Comments Thread For: Arum: Lomachenko's Father Must Approve 140 For Pacquiao Bout

[Removed Now]

No it won't. It eventually happens to every fighter who keeps fighting until someone proves to them they can't handle it anymore. Are BHop and Roy's legacies ruined because of what's gone on the last couple years? No. Was Ali's? It doesn't work like that. Was Oscar's? Manny will never quit anyway outside of a freak injury. His corner might stop it to protect him, but that's it, and fans would understand that, it wouldn't ruin his legacy.

Actually Roy Jones Jr was. That sht left an bad taste in a lot of the younger fans mouth and us as well. After seeing him get washed like that at the end leaves bad memories. Remember Michael Spinks? Yea nobody does. He could walk in a room with his titles and nobody would know him.

[Freedef]

Haha if Rigo could move 2 weight divisions why cant Loma ??? Rigo is 118 olympic champion Loma is 135lb olympic champion !! Dont make me laugh. Weight difference my azz. Naturally it will be one weight division move up. This fight can put some light at Lomachenko finaly.

[future hendrixx]

No man that's their problem, they're "right" all the time, but not because they're actually right, it's just that corrupt refs and judges make them right, or fighters who duck until an opponent is past prime eventually make them "right." Pacquiao is so much more dominant in his prime than Floyd that Floyd ducks him, and yet they pick Floyd. Then Floyd waits until Pacquiao declines, allegedly roids up, fights in Nevada where he's allowed lidocaine injections in his hands, gets caught using illegal IVs either to drain down to an unnatural weight to get a size advantage or more likely to mask PEDs but is allowed to keep going, then the same mafia protecting him prevents Pacquiao from getting a legal injection in his injured shoulder that Floyd pulls on during the fight, then the ref lets Floyd hold the whole fight, and still Floyd fights Pacquiao even at best, but the judges give it to Floyd of course, and now suddenly all these guys are like "I told you so all along. I just knew Floyd would beat Pacquiao! He was always better! I was right and this proves it!"

Same thing with all these fights. They pick Ward to beat Kovalev, get proven wrong once the fight happens, but the judges fix the outcome anyway and make them right on paper.

Same with GGG. They hate white boxers so naturally they call him a hypejob. He's such a hypejob that no top fighter at 154, 160, or 168 will fight him during his prime. Then when he finally declines, Jacobs and Canelo agree to fight him, and he still arguably wins both fights, but can't dominate like he did in his prime. "See, Jacobs and Canelo exposed him. I told you he was a great white hype all along."

This has gone on for years. The reason they are constantly wrong is because they are so used to being rewarded for being wrong. They are so used to being told they're right by these corrupt judges/refs, or as a result of ducking, that they always believe they're right. That's why they were so brazen in picking Rigo over Loma. They believe their picks themselves the last decade have been right, rather than corruption. They don't understand what's really been going on. So for them it was business as usual, picking the slick defensive dirty black boxer to beat the clean boxing foreigner. They didn't realize that it was actually advantages outside the ring (like age, drug testing corruption, etc) and corrupt refs and judges that had made them "right" in the past, not the boxers they picked actually being better, so they didn't realize that Loma-Rigo was the rare situation where none of those advantages actually existed for their guy. Due to Rigo being the financial B-side in the fight, unlike is usually the case with black boxers (usually American) fighting foreigners, the corrupt boxing industry had no motivation to protect him. The black ref still seemed to be doing somewhat of a bro code act with Rigo in the ring, letting him hold behind the head and punch, and clinch extensively, before finally taking a point way later than he should have, but that was it. Were the judges going to rob Loma in favor of Rigo if it was close? probably not. And most importantly, Rigo hadn't been able to wait until Loma got old while he was still in his prime. This time, Rigo was the older one, which is again a big change from what they're used to (GGG is older than Canelo and Jacobs, Kovalev is older than Ward, Pacquiao was far more declined than Floyd and wasn't allowed illegal IVs, etc etc).

So their problem is not that they're always wrong. It's that they are continually told they're right even when they're wrong, which makes it impossible for them to learn. They don't even get to see that they're wrong, because it's covered up, it's prevented from happening before it even materializes. They usually root for and pick the black American to win, and the black American is usually allowed to cheat to no end and protected on the scorecards either because the black American usually generates more money in America, or maybe just for nationalistic or racial reasons by local officials who are also American and/or black, so their pick is usually protected.

