Comments Thread For: DeGale: Can't Moan Over Canelo-GGG Draw, It Was Close Fight

[aboutfkntime]

[bluepete]

good god you fkn moron, what more needs to be said ?

FACT: you said that you would not make excuses

FACT: you made every excuse in the book

now you are crawling up your own ass, to make more excuses

I will leave it there

You asked me to justify what I said and I did. No excuses I said he'd win the fight and I feel he did. Since you went to all that trouble to research my past posts I asked you a few questions and now you've crawled up your arse and ran away from the discussion. You look real tough calling me names from the safety of your screen you little mug, but youre not even brave enough to give your position. Don't be a little girl, come on here sniping and then run away. Give your reasons on all this negativity you have for another man, which seems to be practically the only reason you come to this site to drone on about. Did you think he beat Jacobs? Did you think Canelo won the fight and did you think he would going in? It's really simple, don't be a chicken. What you made of?

[Curt Henning]

is this the same james degale that loeffler didnt ask hearn about, not even once when the eubank fight fell through, and instead took hearns offer to fight a welterweight? then loeffler turned around and said "we would have fought degale if he was offered to us"? same degale?

[aboutfkntime]

You asked me to justify what I said and I did. No excuses I said he'd win the fight and I feel he did. Since you went to all that trouble to research my past posts I asked you a few questions and now you've crawled up your arse and ran away from the discussion. You look real tough calling me names from the safety of your screen you little mug, but youre not even brave enough to give your position. Don't be a little girl, come on here sniping and then run away. Give your reasons on all this negativity you have for another man, which seems to be practically the only reason you come to this site to drone on about. Did you think he beat Jacobs? Did you think Canelo won the fight and did you think he would going in? It's really simple, don't be a chicken. What you made of?

I think Jacobs beat Golovkin..... not sure if Canelo did, but not sure if Golovkin beat Canelo either..... and yes, I picked Canelo to win a real close/tough fight.....

scoring for the boxer unless the pressure fighter is being effective, he likely did win..... that fight certainly went more according to Canelo's plan that it did Golovkin's..... who missed all night long and got touched up with plenty of judge-friendly punches

there was very little bodywork or pipe-bursting pressure from Golovkin, with him looking very hesitant at times..... against the A-side, in Vegas, Golovkin was probably lucky to keep his titles..... there have been far worse decisions

no big deal, I am ok with a draw, so long as the rematch happens

but what does that have to do with you stating that you will not make excuses..... and then making all of them?

[bluepete]

I think Jacobs beat Golovkin..... not sure if Canelo did, but not sure if Golovkin beat Canelo either..... and yes, I picked Canelo to win a real close/tough fight.....

scoring for the boxer unless the pressure fighter is being effective, he likely did win..... that fight certainly went more according to Canelo's plan that it did Golovkin's..... who missed all night long and got touched up with plenty of judge-friendly punches

there was very little bodywork or pipe-bursting pressure from Golovkin, with him looking very hesitant at times..... against the A-side, in Vegas, Golovkin was probably lucky to keep his titles..... there have been far worse decisions

no big deal, I am ok with a draw, so long as the rematch happens

but what does that have to do with you stating that you will not make excuses..... and then making all of them?

What it's got to do with things is that it shows youre not impartial. You don't like Golovkin so coincidentally you think he lost the last two fights. See, you said I don't give Canelo or Jacobs credit but I do, Canelo showed a better chin than I expected and better tactical thinking because I thought he'd stand and trade more. Jacobs also, I was one of the few on this site who gave him credit going in despite Pirog. You disagreed with the judges both times. I disagree with the draw and think Golovkin won. I've not gone around complaining that it was a draw, I just stated an opinion that Golovkin looks slower these days and you went into one about excuses. I'm satisfied that Golovkin done good against Canelo, as most people thought. It doesn't mean Canelo gets no credit. But to say I think Golovkin won despite the verdict is the exact same thing as for you to think this fight, and Jacobs went the other way. So not sure why you keep on about excuses. Now if Canelo had won clear I'd say so. But I dont think he won or deserved a draw. And I do think Golovkin has slowed down, especially in handspeed. Neither is excuses, just my opinion. That's what we post on here for ain't it?

