list of B side fighters who won decisions. It quite literally debunks your theory. And there's a whole long list of other examples of that.

[Smash]

kotelnik v devon alexander back in the day also, that was a bit embarrassing with devon taking shouting to bradley U next lol if i remember after a crap performance where he was handed the win as far i remember

[IronDanHamza]

u mention charlo but i also remember a very su****ious fight v korobov i think it was a clear as day robbery actually

And that has what to do with he fact he lost a close decision to the B side fighter?

Shouldn't Charlo have won that on the basis he was the A side? Like you're claiming was the case with Haney?

Can you genuinely not see the gaping hole in your assertion?

[Smash]

No, I really don't think you do.

You've just deemed JEFF HORN the A side vs MANNY PACQUAIO, who at the time was still one of the biggest PPV stars in the sport, because the fight was in Australia.

You've then deemed Amir Khan as the B Side vs Lamont Peterson, because the fight was in Washington.

Let me ask you, when Devin Haney fought George Kambosos, who was the A side in that fight? It's give you a hint, not the person from Australia.

When AJ fought Andy Ruiz, who was the A side in that fight? I'll give you another hint, not the person from the USA.

When Lomachenko fought Luke Campbell, who was the A side in that fight? I'll give you ANOTHER hint, not the person from the UK.

I could go on. Shall I? Or have you grasped it?

The A side is the fighter who get's the bigger split, the fighter who brings more money to the table. That's who the A Side is. The fact you've just tried to call Jeff Horn the A side in a fight vs MANNY PACQUAIO is legitimately one of the most comical things I've ever read.

And on top of that, this is besides the point that your position is nonsensical and just stupid, really. You're asserting that Haney was the A side and "favoured by the promoter" on the basis that he was awarded the decision. Does that actually make sense in your head? Because if it does you should be worried.

I've just given you a list of B side fighters who won decisions. It quite literally debunks your theory. And there's a whole long list of other examples of that.

its not always there same, there can be reasons for these decisions and i pointed them out in those cases its not going to happen in every case but it happened in those cases

[IronDanHamza]

kotelnik v devon alexander back in the day also, that was a bit embarrassing with devon taking shouting to bradley U next lol if i remember after a crap performance where he was handed the win as far i remember

You called the other guy thick. Was that intentional irony or what is it?

You can list 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00 fights whereby the A side won a decision that they should have lost. That happens.

What is your point?

Do I need to make another list of when the B side fighter wins a close decision for you to understand why your position makes no sense?

[IronDanHamza]

its not always there same, there can be reasons for these decisions and i pointed them out in those cases its not going to happen in every case but it happened in those cases

Ok so how do you know Haney beat Lomachenko because he was "favoured by the promoter?"

And secondly, have you grasped that the A side fighter isn't always the home fighter?

[Smash]

You called the other guy thick. Was that intentional irony or what is it?

You can list 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00 fights whereby the A side won a decision that they should have lost. That happens.

What is your point?

Do I need to make another list of when the B side fighter wins a close decision for you to understand why your position makes no sense?

u are the thick one actually very thick

if u cant understand that a siders get more decisions for them than b siders u should immediately check yourself into hospital because u actually have NO BRAIN WHATSOEVER in your head, if u even have a head that is