It would be like if you or me wanted to become great at black jack, but someone gifted us a special stacked deck of cards at home that allowed us to win 90% of the time when playing our friends, but we weren't aware or objective enough to realize it was because of the deck, not our skill. It would be like we were too drunk on "winning," and on seeing our own biases "validated," to notice. Like we didn't even know the deck was special. So then because we didn't know, it would be like if we went to the casino to stake all our money on some black jack games, thinking we were amazing at the game, not knowing it was really just a stacked deck we had at home, and as a result, it caused us to be overconfident and lose all our money once the game was real at the casino, once it was on an even playing field.

That's what happened with the LDBC and all the picks of Rigo breaking Loma's face and so forth. They were so used to picking with a stacked deck and "winning" as a result, that they thought it was because of their picks, not even aware that they've been picking with a stacked deck and that that is the real reason, and as a result, they got it as wrong as you possibly could. It's just like how so many of them picked 50 year old BHop to beat the best prime light heavyweight we've seen in about a decade in Sergey Kovalev. Just an insane pick to make, but they were so used to all the advantages being in the corner of the guy they wanted to win, they took that for granted, and had basically forgotten that those things, like age, are actually the real reason for many results in boxing, not their pick being "right all along" and someone getting "exposed." By their flawed logic, that fight proved BHop was never good to begin with. That's not true, but that is how flawed their logic has become as a result of being rewarded for using flawed logic for years and years. When you reward a behavior, you end of getting more of it, and that's what happened with the LDBC. They got rewarded for being wrong, being biased, and ignoring slanted playing fields and cheating, so they just kept doing all of that more and more, and in more extreme ways, year after year, until they'd become so far removed from objective reality that they were picking 50 year old BHop to beat Kovalev. I believe that's the real story of what's been going on within this part of the boxing fan community, but not many people realize it.

let me try to response to you.

📌the "mafia" didn't allow pacquiao to get a toradol injection? or was it that pacquiao filled out the paperwork incorrectly? this phantom "injury" was allegedly suffered in 2008 according to arum. then no it was suffered weaks prior in sparring. then no actually he was perfectly healthy and the injury occured in round 4. which story are you sticking to?

in the eyes of the commission this was a healthy fighter seeking an injection that is known to numb you to pain. basically a toradol shot would've gave this healthy pacquiao an unfair advantage. toradol is used in NLF to help players play through brutal hits and concussions. he was not injured and you know it. show me one instance of the corner massaging that shoulder through 12 rounds or any instance of manny grimacing in pain..

📌 so because ward was awarded the winner in a close fight you say it was fixed? did you think kovalevs fight against darnell boone in 2010 was fixed when he was awarded a split decision in boone's hometown? remember he was knocked down in that fight. lets see how you spin this.

📌 "they" hate white boxers. who is "they"? now we're getting to what you're really all about. boxing logic? more like racist logic. anyway ggg is from Kazakhstan. 90% of that country lies in asia. ggg is asian. define "white".

📌 no top fighter would fight him in his "prime". guess you missed lara and ward calling him out. 168 for chavez. 164 for ward. its business right? well then he should've faced canelo long ago at 155. and cut this "prime" sht out. the only difference is ggg has finally stepped up his competition. if you put him against wade and rubio again he'll look unbeatable once more.

📌 he "arguably" won both fights vs danny and canelo. but I thought winning close fights means it was fixed. or does that only apply for ward?

📌 slick defensive dirty black vs clean foreigner. change your name to racist logic. it fits more.

📌 define "bro code act". you're one racist disgusting mofo. your "logic" is clouded by race. you are just as biased as those extreme pro black fans. but you see them as different when all you are cut from the same cloth. you're the type to call ward a clincher but ignore kovalevs rabbit punching which is more dangerous to future health than grabbing.

📌 where were these racist pro black american judges during kovalev - boone 1? remember he won a SD suffering a knockdown. spin this. let me guess you'll say boone is not as famous as ward. that won't work. your argument is pro black american judges making decisions based on race.

📌 so in your twisted racist mind "they" only picked hopkins to beat kovalev based on race or a perceived "stacked card". it's clear now your views on boxing are clouded with a white vs black perspective. you're not as righteous as you think you are. hopkins was the IBF and WBA champ on a 3 fight win streak and a history of upsetting the odds. it couldn't have been none of that it was just because he's black.


to sum your post up: black fighters, black refs and american judges are corrupt. non black fighters are clean and when they lose it was due to cheating or not being "prime". pro black fans are racist but you (pro white fan) are not racist.

[Ajvar]

Haha if Rigo could move 2 weight divisions why cant Loma ??? Rigo is 118 olympic champion Loma is 135lb olympic champion !! Dont make me laugh. Weight difference my azz.

132.3 lbs Olympic Champion which is closer to 130 than 135. Check your facts.

