Comments Thread For: Billy Joe Saunders Trolls David Lemieux For Past Comments

[Lemonhead_Jeff]

funny, because Charlo is also ranked #3 by the IBF and the WBA

and get this..... #1 for the WBC

so..... Golovkin better hope that Canelo throws him a bone, or he could lose everything to a guy who many casuals have never heard of

see how that works

Is that the "I'm rubber, you're glue" argument?
None of these guys are in a hurry to face Charlo.
Saunders, having the least clout out of all the titlists, will probably have a harder time ducking Charlo. That's in the unlikely event that Saunders can get past the HBO-affiliated, Hearn-promoted Jacobs, who is more likely to be the next major opponent Saunders faces.

[Kiowhatta]

One win against a sub-par Lemieux and now he's the new Sugar Ray Leonard?

Some of you 'fans' are as fickle as teenage girls.

Saunders trained hard, focused and delivered against a fringe titlist.

Lemieux is way better than this performance suggests- For a multitude of possible reasons, he had a bad night.
I suspect he's the kind of pressure fighter who can't deal with the extensive movement and outside combination punching Saunders possesses. He has a plodding, come forward style, rather than the explosive, overwhelming pressure required to demoralize and unhinge BJS.

Lemieux would struggle with just about any elite level fighter with fast feet who can dominate from the outside, Jacobs, Charlo, Andrade etc.
When Lemieux is on song, he could perhaps hang in there with Derevyanchenko, Canelo, Murata or any fighter who likes to trade, fight on the inside, and/or is a little flat-footed.
Lemmy has a good chin and when he has a stationary target can blow fighters away.

Golovkin was an exceptional case- he did what Kostya Tszyu used to do: dominate the ring with presence, an immovable object, breaking down his opponent with a powerful, educated lead hand and power shots to crush the opponents will and confidence to fight.

I'm in the minority who think this fight proves Saunders belongs at the top of the division with the biggest names, but he still has room to improve his resumé which has a couple of decent scalps on it.

[aboutfkntime]

Is that the "I'm rubber, you're glue" argument?
None of these guys are in a hurry to face Charlo.
Saunders, having the least clout out of all the titlists, will probably have a harder time ducking Charlo. That's in the unlikely event that Saunders can get past the HBO-affiliated, Hearn-promoted Jacobs, who is more likely to be the next major opponent Saunders faces.

it's ok now, Golovkin is good, Canelo threw him a bone

[LacedUp]

Funny that the gentleman in your avatar pic would've disagreed with you.

Boxing was different in the 70s than it is now. So what? You gotta be able to go with the times. People said Ali was a runner then, now he's considered the best ever.

What was different from how BJS fought to how Mayweather, Ali, Pernell Whitaker etc approached boxing?

[Lemonhead_Jeff]

Boxing was different in the 70s than it is now. So what? You gotta be able to go with the times. People said Ali was a runner then, now he's considered the best ever.

What was different from how BJS fought to how Mayweather, Ali, Pernell Whitaker etc approached boxing?

BJS was able to beat Lemiuex, and now you're comparing him to Ali, Mayweather and Whitaker!? The three legends that you mentioned could stand in-front of you, be defensive, and win. Saunders was using every inch of the ring to run, even when Lemieux looked beaten, broken, and ripe for the knockout. Boxing was not very different in the 70's and 80's. A fight is a fight. Most fighters today are pampered pansies in comparison to the fighters of the past, but boxing is still boxing. A left-hook hurts just as much today as it did in the golden era.