Shawn Porter still salty about Brook - Picks Khan

[Box-Office]

Where was the Collazo ranked in the WBA? And Khan wasn't WBA Champion so I don't understand the relevance.

Collazo had one of those International belts by WBA and hence was a ranked fighter. #7 I believe a month before Khan?

The whole argument where it was brought up was about being a top 10 WW. Now its obviously not as good as being Ring top 10.

[IronDanHamza]

Collazo had one of those International belts by WBA and hence was a ranked fighter. #7 I believe a month before Khan?

The whole argument where it was brought up was about being a top 10 WW. Now its obviously not as good as being Ring top 10.

Yeah because Collazo defintely wasn't a Top 10 WW at that point.

[Box-Office]

Yeah because Collazo defintely wasn't a Top 10 WW at that point.

No, but he was a good WW debut fight.

Me personally, I don't care about rankings including Ring much if any. I primarily care about resumes.

The nature of the argument was something around the lines of Collazo coming off a decent win, both guys at crossroads and at the time was actually respected by the forum too, which LacedUp replied with he wasn't top 10 WW. I for one replied by saying he was WBA top 10, good enough.Then Laced Up: alphabet rankings don't mean anything. Of course IBF is an exception.

[STREET CLEANER]

Weren't you the guy who kept saying Brook wouldn't show up to fight Porter?

Yeah....moving on...

Nope, you made that up to save face

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Nope, you made that up to save face

I have a near photographic memory, kid. I know for a fact you specifically kept saying that Brook would pull out of the fight.

[LacedUp]

That was Barrera with the WBO, you mug.

Brook-Jones II was exactly 2 yrs ago, recently?

Anyways,they made him add pounds a few weeks before the fight. It was initially a WW fight. Pathetic!!!!

No it wasn't.

Well, you brought it up? Jones had fought at light middleweight multiple times and had knocked out people at light middleweight BEFORE he fought Brook, has fought there since and recently fought at middleweight. Yet now you're trying to tell me it was an advantage to Brook Jesus Christ almighty, you're on a slippery slope there.

It was a 10 round non-title fight. Why should two big welterweights make 147?

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Box-Office doesn't half clutch at straws eh

[LacedUp]

No, but he was a good WW debut fight.

Me personally, I don't care about rankings including Ring. I care of resumes.

The nature of the argument was something around the lines of Collazo coming off a decent win, both guys at crossroads and at the time was actually respected by the forum too, which LacedUp replied with he wasn't top 10 WW. I for one replied by saying he was WBA top 10, good enough.Then Laced Up: alphabet rankings don't mean anything. Of course IBF is an exception.

No you said he was a top 10 welterweight period. You didn't mention any alphabet ranking, stop playing dumb. I have never used the IBF rankings for anything other than explain to you that an IBF champion has to fight guys in that division unless an exception is made for a big fight or unification.

I have never said anything as ******ed as Jo Jo Dan was #1 welterweight in the world, because of his ranking with IBF - Which is exactly what you did with Collazo.

I have explained this to you at least 10 times, yet it doesn't seem to get through.

[LacedUp]

Yeah because Collazo defintely wasn't a Top 10 WW at that point.

That was obvious to anyone but Box-Office.

Now he's trying to claim I have used alphabet rankings for the same purpose, yet won't give me an example of it.

[LacedUp]

Box-Office doesn't half clutch at straws eh

He's sinking fast, like the career of his hero.