[Boxing Logic]

So in other words:

whitey and others = good???
blackie = bad???

No, that's not what I said at all. I said fairness = good, cheating and corruption = bad, and none of those things are limited only to white or black boxers, although there are prevailing trends of which nationality and race of boxer is most likely to be protected by corruption, and has been most often protected by corruption recently, in each different nation, and that is one thing I explained in my post if you actually read it. If you want further clarification, read my responses to this post here:

let me try to response to you.

��the "mafia" didn't allow pacquiao to get a toradol injection? or was it that pacquiao filled out the paperwork incorrectly? this phantom "injury" was allegedly suffered in 2008 according to arum. then no it was suffered weaks prior in sparring. then no actually he was perfectly healthy and the injury occured in round 4. which story are you sticking to?

in the eyes of the commission this was a healthy fighter seeking an injection that is known to numb you to pain. basically a toradol shot would've gave this healthy pacquiao an unfair advantage. toradol is used in NLF to help players play through brutal hits and concussions. he was not injured and you know it. show me one instance of the corner massaging that shoulder through 12 rounds or any instance of manny grimacing in pain..

�� so because ward was awarded the winner in a close fight you say it was fixed? did you think kovalevs fight against darnell boone in 2010 was fixed when he was awarded a split decision in boone's hometown? remember he was knocked down in that fight. lets see how you spin this.

�� "they" hate white boxers. who is "they"? now we're getting to what you're really all about. boxing logic? more like racist logic. anyway ggg is from Kazakhstan. 90% of that country lies in asia. ggg is asian. define "white".

�� no top fighter would fight him in his "prime". guess you missed lara and ward calling him out. 168 for chavez. 164 for ward. its business right? well then he should've faced canelo long ago at 155. and cut this "prime" sht out. the only difference is ggg has finally stepped up his competition. if you put him against wade and rubio again he'll look unbeatable once more.

�� he "arguably" won both fights vs danny and canelo. but I thought winning close fights means it was fixed. or does that only apply for ward?

�� slick defensive dirty black vs clean foreigner. change your name to racist logic. it fits more.

�� define "bro code act". you're one racist disgusting mofo. your "logic" is clouded by race. you are just as biased as those extreme pro black fans. but you see them as different when all you are cut from the same cloth. you're the type to call ward a clincher but ignore kovalevs rabbit punching which is more dangerous to future health than grabbing.

�� where were these racist pro black american judges during kovalev - boone 1? remember he won a SD suffering a knockdown. spin this. let me guess you'll say boone is not as famous as ward. that won't work. your argument is pro black american judges making decisions based on race.

�� so in your twisted racist mind "they" only picked hopkins to beat kovalev based on race or a perceived "stacked card". it's clear now your views on boxing are clouded with a white vs black perspective. you're not as righteous as you think you are. hopkins was the IBF and WBA champ on a 3 fight win streak and a history of upsetting the odds. it couldn't have been none of that it was just because he's black.


to sum your post up: black fighters, black refs and american judges are corrupt. non black fighters are clean and when they lose it was due to cheating or not being "prime". pro black fans are racist but you (pro white fan) are not racist.

The problem with your post is that the entire summary you wrote of my post is wrong, and based on false assumptions and misinterpretations, double standards and worse, and putting words in my mouth. I'll respond.

1. Im not a pro-white fan. When did I ever state anything pro-white, or about wanting things to be a certain way that will always benefit white boxers? I always speak up for fairness, and against corruption. I never speak up for white boxers specifically. I just speak up for fairness, which is something that allows anyone to succeed, white, black, Hispanic, anyone, whoever is the best. So please don't put words in my mouth, especially on a subject like race. You are making me out to be a racist when nothing in my post was pushing a racial agenda, only a fairness agenda.

2. Black fighters are not corrupt. Just some prominent black fighters recently have been very dirty in the ring (and allegedly outside with PEDs), but gotten away with it due to corruption that protects them, not necessarily because they are corrupt personally. There has been a pattern of ducking and/or cheating that I pointed out from Floyd to Ward to Adonis and so on. Even Rigo tried to cheat vs Loma, Loma was just better prepared for it. But whether you're good enough to overcome cheating or not does not make cheating okay either way.

