Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lewis/Wlad/Hopkins all came back from defeats. So why doubting Broner?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Originally posted by HeroBando View Post
    You also need great ability, which he doesnt have. And dedication, ditto there
    Dude broner was P4P just last year

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by JasonBoxing View Post
      Dude broner was P4P just last year
      For what? Beating Demarco and Gavin Rees, close call vs feeble 10-'1 underdog Paulie, and gift decision vs patsy PDL? You mean in Chuck Giampa's ratings? I hear those are the most credible lol

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by JasonBoxing View Post
        Dude broner was P4P just last year
        Haha this just keeps getting better. That's why those rankings and belts are meaningless, again, people are impressed by window dressing. You're one of those people.

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by HeroBando View Post
          For what? Beating Demarco and Gavin Rees, close call vs feeble 10-'1 underdog Paulie, and gift decision vs patsy PDL? You mean in Chuck Giampa's ratings? I hear those are the most credible lol
          Haha I can't get enough of this thread. I honestly can't tell if he's trolling or dead serious, either way great entertainment.

          Comment


          • #55
            Anyone who thinks Broner at ANY point of his career was a P4P fighter, it is amazing with an IQ that low that they can even breathe.

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by El-blanco View Post
              Haha this just keeps getting better. That's why those rankings and belts are meaningless, again, people are impressed by window dressing. You're one of those people.
              The RING had Broner P4P. The Ring is >than you. Those guy at the RING have been writing about boxing for like 90 years.

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by JasonBoxing View Post
                The RING had Broner P4P. The Ring is >than you. Those guy at the RING have been writing about boxing for like 90 years.
                Let me clue you in. GBP bought the Ring. Then a bit later fired all their long time staff. Then later they got rid of the panel in p4p rankings, and let retired judge Giamp be the sole arbiter. Sound ridiculous yet?

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by HeroBando View Post
                  Let me clue you in. GBP bought the Ring. Then a bit later fired all their long time staff. Then later they got rid of the panel in p4p rankings, and let retired judge Giamp be the sole arbiter. Sound ridiculous yet?
                  The Ring is a legitimate boxing source. Also GBP never brought the ring. That's just rumors.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Haha this can't be real.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by JasonBoxing View Post
                      The Ring is a legitimate boxing source. Also GBP never brought the ring. That's just rumors.
                      That's not what Wikipedia says: The Ring (often called The Ring Magazine) is an American boxing magazine that was first published in 1922 as a boxing and wrestling magazine. As the sporting legitimacy of professional wrestling came more into question, The Ring shifted to becoming exclusively a boxing oriented publication. The magazine is currently owned by Oscar De La Hoya's Golden Boy Enterprises.
                      Last edited by richardt; 02-15-2015, 10:46 PM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP