-
-
Porter-Brook was close and was no bashing.Wtf did I just read.
Are you thick? Hopkins got robbed against Taylor, Porter bashed Alexander up good. Absolutely terrible analogy.
You know that's how it works in boxing - two guys fight, one wins and therefore he's better.
Never thought I'd have to explain such simple logic to anyone. Further proves what a khanturd you are.
holy cow you've lost it good.
Hopkins-Taylor fought twice, which one are you calling robbery?
Between Porter-Alexander, Shawn is the better fighter, but Devon has achieved more than Porter, beating Alexander is getting a more accomplished name on your resume. Everyone has losses, they don't define the fighter. Is Kevin Mitchell beating Prescott better than DSG shattering Khan? cuz when they met Prescott>Khan? Please do answer that instead of inserting a million smileys calling me names and the usual trolling garbage.
Also, nice try with my quote in your sign, the Kell-ends are one shook bunch, its called the Box-Office effect.Comment
-
Lets face it, Devon Alexander has now lost 6 of his last 10 fights.
His wins were Maidana, Bailey, Soto-BumAss and Lee Purdy.
The guy has been a major flop.Comment
-
It wasn't really close, but it was not a bashing either. Porter did not win more than 4 rounds in the fight.
Both of them were robberies. Taylor did not beat Hopkins.
Mate, you are coming up with ridiculous analogies. Who cares who achieved more? Porter CLEARLY beat Alexander hence Porter > Alexander. It's as simple as that. And it's not like there was years between and Brook fought a different version of Porter that beat Alexander. He faced the winner of the two straight after, only Porter squeezed in a Malignaggi fight and looked destructive in it. Alexander really lost to Kotelnik, he really lost to Matthysse, he quit against Bradley. He hugged and clinched his way to beat Maidana and then fought a 100 year old Randal Bailey who couldn't even muster 100 shots through 12 rounds (thrown not landed) and then fought Lee Purdy of all people.
It is clearly a crazy analogy as Prescott was a columbian goat farmer who never ever got a single win as good as Khan again and lost to the likes of Paul McCloskey even.
Porter beat Alexander handily, beat a former world champion in Malignaggi who had just fought Broner and given him a tough fight and bested Zab Judah albeit a stinky version. Porter also beat Julio Diaz comfortably in their rematch and since losing to Brook beat Broner comfortably.
Yeah it's in my sig because it's completely delusional to even suggest Alexander is better than Porter when they fought and he clearly lost
Say if someone was to fight Danny Garcia and win in 2013 (or even now), it would be a much better win than if he beat Amir Khan because he was smoked in 4 rounds.Comment
-
-
Too much drivel to shovel through.It wasn't really close, but it was not a bashing either. Porter did not win more than 4 rounds in the fight.
Both of them were robberies. Taylor did not beat Hopkins.
Mate, you are coming up with ridiculous analogies. Who cares who achieved more? Porter CLEARLY beat Alexander hence Porter > Alexander. It's as simple as that. And it's not like there was years between and Brook fought a different version of Porter that beat Alexander. He faced the winner of the two straight after, only Porter squeezed in a Malignaggi fight and looked destructive in it. Alexander really lost to Kotelnik, he really lost to Matthysse, he quit against Bradley. He hugged and clinched his way to beat Maidana and then fought a 100 year old Randal Bailey who couldn't even muster 100 shots through 12 rounds (thrown not landed) and then fought Lee Purdy of all people.
It is clearly a crazy analogy as Prescott was a columbian goat farmer who never ever got a single win as good as Khan again and lost to the likes of Paul McCloskey even.
Porter beat Alexander handily, beat a former world champion in Malignaggi who had just fought Broner and given him a tough fight and bested Zab Judah albeit a stinky version. Porter also beat Julio Diaz comfortably in their rematch and since losing to Brook beat Broner comfortably.
Yeah it's in my sig because it's completely delusional to even suggest Alexander is better than Porter when they fought and he clearly lost
Say if someone was to fight Danny Garcia and win in 2013 (or even now), it would be a much better win than if he beat Amir Khan because he was smoked in 4 rounds.
The whole "years apart" thing is just a new constraint you conveniently added. Much like the one about the method (Dec/KO) of how the won/lost.
The original point you've always made on several other threads is: Porter>Alexander.Comment
-
Comment
Tweet
Comment