3. Not every black fighter is dirty and not every white fighter is clean. For example when Klitschko beat Povetkin in Europe, the same type of cheating by the fighter, and corruption protecting him by the ref, took place as often takes place in American with black fighters and corrupt refs and judges, because Klitshcko was a cash cow in Europe the same way Floyd for example was in the U.S., and I criticized that very vocally when it happened (Klitshchko-Povetkin. So stop making generalizations. I always try to be consistent in supporting the facts and a sense of fair play, unlike actual racial fans who try to sweep them under the rug if they're benefiting a boxer of the same race as them. The difference is, that was just one fight with Klitschko, and at least he always fought his mandatories, and didnt reach the top and stay at the top by ducking. Then when he fought Joshua in a career defining fight, the ref was on the side of the younger, new cash cow, and let the fight get decided by an uppercut that took place as a result of Joshua holding Klitschkos head down. So with Klitschko there were a few fights where he got away with cheating, due to corruption, and I criticized that, but at least he always fought the best, and he also got burned by cheating in the end as well, whereas the pattern I pointed out with respect to black American fighters recently in high profile fights, that I said I believe have skewed the opinions of pro-black fans, is a much more constant pattern where they are allowed to cheat every time and protected by seeming corruption every time, and one where they also cherry pick way, way more than Klitschko ever did. Two wrongs don't make a right, but one wrong has been happening way more, and much more flagrantly, and with many more wrong elements involved in the overall wrong, so that's why I focused more on that wrong in my post. Also because that was the context of the post I was responding to. But I did, for the record, also speak up after Klitschko-Povetkin.

4. No, not every time a white fighter loses is it because they are past prime. When Victor Postol lost to Terence Crawford, name one poster who said it was because he was past prime? Exactly. Now, getting hit behind the head repeatedly by Crawford without the ref doing anything certainly didn't help, but I always said that was a 100% legitimate win for Crawford, or at least, that he would have won anyway, even if he hadnt been allowed to cheat per usual. It was dominant enough that I overlooked that, although in a fair world, I really shouldn't have to, you know? If you're being honest, right? Cheating shouldn't be allowed, especially cheating that can debilitate someone for the whole fight, and then fans are left to wonder, "yeah he lost every round, but how much did that affect him? Maybe the fight would have been totally different if the ref hadn't been bought off? But he did lose every round, and was never that good to begin with, so it probably didn't make a difference in the outcome..." Except you never know for sure, right? That's why the ref is supposed to enforce the rules even when one guy appears to be much better than the other, because in boxing you never know what can happen...

But, even though I could have blamed it on Crawford being allowed to cheat, I never did. I said that was a legitimate win. And same goes for every other win against boxers 32 years old or younger that doesn't involve cheating in the ring or one-sided PED cycling outside the ring. All I pointed out in my post is that Pacquiao, GGG, and Kovalev were all past their primes by the time any opponent would give them their "big fight." 33 years old, 34 years old, 35 years old, and 36 years old were the age for these four big fights. An average age of 34.5 years old. That is scientifically known to be past an athlete's prime, especially in a speed sport like boxing. But somehow again you have tried to twist my simple statement of fact into me being a racial fan. How is stating a fact being a racial fan? This is again why I said many fans have a skewed reality when it comes to boxing at this point because somehow, to you, a simple observance of objective reality sounds like a racial statement. In reality, if you think that, then you are the one with a skewed view of things.

Now to address your other points quickly:

- Pacquiao's team filling out paperwork wrong was not corruption, but USADA (or was it the NSAC?) using that as an excuse not to allow him to get a toradol injection was absolutely corruption seeing as Floyd did something way more illegal than filling out paperwork wrong, which was actually taking illegal IVs without even bothering to fill out any paperwork at all (because he knew it was illegal), but they let him do it. Floyd completely breaks the rules, it's allowed. Pacquiao follows the rules but simply fills out a form wrong, and it's not allowed. That looks like corruption to me.

- Pacquiao's injury could have originated in 1950, what's the difference? Old injuries can get reinjured at any time. If you watch the fight it's obvious that happened in the 4th round when Pacquiao had Floyd hurt on the ropes but for the first time his entire career in that situation, backed off and stopped throwing punches. At the same time, the expression on his face changed right after he threw the right hand, as if something has popped or strained itself.

- When one close fight goes a certain way, it's not necessarily corruption. When every close fight always goes to (Floyd, Ward, Canelo, etc, i.e. the North American house "A-side" boxer) every single time, over and over again, handfuls and handfuls of times, then yeah, that's a clear pattern of bias or corruption. Because if it was just a "close fight" that "could go either way," then guess what, sometimes it would actually go either way! One time Canelo gets the decision, one time Lara or GGG gets it. One time Floyd gets the close decision, one time Castillo or Oscar or Maidana gets it. One time Ward gets it, one time Kovalev gets it. One time time Robert Easter Jr gets it (advised by Floyd's adviser), one time Javier Fortuna gets it. But instead what we see is EVERY TIME it goes to the house fighter. So that is not "it could go either way." It only ever goes one way. That tells you it's not chance, it's corruption, it's on purpose.