[aboutfkntime]

What it's got to do with things is that it shows youre not impartial. You don't like Golovkin so coincidentally you think he lost the last two fights. See, you said I don't give Canelo or Jacobs credit but I do, Canelo showed a better chin than I expected and better tactical thinking because I thought he'd stand and trade more. Jacobs also, I was one of the few on this site who gave him credit going in despite Pirog. You disagreed with the judges both times. I disagree with the draw and think Golovkin won. I've not gone around complaining that it was a draw, I just stated an opinion that Golovkin looks slower these days and you went into one about excuses. I'm satisfied that Golovkin done good against Canelo, as most people thought. It doesn't mean Canelo gets no credit. But to say I think Golovkin won despite the verdict is the exact same thing as for you to think this fight, and Jacobs went the other way. So not sure why you keep on about excuses. Now if Canelo had won clear I'd say so. But I dont think he won or deserved a draw. And I do think Golovkin has slowed down, especially in handspeed. Neither is excuses, just my opinion. That's what we post on here for ain't it?

that is fine

stating your opinion..... is fine

but, you said that you would not make excuses

and then, you made all of them

you even specifically mentioned not making excuses about age..... but, you went there anyway

just saying

and your statements about hate are rubbish

what, you can have an opinion, but I cannot ?

my opinion is that Golovkin was baaadly over-rated

and his last 3 fights proved that

you guys painted him up like some ATG killer, but he may not even be the best middleweight

let's agree to disagree

[bluepete]

that is fine

stating your opinion..... is fine

but, you said that you would not make excuses

and then, you made all of them

you even specifically mentioned not making excuses about age..... but, you went there anyway

just saying

and your statements about hate are rubbish

what, you can have an opinion, but I cannot ?

my opinion is that Golovkin was baaadly over-rated

and his last 3 fights proved that

you guys painted him up like some ATG killer, but he may not even be the best middleweight

let's agree to disagree

My opinion about he's age was in regard to he's handspeed not he's performance against Canelo because I thought he won ok.Your getting the two things mixed up. Same as Hagler against Leonard, sure Ray was slicker than most Hagler had fought, but he'd still got slower. That didn't mean Ray didn't achieve anything in winning. I always rated Brook as a boxer, Jacobs too, and obviously Canelo is a good fighter. That doesn't mean I can't say that Golovkin looks slower to me than he did verses Proska and even Murray does it? And that would be down to age likely. It happened to me and fighters I shared the gym with in my 30s.Just my observations and hardly "every excuse in the book". Of course you have a right to your opinion, I just think all the Lil G stuff denigrates it abit but that's up to you. I agree that Golovkin isn't quite the destroyer some had him penned as, I don't think he stops Nunn in 3 as I'm on record as saying. I don't think he's a hype job either. I don't think that qualifies me as "you guys" whoever they are. He's the best middleweight right now on form for me and he's the champion. But that's subject to change like anyone. Charlo is the best light middle to me but it's quite possibly Hurd or Lara. We only got the present to go on.

[aboutfkntime]

My opinion about he's age was in regard to he's handspeed not he's performance against Canelo because I thought he won ok.Your getting the two things mixed up. Same as Hagler against Leonard, sure Ray was slicker than most Hagler had fought, but he'd still got slower. That didn't mean Ray didn't achieve anything in winning. I always rated Brook as a boxer, Jacobs too, and obviously Canelo is a good fighter. That doesn't mean I can't say that Golovkin looks slower to me than he did verses Proska and even Murray does it? And that would be down to age likely. It happened to me and fighters I shared the gym with in my 30s.Just my observations and hardly "every excuse in the book". Of course you have a right to your opinion, I just think all the Lil G stuff denigrates it abit but that's up to you. I agree that Golovkin isn't quite the destroyer some had him penned as, I don't think he stops Nunn in 3 as I'm on record as saying. I don't think he's a hype job either. I don't think that qualifies me as "you guys" whoever they are. He's the best middleweight right now on form for me and he's the champion. But that's subject to change like anyone. Charlo is the best light middle to me but it's quite possibly Hurd or Lara. We only got the present to go on.

