Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comments Thread For: NSAC On Golovkin's Claims: No Favoritism For Canelo in Vegas

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Comments Thread For: NSAC On Golovkin's Claims: No Favoritism For Canelo in Vegas

    On Tuesday, middleweight champion Gennady Golovkin fired off an arsenal of verbal jabs in the direction of Canelo Alvarez, the Mexican superstar's promoter Oscar De La Hoya, and even the Nevada State Athletic Commission.
    [Click Here To Read More]

  • #2

    Comment


    • #3
      Golovkin really compared judges to terrorists? Stupid, lol.

      Comment


      • #4
        Of course, said the accused. I mean it's not like Canelo got his first title shot, a vacant belt against legendary Matthew Hatton who never even fought in the division. No open scoring in his first step up fight against Austin Trout. Didn't get a draw against Floyd on one card in a fight he was embarrassed in. Didn't have wide scores in a fight he could have lost to Lara. Didn't fight in a made up weight class just for himself that the sanctioning bodies recognized as legit. Didn't get a draw in a fight he should have lost against Golovkin. And definitely didn't have a failed drug test that is swept under the rug. Yep, absolutely no favoritism here, thanks for clearing it uo, carry on!

        Comment


        • #5
          I believe it, I believe NSAC will be fair and rightfully see Canelo as a clean fighter.

          Canelo is a clean fighter, the wbc and the wba is looking at all the evidence and have concluded that they believe it is from mean contamination and nothing else, also the wada accredited doctor collaborated this by his statements on this matter (not this particular matter but this matter in general) and states levels as which canelo had "SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A NEGATIVE TEST".

          So their is no reason to think NSAC will rule against science and expert advice.

          WAR CANELO!

          Comment


          • #6
            Bwahahaha!!!

            Comment


            • #7
              The plot thickens, as they say... "Canelo's Feb. 17 positive sample contained such a higher level than the positive sample collected on Feb. 20."

              Comment


              • #8
                Favoritism is reserved for froid

                Comment


                • #9
                  No evidence of favourtism? Why was Adelaide Byrd suspended then?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Honestly, NSAC shouldn't say anything they're just making themselves look like idiots, we all know what is up.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP