Tweet
Facts - you got any?
-
-
bububu.. Mosley is a riskier fighter for Pac but I wont give him credit if they fought, and has more reward, uhm i'll prove it later. LMAO!!
Comment
-
and he's gone along with his facts.Comment
-
-
Straight from his mouth.Originally posted by IMDAZED View PostMaybe. Or not. Maybe he still thinks Mosley isn't a draw
Comment
-
[QUOTE=Lead Cenobite;7796821]Where have I bashed Pacman on this thread? I haven't, only his crazier fans. This is not a thread about PAC or Floyd. How many times do I have to repeat that? Jesus.---FIRST, AM SORRY. I READ FAST. MY FAULT
So again we go back to the first point: Yes, the blood testing was a personal demand of Floyd. NO it's not unprecedented (Holyfield vs. Tyson for example).---NOTHING TO ARGUE ON THIS BECAUSE THIS ISNT THE TITLE OF UR THREAD. IT WOULD BE NEVER ENDING ARGUMENT AGAIN ONCE TACKLED.
The big issue was not when the drug test was administered, it was the random administration of it up to close to the fight (the details get murky here). THAT is what the Pac camp objected to.---AS IVE SAID PAC IS SUPERSTITIOUS THATS WHY THEY DO NOT LIKE RANDOM TESTING AS RANDOM TESTING MEANS ANYTIME, INCLUDING THE CLOSER FIGHT SCHEDULE, A TEST WILL BE ADMINISTER.
I do think the Floyd should have at least TRIED to take this to the commission. But, the commission will not change it's rules, because they would lose too much money with too many fighters when they all tested positive. It's a losing battle in any case.---WE BOTH AGREE THAT HE SHOULD TRIED. LETS US NOT SPECULATE ABOUT THE COWARDICE OF THE COMMISSION LOSING MONEY. IF YOU BELIEVE THAT..THEN YOU BELIEVE THAT MANY BOXERS ARE ON PEDS..SO WHY DO WE STILL WATCH BOXING FIGHTS..WHEN AT THE BACK OF R MIND BOTH BOXERS FIGHTING WERE ON PEDS.
Do I think "Floyd did it to clean up the sport"? NO. I highly doubt that (which is why it's hilarious when these hurt little Pac fanbitches think I'm a "*****" whatever the **** that means). I think he did it for mind games and I think he probably really does think Pac is on something. OK. I TOO, BELIEVE THAT FLOYD IS NOT CLEANING THE SPORT. CORRECT THE OST IS FOR MIND GAMES, THATS WHY PAC DIDNT AGREE, AND ALSO IT HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH HIS SUPERSTITIOUS BELIEF THATS WHY HE BACK OFF.
Either way, the big problem here is that Pac has made himself look guilty. For what? A superstition?---YES, HE MADE HIMSELF LOOK GUILTY. WHICH ALOT OF *****S CAPITALIZED ON. I KNOW, YOU KNOW THAT MENTAL HAS ALOT TO DO ON FIGHTING. SO IF HIS BELIEF THAT HE WOULD LOSE BECASUE OF THE TESTING CLOSER TO THE DATES. THEN WHAT CAN PAC DO IF HE HAD AGREED ON CONDITION? FIGHTING WITH A BELIEF THAT HE HAS A BIG CHANCE OF LOSING THATS BAD. I TOO HAS A BELIEF WHEN I DO SPARRING. I BELIEVE THAT I LOSE IF MY SPARMATE HIT ME FIRST, EVEN IN THE SLIGHTEST JAB, IN THE HEAD BEFORE I DO. AND I ALWAYS LOSE WHEN IT HAPPENS,HEHE. AND NEVER HAD LOST ONE WHEN I FIRST HIT MY SPARMATE.
And lastly, once again my friend: THIS THREAD WAS NOT ABOUT PAC'S GUILT or INNOCENCE. OR FLOYD. This is about ******* LOGIC. Please stay on topic.---OK. AGAIN AM SORRY FOR READING FAST, THOUGH UR ONE OF THOSE *****S BASHING ANYONE WHO BACK PAC. REGARDING ON UR PUZZLE. MY ANSWER IS NO. FLOYD HAS NO ESP. HE HAS PEOPLE PEEKING/RESEARCHING ABOUT PAC AND HIS CAMP. WHY? HE KNOWS ALOT ABOUT PACMAN..AND HE EVEN KNOWS HOW MUCH PAC EARNED ON NIKE ENDORSEMENT.[/QUOTE
sorry for my answer in ur quote if i capitalized them. just to distinguish ur text from mineComment
-
He doesn't understand the idea that if you make a statement the onus is on you to prove it. Basic logic fail like most *******sOriginally posted by IMDAZED View PostYou already failed, man. First in life, now here.
"Cotto's a bigger draw"
Really, prove it.
"If he fought Oscar, he would've sold thrice more!"
Comment
-
haha the ****** idiot in the red still trying to insult people
how pathetic his life must beComment
-
What an irony.Originally posted by Lead Cenobite View Post
I never thought a ***** or you would ever say this but since you did let us emphasize it....
So how did you get this 'onus' that it's only applicable to that particular poster?
Does this only applies to Pac, his fans, his tards, or anyone who even just remotely says Pac's name but anyone who believes 'Floyd is great' is exempted on this saying?
You sound intelligent, why haven't i heard of it from you criticising other ******s like the mayweather but only *******s?Comment
-
Because you're a troll that hasn't looked hard enough. Recently the level of extremely ****** Mayweather **** has died down. If you looked at this objectively- the *******s have taken over this forum.Originally posted by PAKYO View Post
And uh, you fail really hard with the statement in bold.
WOW. Are you really this dumb? Any person, in any conversation that makes a statement that has no merit or is CHALLENGED by the debating party: THEY have the burden of proof. Not just Pac fans.
If a Mayweather groupie was to say: Floyd is better than Robinson- they'd have to make a case for such a claim. They couldn't just tell someone who heard that and said "you're a ****ing moron" that THAT person should prove the opposite. I'll give you an example in a way that hopefully, even you can understand.
It goes like this:
Floyd fanqueen: "Floyd is better than Robinson"
Reality: Huh? Wtf are you talking about? Stop doing drugs.
Floyd fanqueen: "Of course he is, you're just jealous of how great he is"
Reality: Uh, I know he's great, but better than SRR? **** no. Prove it.
Floyd fanqueen: "No, YOU PROVE it"
FAIL. Right there is the Logic fail.
I'm saddened that I had to break this down for you but you are after all an emotional ******* and think that everyone is out to "get" anyone who doesn't like Pac fans. I have no problem with Pac "fans", because hell as a fighter: I love Pac. It's the *******s with their ****ty, immature ****ing arguments and inability to comprehend basic tenets of how to have an intelligent argument.
PS: I hope you enjoyed looking up "onus" in dictionary.com, but I'm guessing you still didn't quite grasp what it meant.Comment
Comment