Yeah Bro im in SD . Chavez telling it how it is ,pretty much telling Marquez, This is how ****ing boxing is, Its bull**** and I want you to fight him again so you can whoop his ass again the whole world saw it. Take the fight so you can beat his ass and you can get more Money. The whole world saw who the greatest was , Your a legend and your still a better fighter than Pacquiao,You took him to school ...
Take off the Cable and just put a regular antenna , im sure youll get it
Lol, Chavez can talk. In his two biggest fights, bought judges got him a gift draw against Whitaker, and a gift stoppage allowed him to escape from a sure loss vs Taylor
Someone should call in and ask him which of the following aspects of boxing did he win against Pac:
1) Effective Aggression (easily Pac)
2) Defense (Pac by a mile)
3) Ring Generalship (Pac by a mile)
4) Clean effective punching (compubox says Pac and it wasn't even close)
and someone should fax over a copy of the compubox numbers and shove them in front of his face and ask him to explain how he thinks he won. Seriously if someone gives me their fax number I'll fax it over right now I don't give a ****
Look *******
1 .Because of aggressiveness ??? And what kind of “EFFECTIVE aggressiveness” according to the boxing scoring criteria ???
2. “Ring Generalship”??? Wake-up. the promising noble-politician over-hyped hero was more like a DESPERATE MADMAN stalking on an underrated opponent !
3. “Power Punches” ??? So where were the Quality (power) of his punches that shook marquez, they were rather instead more of QUANTITY or missed punches, a no-good for scoring. CompuBox, CompuBox, CompuBox… (and tell me, WHAT/who enconded for this un-official tally system?)
4. “Defense” ? We might should remove this criteria to please ourselves.
Someone should call in and ask him which of the following aspects of boxing did he win against Pac:
1) Effective Aggression (easily Pac)
2) Defense (Pac by a mile)
3) Ring Generalship (Pac by a mile)
4) Clean effective punching (compubox says Pac and it wasn't even close)
and someone should fax over a copy of the compubox numbers and shove them in front of his face and ask him to explain how he thinks he won. Seriously if someone gives me their fax number I'll fax it over right now I don't give a ****
1 .Because of aggressiveness ??? And what kind of “EFFECTIVE aggressiveness” according to the boxing scoring criteria ???
2. “Ring Generalship”??? Wake-up. the promising noble-politician over-hyped hero was more like a DESPERATE MADMAN stalking on an underrated opponent !
3. “Power Punches” ??? So where were the Quality (power) of his punches that shook marquez, they were rather instead more of QUANTITY or missed punches, a no-good for scoring. CompuBox, CompuBox, CompuBox… (and tell me, WHAT/who enconded for this un-official tally system?)
4. “Defense” ? We might should remove this criteria to please ourselves.
Dude, just by reading the post I know he's a troll. Don't feed the trolls.
Someone should call in and ask him which of the following aspects of boxing did he win against Pac:
1) Effective Aggression (easily Pac)
2) Defense (Pac by a mile)
3) Ring Generalship (Pac by a mile)
4) Clean effective punching (compubox says Pac and it wasn't even close)
and someone should fax over a copy of the compubox numbers and shove them in front of his face and ask him to explain how he thinks he won. Seriously if someone gives me their fax number I'll fax it over right now I don't give a ****
3. “Power Punches” ??? So where were the Quality (power) of his punches that shook marquez, they were rather instead more of QUANTITY or missed punches,
Comment