cauz broner is outspoken so people don't like him.
Why is Broner criticized yet GGG praised?
Collapse
-
-
welp....wont be taking you seriously here on out25-6 barkley, 40-9 malinga, lost to collins twice, 32-8 robbie simms at york hall ffs, mclellan was a bum, fought someone 28-16 the fight before last. What an absolutely amazing set of opponents. Talk about viewing past fighters with rose tinted glasses lol. Can pick and choose a number of fighters on ggg's record who are no worse then that load of ****e. Benn and eubank never dominated a division over a number of years, GGG has destroyed every single fighter hes fought, never been down in almost 400 combined amateur and pro fights.
watch the fights instead of going to boxrec
dont be lazy and watch the fights
Benn was wrecking guys and was an even bigger one punch hitter than GGG, he got better with time whereas GGG had that great amatuer pedigree
when he developed Benn became a force at 160-168Comment
-
Such a good chin that calzaghe knocked him down. Yes you are correct, i wouldnt know a lot of them cause a lot of them were nobodies.Comment
-
Oh so you're a fanboy.....How pathetic....25-6 barkley, 40-9 malinga, lost to collins twice, 32-8 robbie simms at york hall ffs, mclellan was a bum, fought someone 28-16 the fight before last. What an absolutely amazing set of opponents. Talk about viewing past fighters with rose tinted glasses lol. Can pick and choose a number of fighters on ggg's record who are no worse then that load of ****e. Benn and eubank never dominated a division over a number of years, GGG has destroyed every single fighter hes fought, never been down in almost 400 combined amateur and pro fights.
No Benn and Eubank didn't dominate in the Era of Hopkins, Jones, Toney, Griffin, Littles.... Most of this was at 168 though.... Where GGG somehow fights Kell Brook instead of James Degale. Degale is Hearn too btw and would have taken that offer
Comment
-
SO we count fights were the guy is a shell of himself to shamelessly promote our agenda?? like I said....Fanboy
Cotto must get loads of credit for blasting out Martinez off you right
Comment
-
i agree with this, but there's quite a caveat when you consider that those guys beat broner clearly, and golovkin is the most dominant fighter in boxing right now. broner looked spectacular / dominant at 130 and 135. also had a massive advantage in natural size. looked ordinary when he got to 140 and 147. i wonder why?
do we credit broner for wins he didn't get because they're better than anytbody golovkin fought?
when you look at a resume, rank a fighter, etc, you don't credit him for his losses
. you ask "who did he beat and when?"
in broner's case his best win may very well be antonio freaking demarco, a much smaller but decent fighter, and the best fighter he's actually beaten was probably an aging paulie malignaggi at welterweight.
when you consider wins, which is what really matters on a resume, golovkin's the better fighter. no losses, nevermind getting a beating from marcos maidana. nevermind a clear loss to shawn porter at a catchweight. wins that fit right in with the antonio demarcos and aging paulie's of the world. and they're back to back for several years, all via knockout. his resume is better than broners. at the very least, they're comparable.
but you have moneyteamers / team broners hyping broner, and crapping on golokvin. i wonder why
?
Comment
-
dont be lazy and watch the fights lol, yeah going to cancel work tomorrow so i can sit through all of benns fights. Alright bum was an exaggeration but he wasnt some world beater was he, as i said a lot of these fighters from the past get made out to be amazing when they werent, laughable that im being made out to be the crazy one by you two clowns for thinking golovkin (unanimously considered either 1st,2nd ,3rd in world p4p) is better than benn and eubank, two solid but limited fighters who were nowhere near any P4P listswelp....wont be taking you seriously here on out
watch the fights instead of going to boxrec
dont be lazy and watch the fights
Benn was wrecking guys and was an even bigger one punch hitter than GGG, he got better with time whereas GGG had that great amatuer pedigree
when he developed Benn became a force at 160-168Comment
-
a chin doesnt change that much. hopkins and toneys chins were fine well into there 40's.Comment
-
Barkley has wins over Hearns you fool. And Collins had Roy Jones second guessing a fight...Not BJS ffs.25-6 barkley, 40-9 malinga, lost to collins twice, 32-8 robbie simms at york hall ffs, mclellan was a bum, fought someone 28-16 the fight before last. What an absolutely amazing set of opponents. Talk about viewing past fighters with rose tinted glasses lol. Can pick and choose a number of fighters on ggg's record who are no worse then that load of ****e. Benn and eubank never dominated a division over a number of years, GGG has destroyed every single fighter hes fought, never been down in almost 400 combined amateur and pro fights.
McClellan only has two wins over Julian Jackson.
Does it not get old spouting this crap?Comment
-
and thats my point, all these great fighters and eubank and benn didnt fight them. Cause they formed there own domestic circuit with watson and collins, all fighting each other and avoiding the true world class fightersOh so you're a fanboy.....How pathetic....
No Benn and Eubank didn't dominate in the Era of Hopkins, Jones, Toney, Griffin, Littles.... Most of this was at 168 though.... Where GGG somehow fights Kell Brook instead of James Degale. Degale is Hearn too btw and would have taken that offer
Comment
Comment