I don't care about any of that, nor do I care who won

all I am saying is, you said this.....

I think Golovkin well beats Canelo,

at any age.

No excuses

then, you made every excuse in the book, including age

the facts are.....

FACT: Golovkin did not " well-beat " Canelo..... nothing like that happened..... that fight was close as hell and could have gone either way

FACT: you immediately proceeded to make excuses

the fact that you think Golovkin won, is just your opinion

1) Golovkin did not win, that fight was officially a draw

2) insiders, including professional judges/fighters/trainers scored that fight for Canelo..... one official judge scored it a draw, and the judge who scored for Golovkin gave him that fight by one measly point..... there was nothing in it

..... making your comment about age, an excuse

no big deal, just saying

your position is largely pointless..... because according to your initial prediction, you have no grounds to mention age or any other factor for that matter

[bluepete]

I don't care about any of that, nor do I care who won

all I am saying is, you said this.....





then, you made every excuse in the book, including age

the facts are.....

FACT: Golovkin did not " well-beat " Canelo..... nothing like that happened..... that fight was close as hell and could have gone either way

FACT: you immediately proceeded to make excuses

the fact that you think Golovkin won, is just your opinion

1) Golovkin did not win, that fight was officially a draw

2) insiders, including professional judges/fighters/trainers scored that fight for Canelo..... one official judge scored it a draw, and the judge who scored for Golovkin gave him that fight by one measly point..... there was nothing in it

..... making your comment about age, an excuse

no big deal, just saying

your position is largely pointless..... because according to your initial prediction, you have no grounds to mention age or any other factor for that matter

My mention of age was in relation to he's handspeed, I never came on here saying "hey everyone he'd have done better if he'd been quicker" I'm saying hes slower than he was, simple as that. In regards to he's fight with Canelo I and many others thought he won by a couple of rounds. So no excuses needed. Ive not made a single excuse. Age isn't an excuse for defending he's title and winning in the eyes of the world, it's just the age he is, and the reason he's handspeed is slower. Some insiders may have scored for Canelo, but most scored for Golovkin. It doesn't matter like you say, and you have a preconceived position which would have seem Canelo winning any way as long as he left the ring upright. You can't be unbiased, because you call the other guy silly names so your position is hardly based on boxing alone is it? Now here's the pattern you've fell in. I'm answering you and all you are doing is writing that you don't care about anything I write and then talking about every excuse in the book, but this is in reference to me mentioning he's age on the subject of him being slower. It's not an excuse about the fight.i felt he won but Im not bothered about the draw. I don't know where you get "every excuse in the book" from. I think it's another case of you have your mind made up and you've invested in this position and you can't shake out of it. I already stated that Golovkin wining was my opinion, just like him losing he's last two was yours. Corse, I didnt go around calling Jacobs and Canelo silly names so I didn't have a personal stake in what I saw. Fact: Golovkin got a draw, retained he's title and won the fight for me and most others. Fact: No excuses, it's a draw but I thought he won so I don't feel I made some horrendous prediction, unlike those who said Golovkin would be destroyed who you have no issues with.Fact : The reason why you don't have an issue with these predictions is because you have a personal dislike of the fighters and he's fans for some odd reason. FACT : He is 35 and you are slower by then than you were in your 20s,no amount of bollocks from your or pep talk from Sanchez changes that. I've boxed, my friends have boxed and I KNOW this. But do come back with your well established position, even if it's the same thing again because I do enjoy our little convos.

[alexguiness]

A draw was the very best GGG could have hoped for without a KO / Stoppage in Vegas.

Canelo did some clean, accurate work throughout the fight but never took any real control.

I admit to being a cynic / conspiracy theorist...but this sets up a rematch for everyone to get paid twice.

If Golovkin is on the decline, why didn't Canelo (who is in his prime) do more to take control?