Tweet
I mean, could you even imagine Broner surviving against Provid with his lack of movement? Please, he'd get utterly destroyed. Algieri has many more tools than Broner does and even so, he'll still get beaten up by Pac.
-
-
I bet when he was writing that he thought he'd put it so succinctly that no one could ever have a response that rivaled Larry's initial moment of profound in-your-face Genius.Originally posted by Freedom2014
Instead he looks like an absolute Dim dumpling as per usual.
Comment
-
of course algeiri is better. broner is mediocre. moving through weight divisions while fighting bums=robert guerrero style. he's like a 5 weight 8 time champ according to himself of course.Comment
-
The triangle theory never works in reality, in MMA it is called MMA Math.
Meaning x fighter beats y fighter easier than b fighter did so that means x is the better fighter right?
No styles make fights most people would agree with that statment and until Algieri wins some belts i would favor Broner in a H2H
And I think Broner beats the Russian alsoComment
-
He's white so he can't be called slick, crafty, and skillful.Comment
-
He's at least as good. I think he's better than Broner.Comment
-
If they fought, I think Algieri wins. He's a younger, taller, longer and fresher version of Malignaggi. Broner fought to a draw with Malignaggi, in my eyes. Broner is also flat footed while Algieri can box. If you can box you automatically have a chance against Broner. If you can brawl you have a chance. ****, if you have a pulse, you have a chance.Comment
-
Algieri is so overrated on here it's not even funny.Comment
-
Well he made some good points to be honest.
Styles make fights.
I think the sports been around long enough now to know triangle theories don't mean much.Comment
-
Yeah, I think there is a fair argument for Algieri being betterComment
Comment