- I've never seen Kovalev-Boone I. You can't find the fight anywhere. I'm aware Boone knocked him down but that doesn't mean he won more than 1 round. Additionally, Boone already had losses and was not a cash cow at all, so he is not the type of American boxer that the house bothers protecting. Kovalev was undefeated and had a more financially marketable future ahead of him, so in that case, they will sometimes protect the Russian boxer. That's why I said in my post, it mostly seems to be a financial thing that just so happens to usually favor black Americans or Mexicans because the house seems to think they are usually the more financially viable boxers, even if that's often a wrong assumption by them, but that in some cases it does also seem to be a nationalistic or racial thing. Like why would they give the first Pacquiao-Bradley decision to Bradley when Pacquiao was a much bigger star? That's the type of thing that never happens to American A-sides, so that's why I added that there could also be a nationalistic or racial element. But I've always been consistent that mostly, it seems to be an economic thing more than anything, and that would explain why Kovalev was awarded the close fight over Boone in their first fight, IF that fight was even close, which I have no idea if it was, and neither do you.

- Who is the "they" that hate white boxers? And I'm a racist because I point out there are racists out there with big followings of people who post tons of comments that are also clearly racist? Please. Here's who: Boxing Ego. Dontae's Boxing Nation. Constantly making comments about boxers and boxing fans "melanin" content and "the complexion for the protection." I must have missed the epidemic of white boxers being "protected" in America, what with all three of the most popular white boxers in the US the last five years, Kovalev, GGG, and Loma, ALL being robbed in that time frame, while in the meantime, not a single prominent black or Mexican boxer was even robbed ONCE on American soil. But they never talk about that, and instead they talked about "complexion" being protected when as I just exposed, it's a complete lie. When you are constantly lying about people with a different skin color in derisive, agenda-driven ways, YES that is clearly coming from a racist place! And you know it!

You will also see comments from time to time that Marcus Browne and Anthony Yarde are the best light heavyweights, and that Robert Easter is the best lightweight. Posters who find whoever the best black boxer is in any division and automatically say that guy is the best in the division, even in cases like those where it's ridiculous, and then make excuses for those same boxers when they duck the actual top guys in the division. To these racial fans, the black boxers are the best simply by default, simply by having black skin, and a result, they don't even have to prove it, they don't even have to fight the best guys in the division, because simply by being black, the title is already theirs by default, and if anyone else wants to take that title, they need to fight the black boxer, except for the fact that the black boxer refuses to fight them, which is, of course, not the fault of the black boxer, but the fault of the other boxers, or their promoters, for whatever reason these racial posters make up in their minds, usually something to do with money or "A-side."

Also, there have been thousands and thousands of fans supporting Floyd Mayweather and Andre Ward to beat much more entertaining, clean boxers. Objective fans tend to root for the most exciting, cleanest boxer who takes on the most challenges, and is the most humble. When you have fans who actively root for cheaters who beat up women outside the ring, allegedly get protected for PED use, run and spoil for most of their fights, and get protected by refs and judges, that also tells you something. Objective people don't like injustice. When a boxer benefits from a robbery, like Bradley did vs Pacquiao, objective people tend to feel empathy for the guy who got screwed, not the guy who benefited. That's just one example. And yet in many cases lately, we've seen tons of fans on forums like these take the side of injustice. Support injustice. Overlook cheating, corruption, and injustice. So it begs the question, for what? For what exactly are they overlooking all those things? What is it that is so important to them, they value it even more than fairness, and not having corruption dictate outcomes of fights, and justice? Well, if you've been on this forum as long as I have, as well as other boxing communities, and you pay attention to what people are posting, then it's not very hard to figure out the real reason so many "boxing fans" still support the likes of Floyd Mayweather in 2018, and it's not because he consistently delivered them an entertaining boxing product, which is the reason that actual objective, true boxing fans fell in love with the likes of Manny Pacquiao and GGG.

- Lara called GGG out lol... I guess you missed his manager saying Lara wouldn't fight on HBO? GGG fights on HBO so yeah... you can throw that "call out" out. As for Ward, all he cared about was money. He was happy fighting bums until HBO said they would only pay him for good fights. Before then, when the opportunity to fight GGG was there, Ward wasn't interested because he was still being paid well to fight easier opponents. Then GGG ended up going the Canelo route, but it was only AFTER that happened that Ward finally wanted a good opponent (but only for the money). Since GGG was no longer available, that's when he turned to Kovalev.

