Tweet
First guy mentioned David Lemiuex as if the fight just happened so it was an old post. He did give too much credit for the Proska victory.
The second guy did not really hype the Proska win. Saying Proska had one lost in 28 fights isn't pumping him up like he's superman but simply an accurate assessment of his record.
Third guy called Proksa a top 10 middleweight at the time. That may or may not be accurate. He was probably ranked in the top 10 of one or more sanctioning body but I base my top 10 off the ring magazine or Dan Rafael's division rankings. I don't recall if Proska was on those lists at the time. But once again, if HE WAS its simply the guy telling you something accurate about Proska at the time and not saying he's superman.
Fourth guy was simply comparing Chavez's recent list of opponents to GGG's. Once again, there is ASBOLUTELY NO crowing about Proska.
Fifth guy is once again is not expressing an opinion on Proska but simply remarking on where he was ranked when GGG fought him.
Seriously, there has to come a point where we can just look at something someone else writes and agree to what the **** reality is. Saying someone was ranked in the top 10 isn't pumping them up as if they were some world beater. You need to be able to tell the difference. If you want to question the source of the ranking then feel free to do so. As sanctioning bodies will have a lot of random turds in their top 10 and generally do not include a belt holder for another sanctioning body from within the weight class they aren't the greatest rankings to site. If you want to point out the relative strength or weakness of the division at the time of the ranking be my guest. But if this dude was ranked in the top 10 somewhere at the time he fought GGG you can't b!tch about them pointing it out. If its true its true. I am sure if you went back to those guys and asked them Proska wouldn't even rank in the top 10 of GGG's best career opponents.
The second guy did not really hype the Proska win. Saying Proska had one lost in 28 fights isn't pumping him up like he's superman but simply an accurate assessment of his record.
Third guy called Proksa a top 10 middleweight at the time. That may or may not be accurate. He was probably ranked in the top 10 of one or more sanctioning body but I base my top 10 off the ring magazine or Dan Rafael's division rankings. I don't recall if Proska was on those lists at the time. But once again, if HE WAS its simply the guy telling you something accurate about Proska at the time and not saying he's superman.
Fourth guy was simply comparing Chavez's recent list of opponents to GGG's. Once again, there is ASBOLUTELY NO crowing about Proska.
Fifth guy is once again is not expressing an opinion on Proska but simply remarking on where he was ranked when GGG fought him.
Seriously, there has to come a point where we can just look at something someone else writes and agree to what the **** reality is. Saying someone was ranked in the top 10 isn't pumping them up as if they were some world beater. You need to be able to tell the difference. If you want to question the source of the ranking then feel free to do so. As sanctioning bodies will have a lot of random turds in their top 10 and generally do not include a belt holder for another sanctioning body from within the weight class they aren't the greatest rankings to site. If you want to point out the relative strength or weakness of the division at the time of the ranking be my guest. But if this dude was ranked in the top 10 somewhere at the time he fought GGG you can't b!tch about them pointing it out. If its true its true. I am sure if you went back to those guys and asked them Proska wouldn't even rank in the top 10 of GGG's best career opponents.
Comment