Is Algieri better than Broner? He beat Taylor more easily

[IronDanHamza]

But what is actually more entertaining is your personal agenda, this thread is about Algieri and Broner, not Floyd.

And contrary to what some may believe, Broner and Floyd are not the same person, lol

Problem with this site is people see a particular fan say somethingn and then bunch them all together as if everyone in that same fanbase has that same view.

I've never said Floyd would beat Pacquaio because Marquez troubled Pacquaio but that poster is implying that I have.

It's difficult.

[Grimgash]

Hard to say that unless they fight. Broner is quick which gives him an edge imo. Totally different styles. Ruslan can hit but isnt very fast and he still got to alieri.

[IronDanHamza]

What agenda does he have? he just laughed at some Floyd fans being hypocrites saying the triangle theory doesn't work when they are known for using that with Mayweather when the Pacquiao topic comes up, they will say look wht Floyd did to Marquez he out box him but Pac went to war with him and got knocked out, that means Floyd beats Pac easy.

So they must have an Agenda.

See, here's a prime example of what I just said.

[keepemup]

Yes and he's a better boxer. Broner has more a slugging style than that of a boxing style.

[2fast2strong]

Problem with this site is people see a particular fan say somethingn and then bunch them all together as if everyone in that same fanbase has that same view.

I've never said Floyd would beat Pacquaio because Marquez troubled Pacquaio but that poster is implying that I have.

It's difficult.

Very true Iron Dan thats why I have decided to bow out of this thread before someone starts insulting my mom or something. lol

[Ragnar Lothbrok]

But what is actually more entertaining is your personal agenda, this thread is about Algieri and Broner, not Floyd.

And contrary to what some may believe, Broner and Floyd are not the same person, lol

and you dont have a personal agenda you ****** alt? stop fronting before you get wrecked here.

[2fast2strong]

The purpose of highlighting a particular part of a sentence is to isolate it. The purpose of isolating it was to show that your definition was ambiguous and could also be used to describe betting odds. How about this: That's exactly what betting odds are, they imply that one is better than the other based on outside factors without actually having to prove it by fighting each other.

Damn I will bow out after is respond to this post.

Actually my definition was not ambiguous at all as i stated what the meaning of the Triangle theory was.

But betting odds are based on many different factors, so yes in fact all betting is obviously based on speculation because the event has not occurred yet.

So it would seem that there was a miscommunication of the imperfect science of odds making but the definition of the The Triangle Theory is black and white

[2fast2strong]

and you dont have a personal agenda you ****** alt? stop fronting before you get wrecked here.

OH NOT THAT!

I would not want to be *wrecked here* by an e_gangster!

And because i am new this HAS to be an alt

Because you were never new once right?

And whats my agenda? because yours is obvious.

[The Big Dunn]

Knowimg you tunney, you probably have told fantastic, thuggery, maniac, slimshandy, weltscmer and gong in ur private chat room that Algieiri is better thans ray Robinson and ali.

[hectari]

OH NOT THAT!

I would not want to be *wrecked here* by an e_gangster!

And because i am new this HAS to be an alt

Because you were never new once right?

And whats my agenda? because yours is obvious.

What is his Agenda?