But when GGG was actually available to fight Ward? Guess what, Ward didn't want to fight him for 2 million. He wanted the type of payday he got vs Kovalev. The problem? Neither of them were well known back then. You really think Ward wanted to fight prime GGG on regular HBO? No, he wanted a PPV fight for that type of risk, same as GGG's team did. They were both trying to build that fight up, but Ward's mid-career retirement and inactivity made that impossible. As for the 164 thing, that was not a final demand, just a negotiation. Something like, "if you really want to make this fight right away, when no one knows who you are and we're only going to get paid 1.5 million, then maybe you should come down to 164."

In other words, it wasn't "168 for Chavez, 164 for Ward." It was "168 for Chavez MONEY (5-10 million dollars), 164 for Ward money (1.5-2 million dollars), BUT that's just Abel or whoever throwing out an initial negotiation to the media, so if you either grow your name so this becomes a PPV fight, or you stop overvaluing yourself in negotiations and leave more money for us to get paid more, we will go to 168." Loeffler said many times they would only go to 168 for a big fight. Froch and Chavez Jr were big fights at that point. Ward was not because of HIS promotional issues which HE forced despite his promoter doing nothing wrong. And you know why he forced them? For money. Roc Nation was offering more money. Ward was willing to sacrifice the prime of his career, and a perfectly legal and fair contract, just to get more money. He even said in one interview I remember that if it ended up that he would never box again, he was fine with that. It was always only about the money with him, and that's why he never even called out GGG, or Kovalev or anyone else good, until HBO got sick of paying him to fight bums and banished him to BET until he agreed to actually fight someone good if he wanted big paydays. Only then did he suddenly act interested in fighting good opponents.

And for the record he never made an offer to GGG either. He conveniently waited until after GGG signed to fight Lemieux to make a fake offer, so that he could go to the press about it. That's all. He knew his career was irrelevant because he wasn't fighting, due to his promotional issues, but GGG's career was skyrocketing, so Ward tried to attach his name to GGG's with a fake offer, that gullible fans like you apparently fell for. But if you paid attention to what really went on, you will see the real story. Neither GGG OR Ward wanted that fight back then because it wasn't a PPV fight yet. Still, GGG at least tried to make it happen with the 164 idea, which is more than we can say for Ward.

PS: I did you the courtesy of explaining the full story in response to your "168 for Chavez but 164 for Ward?" comment, but I didn't have to. I could have just responded, "154 for Cotto but 152 for Canelo?" and exposed your double standard right there in just seven words. But I am a real boxing fan and I'm happy to engage you in a full discussion, and try to share and discuss the full facts and the full story of what's gone on in boxing the last decade, instead of just quickly exposing the double standard but not explaining the rest of the story to you.

And for the record, Floyd actually got way more money to fight Canelo than Cotto, which means it's not only a double standard compared to your point about GGG-Ward, which would mean Floyd did the same thing, but it's actually much worse. Remember Loeffler said GGG would go to 168 for big fights. For money. The equivalent with Floyd would be going to 154 for big fights. Well Canelo was the biggest fight for him at 154, but was he willing to go to 154? No. So what he did is even worse. GGG offered a catchweight to an opponent because they weren't offering big money for him to move up to the next weight class, but Floyd was offered big big BIG money to move up to the next weight class and he still wouldn't do it.

See what I'm saying? You're criticizing GGG for being willing to go to 168 for Froch and Chavez but not being willing to go to 168 for Ward, which isn't even true (he would have once there was money in it), when Floyd wasn't even willing to move up for the equivalent of Froch or Chavez (money fights)! See what I'm saying? GGG was willing to move up for money fights, period. Floyd wasn't willing to move up even when it was a money fight. Just saying...

- I thought GGG won vs Jacobs and Canelo. That doesn't mean he got the decision vs Canelo. He didn't, remember? So you have a gap in your logic there sir. Now if you're asking why GGG got the decision against Jacobs when it was close enough to rob him if they'd wanted to, and when you're correct to hint that that is the only example in recent memory of a non-black non-Hispanic boxer getting the decision in a close fight over a prominent black or Hispanic boxer on U.S. soil, that's easy, it's because GGG is an international superstar, Jacobs is not, GGG generates tons of money, Jacobs doesnt, GGG has an undefeated record, Jacobs doesnt, GGG was capable of generating over 1 million PPVs in a fight with Canelo after getting the win vs Jacobs, Jacobs vs Canelo might have generated half that at best.

