Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

at one point, Broner was #6 p4p according to RING...

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Isaac Clarke View Post
    Like 90% of your posts is talking about ****s and gays.
    Originally posted by Pigeons View Post
    Ducklovkin is a coward and his Ring ranking symbolizes how far the Ring has fallen under Oscar De La *****'s reign.

    Two premier Mayweather bumsniffs desperately trying to divert the topic away from Broner.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by daggum View Post
      yes because gavin rees is better than murray or geale. why even post if you are going to say ridiculous garbage? those guys that ggg fought were in the top 5. most people had murray beating the lineal champ. geale had 2 belts a year before losing to ggg. rees was never in the top 10 and dimarco's resume was worse than both.
      Broner wasn't getting extended by Gavin Rees to 11 rounds; relative levels are about the same, but that's enough to mess your point up.

      The fact that you are trying to sell Geale and Murray as serious fights is even more laughable; top 5 during a **** era in middleweight boxing is the nonsense that you're thumping your chest about, lol

      Comment


      • #63
        RING are a bunch of fools, there P4P lists hardly ever make any sense. GGG is number 4 P4P right now with Geale being his best win who got destroyed by a Junior middle weight who weighed in less then 154. Those idiots make there P4P list based on only hype. Pathetic.
        Last edited by Lords; 06-27-2015, 04:24 PM.

        Comment


        • #64
          Broner could still be an ATG. At lightweight. Mind you, everybody is an ATG these days.

          Comment


          • #65
            I've never been able to take p4p lists too seriously. You currently have Ring ranking Terrance Crawford as the 8th best boxer on the planet. But then they have him listed as the 6th best 140 lber in the division.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Jim Jeffries View Post
              I've never been able to take p4p lists too seriously. You currently have Ring ranking Terrance Crawford as the 8th best boxer on the planet. But then they have him listed as the 6th best 140 lber in the division.
              While P4P lists shouldn't be taken too seriously, that argument doesn't really hold up. Fighters should work their way up the divisional rankings. If a supremely talented fighter moves up and fights a 6-10 guy then he should be ranked accordingly in the division, regardless of how good he is P4P.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Boxfan83 View Post
                I'm no Broner fan but I think the Ring having Lucian "booty" Bute at #4 at one point was worse than Broner being at #6 but that's still de****able...
                Never happened. But was never even Ring top 10, I'm pretty sure

                Comment

                Working...
                X
                TOP