canelo vs kirkland saved boxing, pac man vs algirie on PPV was a good fight because algieri had a good jab, undefeated (at 140) and was tall, Ali is the greatest even though he fought some very weak comp at times, but berto vs mayweather is the worst thing that has ever happend to boxing and floyd is cherrypicking again.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Comments Thread For: Berto: I'm Surprised at Criticism Over Mayweather Shot
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by joseph5620 View PostIf it's so sig worthy why don't you put it in your signature and find out how funny it is? The only laugh I see is your fake laugh.
Actually you suggested that Algieri was not a mismatch by leaving him out of the conversation. Berto actually has wins over ranked welterweights. Algieri has zero wins over ranked welterweights and has never held a belt at the weight. Sig that.
Whats truly funny is that you're implying that Algieri had a realistic shot at beating Pacquiao based on betting odds. That's truly sig worthy. They are both percieved mismatches and the overrated Algieri was worse considering he's done absolutely nothing at 147.
2- Berto has been fighting once a year lately, against subpar competition and has looked terrible for several years. He's incredibly washed up. His best wins were what, Collazo? Quintana? Those aren't spectacular, and they are very far in the past. This is a fighter whose last six fights include getting knocked out in a tough fight with c-level Soto Karass, lost to Guerrero and Ortiz, got outboxed and out thought by another c-level in Josesito Lopez until coming back to score the TKO, got a meh-worthy win over Chambers, and had one decent win over Zaveck.
Algieri was coming up from 140 to 144, sure. But he was coming into the fight with momentum - beat a decent contender and then won a world title. Mind you that Algieri was rated in the top 10 at 140 before fighting Pac, and even continued to be in the top 10 at 140 for some time afterwards. Of course Algieri was still a big underdog, and there was legitimate reason for him to be. It was an easy fight. But he was not as big an underdog as Berto is going to be, because Berto is going to be a much easier fight.
So while Berto has accomplished more, the version of Berto that did those things is long gone and in it's place is a c-level fighter that I would fully expect to get outboxed by Algieri if they fought right now. And he's going to be facing the #1 P4P fighter coming off of a huge victory, what the **** shot does he have? It's way way less than Pacquiao/Algieri, and it's not even close.
PLUS he dam well isn't gonna do after the Mayweather fight something on par with what Algieri did after the Pac fight, and that was give a top WW in Khan a legitimately challenging fight. He'll probably instead get whooped by another 27-8 journeyman who will follow that up with an 0-2 run like Soto Karass.
3- Betting odds do give you a very very rough numerical summary, but of course they're not everything. But trust me, the massive difference in odds is no accident, as a result of the things discussed in point 2.
4- So it's automatically a worse fight because it was a fighter in a lower weight class? There are plenty of fights right now that are being hyped and discussed that involve fighters across weight classes, you have to consider the complete context. Feel free to go back up and read my evaluation of said context.
I would far rather Pacquiao have picked a new, undefeated green champion who fights at 140lbs that was an admittedly easy fight than a washed up former champion who hasn't done **** in years and has absolutely no shot. You can ****in sig that.
EDIT: I didn't even get to the physical characteristics of the fighters, or mention that on paper Algieri had at least been throwing as much as 100 jabs a round in his previous fights, or get into the promotional politics, but guess I didn't really need to do all that when all you had was a weak af post for me to work with.Last edited by BrometheusBob.; 08-10-2015, 07:17 PM.
Comment
Comment