That's why I said, didn't I??? That it seems to be mostly economic, but that sometimes there seems to be a nationalistic or racist element as well. In this case, the economic incentive to give GGG the win was so overwhelming that it prevailed over the nationalistic incentive to give Jacobs the win. It also may have been one of those fights between top fighters that are both well-liked by the establishment, and who both have two separate promoters who are also well liked, where there is a silent agreement behind the scenes to simply judge the fight fairly, no strings attached, and the judges simply felt the champ who came forward all night, landed more punches, and got the only knockdown of the fight won the fight. You can't really compare GGG getting the decision vs Jacobs to Ward getting it vs Kovalev because all those factors that GGG had in his favor that won him the fight were actually in Kovalev's favor in the Ward fight, not Ward's.

- define "bro code act"? I'm a disgusting racist mofo? Wow. It just means biased. Treating one fighter like he's your bro. Protecting him. Maybe you should have asked me to explain to you what it meant before you jumped to conclusions, gave it your own definition, and then branded me as racist because your definition is race-based. If I meant it in a racial way, I would have said "brotha code act," but I put bro, not even "brother" because that can also be misconstrued, so that it would read like I intended it, which is just bias, protecting someone as your bro, or like you're from the same club. Does it seem to happen between a black ref and a black boxer sometimes? Yes, but it can also happen between a white english ref and a white english boxer, and it often does! So remind me how I'm pro-white when I regularly call that out too. There are tons and tons of times white boxers are protected in european countries by seeming corruption, and I hate that too.

The difference is I don't think it's because they're white, but rather it's because of what country they are from. What I mean is, English refs and judges don't protect white boxers, they protect English boxers, and many English boxers happen to be white. Now if you're wondering why I don't look at it the same in America, well that's just because of my personal experience where I don't as often see white American refs protecting black American boxers as I do black American refs protecting black American boxers. But then again, there don't seem to be very many white American refs, so that could also be skewing my perception of that. But to be fair, I can't remember ever seeing a black American boxer give a fistbump to a non-black referee before a huge fight...

All I know is I've seen lots and lots of favoritism. When that is due to corruption, when that is due to nationalism, and when that is do to racial bias, who can say? It's always much easier to see what is (allegedly) happening than it is to discover the motivations behind why it's happening. That's why I've been very fair in listing all the possible reasons, and saying which I believe is most likely and most regularly occurs. Criticizing me for listing all logical possibilities, but not even putting race at the top of that list (because it isn't), is ridiculous. Would you rather I have not listed their most likely motives? Would you have rather I listed illogical possibilities? Come on now, just because you disagree and possibly have your own biases doesn't warrant being completely unfair here...

- Kovalev never habitually rabbit punched Ward. Ward would hold him so that there was no range to hit Ward in the front of the face, so Kovalev swung punches in from the side at Ward's ears. The side of Ward's head. As far as I understand the rules, that's not a rabbit punch. Or is it? I've actually never read the definition, so I guess you could actually be right, but my understanding has always been that punching you opponent in the side of the head is legal. I thought only punching your opponent in the back of the head was considered a rabbit punch? But anyway, then, after Kovalev would punch Ward legally (I think) in the side of the head, Ward would turn to the allegedly paid off referee, motion to the back of his head with his glove, and the referee would warn Kovalev per Ward's instruction. So, your bias, and maybe the real reason you didn't like my post (the truth always pisses off biased people), is starting to show.

Also, I don't think you thought through your comment that rabbit punching has worse long-term consequences than holding. Ward uses holding to trap his opponents arms so they cant defend themselves, either with arm defense or by punching back, so that he can punch them. It allows Ward to land punches he otherwise wouldn't, often to to the liver and kidneys, so stop acting like you care about the long-term damage that comes from cheating. Ward almost blinded Mikkel Kessler with his patented headbutt that he throws in every single fight, so don't talk to me about long-term damage. Plus like I said, unless I have the rule wrong, Kovalev didn't rabbit punch Ward round by round. There were 1 or 2 behind the head when Ward turned, but nothing like you're implying, and nothing consistent like War's fouling was. Ward also headbutted him in the temple. And balls. And strafed Kovalev low so many times that it took away his legs and made him a sitting duck for one of the biggest punches Ward has landed his entire career, right to the chin (i.e. brain), but yeah you care so much about fouls causing long-term damage... Ward's entire career has been using fouls to inflict damage on other boxers, so don't even go there bro...

- Of course BHop's pedigree played a role in why many people picked him, and wasn't the only reason why some people picked him. In this case I was generalizing and speaking specifically of the racial fans. Heck, to be fair I don't even think most black people picked BHop, although I could be wrong. I'm just saying many of the ones who did were the Boxing Ego and Dontaes Boxing Nation type of listeners who are often racial fans, so that did skew their perspectives. Maybe I am being too harsh here, it's just that I remember that being a super easy pick for me at the time, and that was back before I was even aware of Boxing Ego or Dontaes Boxing Nation, and before I even knew there was a pro-black rooting segment within much of the American boxing community.

