urm, what? yes, i can. Kermit Cintron had faced better comp than Saul Alvarez, for instance, had more wins over top 154 contenders than Saul did, but who thought Cintron was the better fighter before he got beaten down? nobody.
it's called perceiving attributes and degrees and nuances of ability, and it is done all the time, sometimes correctly and sometimes not. i may be wrong about N'Dam, which could be proven in time - but if he does get some more opportunities and ends up with a better CV than Geale, does that mean i will be 'correct' then while being 'incorrect' now? i guess you don't think that people should express opinions until those opinions are 'proven'.
i haven't even contended that Geale doesn't deserve to be rated higher. my point is that it doesn't count for much at this stage, when neither guy has fought a truly excellent fighter.
it's hard to have a worthwhile discussion with belligerent people who just misapprehend others' points/remarks and go off on rants.
it's called perceiving attributes and degrees and nuances of ability, and it is done all the time, sometimes correctly and sometimes not. i may be wrong about N'Dam, which could be proven in time - but if he does get some more opportunities and ends up with a better CV than Geale, does that mean i will be 'correct' then while being 'incorrect' now? i guess you don't think that people should express opinions until those opinions are 'proven'.
i haven't even contended that Geale doesn't deserve to be rated higher. my point is that it doesn't count for much at this stage, when neither guy has fought a truly excellent fighter.
it's hard to have a worthwhile discussion with belligerent people who just misapprehend others' points/remarks and go off on rants.
Comment