Comments Thread For: Sulaiman: Floyd-Canelo Winner Should Face Pacquiao

[The Big Dunn]

This is wrong, because I said nothing about Pac. All i said a majority did not have JMM winning. I'm gonna start thinking you're just as ******ed as most of your cohorts if you can't figure this out on 3rd try, it's already a lot of leeway:

JMM winning: 57
JMM not winning: 87

87 > 57

Saying nothing about Pac is your way of trying to make your statement true through exclusion. Maybe that works in whatever stats/math class you are enrolled in but itr doesn't work in the real world.

Your pretending to be ******, which I guess you prefer over admitting your analysis was incorrect and you were wrong.

[Zeus Molecules]

Hey lfc 19titles. You having trouble googling the answer?

Joan Guzman, Ali Funeka, and Zahir Raheem are all fighters that were feared and undefeated in the lightweight division when Pac was fighting in the superfeatherweight and lightweight divisions. All repeatedly called out Pac, with Guzman calling him out for like 4 years and probably being one of the reasons that Pac jumped out of the lightweight division so quickly. Pac wanted no part of Guzman.

Nate Campbell was also in the division, but I don't think Pac ducked him.

[rasdun]

What? So Pac past fights are relevant but others past fights arent? This makes no sense at all.

It seems you wanna say "yes Pac got KO'd by JMM but Pac is still great cause of the Hatton KO a few years back."

If im wrong with this assesment then please explain how this works

No. What Im saying is that fights from '09 - '11 have some relevance. fights from '12-'13 have more relevance and fights from '94-'99 have extremely little relevance. wouldn't you agree?
you stated something to the effect of - are we looking at today or the past - and my point is that you have to use past fights to evaluate today's greatness - No?

[rasdun]

so, of course JMM ko is the most relevant by far, but you also cannot discount what pac did in the preceding 8 yrs either - that's my point

[PAC-BOY]

All big money roads...lead to Manny Pacquiao.

[The Big Dunn]

bendos point is that a slim majority didn't have JMM winning. b/c less than 50% of those polled though JMM won. More though JMM than though Pac won, but still, less than a majority thought he won bc more than 50% though Pac won or a draw - that's his point

your a good dude even though we don't always agree. Thats not Hero's point. He's trying to make a lineal comparison with multiple variables.

He counts draws only as relative to JMM and not manny.

The stats show the majority, however small the majority was, thought JMM won the fight or that the fight was a draw. The minority thought manny won or was a draw.

[rasdun]

Hey lfc 19titles. You having trouble googling the answer?

Joan Guzman, Ali Funeka, and Zahir Raheem are all fighters that were feared and undefeated in the lightweight division when Pac was fighting in the superfeatherweight and lightweight divisions. All repeatedly called out Pac, with Guzman calling him out for like 4 years and probably being one of the reasons that Pac jumped out of the lightweight division so quickly. Pac wanted no part of Guzman.

Nate Campbell was also in the division, but I don't think Pac ducked him.

David Diaz was a top 10 lightwt when Pac took his 1st and only fight at lightwt. and Pac left lightwt bc he got huge multimillion $ offers for fights wit de la Hoya, Hatton and Cotto. do u think Pac was scared of Guzman and then fought a fighter who was 3 weight classes bigger and a 2-1 favorite to beat him instead (de la Hoya)

[HeroBando]

Saying nothing about Pac is your way of trying to make your statement true through exclusion. Maybe that works in whatever stats/math class you are enrolled in but itr doesn't work in the real world.

Your pretending to be ******, which I guess you prefer over admitting your analysis was incorrect and you were wrong.

Man you need backtracking retraining. You realize I was right and you were wrong to call me out, backtrack a little, but can't help your scoundrel self throwing that in. Probably thinking I'd only skim over it. no I was RIGHT and you were wrong to dispute it

[rasdun]

your a good dude even though we don't always agree. Thats not Hero's point. He's trying to make a lineal comparison with multiple variables.

He counts draws only as relative to JMM and not manny.

The stats show the majority, however small the majority was, thought JMM won the fight or that the fight was a draw. The minority thought manny won or was a draw.

of course im a good dude - we're both duns, lol. it seemed to me that he just said that a majority of those polled thought it was a draw or Pac won, meaning a majority thought JMM didn't win.
Bando is that what u meant, or was it something else?

[HeroBando]

of course im a good dude - we're both duns, lol. it seemed to me that he just said that a majority of those polled thought it was a draw or Pac won, meaning a majority thought JMM didn't win.
Bando is that what u meant, or was it something else?

It's as simple as that, not sure why Dunn is resisting and trying to build a strawman instead