In other words, you accuse me of being racist simply for having awareness of a pro-black segment of boxing fans, but I'm saying back then I didn't even have that awareness. I didn't even know it existed, and I had no racial interest of my own, so race played no factor for me in who I picked, and yet still the pick was super easy.

So if I'm harsh in the case of Kovalev-BHop, which reading what you wrote about that specifically, I'm wondering if maybe I was? I think that's the only point you made that might have some legitimacy, not the part where you misinterpreted who I was talking about, or wrongly assumed my motivations or beliefs, but on just the general idea of me believing that picking BHop was ridiculous and must have required some sort of bias, even with his pedigree, maybe you're right. Maybe his pedigree was enough on its own for a lot of people, too. I'm just saying, if I was being harsh in the case of Kovalev-BHop, it's because I had no racial motive in picking a winner, and picking a winner was very easy for me, so in hindsight I've gotten the impression that if picking a winner wasnt easy for other people, maybe the opposite was true for them, and they did have a racial motive for the pick. And since then I have discovered the racial rooting interest of so many fans, and I have seen them pick and support the black boxer no matter what, so looking back at Kovalev-BHop, I sort of put 2 and 2 together....

But, unlike my other points here, that is not always the most scientific way of looking at things, trying to add things up in hindsight without actually examining exactly what is happening when you're there, so I will give you this one. I've always said, I'm always happy to change my opinion on something if I'm presented with new evidence, or something I believe is disproven with evidence or logic. Obviously you didn't disprove anything, but you did add to the discussion with a good point about the run BHop was on, as well as his pedigree and history overcoming the odds, so I will amend my quickly written generalization on that issue specifically, and add more nuance or room for other possibilities to my opinion on the subject in the future on top of what I said.

Peace, and please stop insulting me without evidence or logic! Since we're speaking of those two things.

[Boxing Logic]

Actually Roy Jones Jr was. That sht left an bad taste in a lot of the younger fans mouth and us as well. After seeing him get washed like that at the end leaves bad memories. Remember Michael Spinks? Yea nobody does. He could walk in a room with his titles and nobody would know him.

I disagree man. I still consider prime RJJ an elite boxer and nothing that happens in a fight when he's 50 years old changes what he was in his prime.

[Boxing Logic]

why lomachenko does't fight linares or easter instead of pacquio? why not go straight to the younger liones?

You'd still rather see him fight Easter lol? Easter just lost to the blown up TKO leftovers of Lomachenko's TKO leftovers. Anyway, I would be happy with any of those fights. Best fight is Mikey Garcia. Second best is Tank Davis. Third best is Pacquiao. Fourth best is Linares. Fifth best is Berchelt. Sixth is Ray Beltran. Seventh is Easter. I'd actually love to see Beltran vs Easter. That would be a good fight. We might learn that the reloaded Beltran (looks like he started PEDs recently to me, could be wrong though) is way better than people think, at least relative to Easter.

[Boxing Logic]

Walks around at 138 though.

Good work, but hey, that was back in the Alex Ariza days... Lol.

Can you find what he's weighed in the ring the last few years? If he weighed less than 150 in the ring after dieting for welterweight then he can make 135 easy. Crawford has gone from 161 in the ring to 140 at the weight in the night before, going backwards in time, so Pacquiao can go from 145 or 150 to 135, which is only 50% to 75% of that.

[Boxing Logic]

Is that why the tale of the tape shows him at 152lbs when he fought Mayweather?

is that why he weighed up to 149lbs even when he was fighting at the lower weight classes?

Because he walks around at 138lb?

Yeah sure, that makes a lot of sense.

I'd suggest you google Pacquiao's tale of the tape history.

You'll have a heart attack.

If you're only 152 in the ring, then you can make 135. And that was one of Pacquiao's highest all time weights. Hell Robert Easter was probably 152 last night and he weighed in at 135. Crawford weighed in at 140 and blew up to over 160 in the ring so if that's possible, going from 135 to 150 should also be. Salido went from 128 to 146 or something like that. Plus, Pacquiao weighing high 140s when he fought at 135 in the past was back when he had Alex Ariza. He was more muscular back then. So him being 140 now is still possible. It wouldn't surprise me if he weighed less now than he used to when he was shredded. Muscle weighs more than fat.

[War Dinamita]

Loma is ****ing overrated. Why fight Pac at 140, but won't fight Mikey at 135?