Originally posted by studentofthegam
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
How is ray Leonard beter than mayweather??
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by SpeedKillz View PostI almost agree. I have never argued that floyd would beat duran in a H2H. duran is a great fighter / mauler, but floyd is way smarter and more adaptive. yea yea some tards here will call me flomo or whatever, but that wont change the truth.
I dont think floyd could potshot hagler, or beat him for that matter, another unfair comparison, hagler is a monster, size wise, compared to floyd. i think hearns is winnable, and duran obviously...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Brother Jay View PostLOL@believing that yesterday's fighters are the stuff of legends.
In every single sport, the athletes have gotten leaps and bounds better in terms of performance, science and skills.
All except boxing in the minds of certain historians and fanboys.
The stats tell the tale, but I guess in some minds life isn't worth living if you don't have untouchable idols to pray to.
Its incredible the way some lend validity to the theory that "SO & SO from the past" would kill "SO & SO from the present" based SOLELY on the era.
Its like arguing with conviction about fantasy football or baseball. Its supposed to be fun, not realistic.
Yet they hilariously persist as if they have some higher ground ... cheered on by others who are equally delusional.
I personally love it as it amuses me to no end.
Its like the debate where Bruce Lee beats every fighter since his death based on how well choreographed he looked in his films.
Hahaha .. you can always find a good laugh at this site.
If that were true though, every champ today would be as good as Mayweather, or they would all be a mix of Ali, Duran, Robinson, Charles, Pep, Armstrong....instead we have champs like Mayorga, segura, Margarito, Arreola, And a thousand others who suck ass.
Like it or not, boxing is different. It's not against a clock and there is no sport science secret to being able to take a punch. Banks v Mitchell, better athlete doesn't win. Margarito v Martinez better athlete, more skilled, loses by KO.
You guys just don't look at what's staring you in the face. Boxing is the most primitive sport on earth for a very good reason. No matter what science breakthroughs are made, two guys beating the ****e out of each other doesn't change with the advent of excellent new shoes. It's not against the clock, the gloves aren't going to make a difference, as would shoes to a runner, racket to a tennis guy, boat to a rower etc etc.
Guys have fought with the same moves and style that Hopkins, Floyd etc have for decades and decades. You're just too thick to realise it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by SpeedKillz View PostI almost agree. I have never argued that floyd would beat duran in a H2H. duran is a great fighter / mauler, but floyd is way smarter and more adaptive. yea yea some tards here will call me flomo or whatever, but that wont change the truth.
I dont think floyd could potshot hagler, or beat him for that matter, another unfair comparison, hagler is a monster, size wise, compared to floyd. i think hearns is winnable, and duran obviously...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Brother Jay View PostLOL@believing that yesterday's fighters are the stuff of legends.
In every single sport, the athletes have gotten leaps and bounds better in terms of performance, science and skills.
All except boxing in the minds of certain historians and fanboys.
The stats tell the tale, but I guess in some minds life isn't worth living if you don't have untouchable idols to pray to.
Its incredible the way some lend validity to the theory that "SO & SO from the past" would kill "SO & SO from the present" based SOLELY on the era.
Its like arguing with conviction about fantasy football or baseball. Its supposed to be fun, not realistic.
Yet they hilariously persist as if they have some higher ground ... cheered on by others who are equally delusional.
I personally love it as it amuses me to no end.
Its like the debate where Bruce Lee beats every fighter since his death based on how well choreographed he looked in his films.
Hahaha .. you can always find a good laugh at this site.
Unless you think Wlad Klitschko would have lost to Mike Tyson.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by studentofthegam View PostShhh. I wont tell anyone u said that. LOL. Yeah Hagler is huge so potshots are his only choice. I am a big fan of Hagler but in all his big fights he chose to fight and stalk rather than box and move. Advantage Mayweather.
Comment
-
Originally posted by BennyST View PostAt the same level as you stating that Hearns was easily frustrated with a soft chin and that Floyd could just take his right hand away quick and easy and win like that.Last edited by SpeedKillz; 11-21-2012, 09:22 AM.
Comment
Comment