if postol is so good how come hes such a massive underdog....

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Zaroku
    RIP BIg Dawg Larry & Walt
    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
    • Mar 2009
    • 53353
    • 4,761
    • 10,926
    • 389,015

    #31
    Originally posted by Derranged
    So in other words, Crawford is a hype job. Is that what you're aiming for?
    Nice cut to the point. That’s what he’s aiming for, you cut his slow game short.

    Comment

    • HanzGruber
      STRAPMEUP
      Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
      • Dec 2011
      • 29824
      • 1,069
      • 238
      • 81,632

      #32
      Originally posted by Drama Show
      yeah i said it wouldnt be a tough fight. glad you bumped them for me so people cant say im flip flopping. and yes thats what crawford still is 'potential p4p'. hes gone on to do nothing after that postol win
      youre an idiot lol.. im sure youd be sucking postols cawk if he beat crawford and was undisputed

      you said postol was very good.. now hes not? stop being so insecure
      Last edited by HanzGruber; 06-20-2018, 12:19 PM.

      Comment

      • Larry the boss
        EDUCATED
        Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
        • Jan 2011
        • 90798
        • 6,419
        • 4,473
        • 2,500,480

        #33
        Originally posted by Drama Show
        its ****ing no wonder he has with that level of opposition lol. clearing out a division sounds less impressive when said division is absolute garbage.
        Yet you praise GGG..weird

        Comment

        • chrisJS
          Undisputed Champion
          Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
          • Mar 2007
          • 8989
          • 331
          • 64
          • 78,477

          #34
          Originally posted by Drama Show
          yeah i said it wouldnt be a tough fight. glad you bumped them for me so people cant say im flip flopping. and yes thats what crawford still is 'potential p4p'. hes gone on to do nothing after that postol win
          "Nothing" is a stretch, he's added two more belts at 140 becoming the first male fighter in over a decade to do such in addition to beating Diaz (had a robbery loss to Peterson, excellent upset win over Vazquez), Molina (off of an upset win of Provodnikov) and added a title at 147. The only one that was available to him at that time.

          I also don't think he's lost a round and has KO'd everybody.

          If that's "nothing" then surely GGG's career up until his disputed draw with Canelo was a big nothing then?

          Comment

          • Larry the boss
            EDUCATED
            Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
            • Jan 2011
            • 90798
            • 6,419
            • 4,473
            • 2,500,480

            #35
            Originally posted by BufordTannen
            yet you called GG greatest mw of all time for beating david lemuix gtfo
            lol.............

            Comment

            • b00g13man
              Undisputed Champion
              Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
              • Dec 2012
              • 12197
              • 265
              • 51
              • 34,905

              #36
              When will OP stop embarrassing himself with his dumb threads?

              Comment

              • Larry the boss
                EDUCATED
                Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                • Jan 2011
                • 90798
                • 6,419
                • 4,473
                • 2,500,480

                #37
                Originally posted by The Big Dunn
                He wasn't considered the same fighter by anyone with common sense. You thought he was the same and would beat Spence. You were wrong.
                Exactly...He was the one hyping Brook thru the roof before the fight

                Comment

                • Clegg
                  Banned
                  Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                  • Mar 2008
                  • 24673
                  • 3,726
                  • 2,307
                  • 233,274

                  #38
                  Originally posted by Drama Show
                  so if he clears out 140 like crawford, does he get rated the same way?
                  If Taylor beats Postol and then enters, wins WBSS, then beats Ramirez he will have unified the belts like Crawford and have wins over several good/very good but not great fighters so sure I'd have him top 10 P4P.

                  Part of it with Crawford is the level of dominance in his wins, if Taylor can consistently win by KO/wide decision at title unification level then he can be in the conversation for best fighter in the world, same with the GGG/Clenelo and Usyk/Gassiev winners.

                  Current Postol isn't rated highly because time changes things, fighters decline, have bad performances, are 34 etc.

                  It's like how Danny Garcia gets more credit than Postol does for beating LM. Because guys in their 30s can decline in the 2 years after a defeat. And LM had some decent wins in those 2 years, Postol has done nothing since the Crawford loss except get dropped by somebody he was expected to beat easy.

                  Comment

                  • boliodogs
                    Undisputed Champion
                    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                    • May 2008
                    • 33358
                    • 824
                    • 1,782
                    • 309,589

                    #39
                    Originally posted by chrisJS
                    Postol lost 12-0 to Crawford, including some knockdowns and has fought once in two years since. That's probably factored in also. Sometimes fighters aren't the same after a loss. Crawford ruined Gamboa as a 2-1 underdog and perhaps that's a reference that after a guy is taken apart by Crawford he's not the same. Tito Trinidad used to do that with highly touted guys too, unbeaten ones also.
                    Vargas, Mayorga and Whitaker and a few others were never as good after Trinidad beat them up or knocked them out.

                    Comment

                    • xhiddenx87
                      Undisputed Champion
                      • Apr 2015
                      • 1783
                      • 52
                      • 7
                      • 23,516

                      #40
                      ****** logic.
                      Sports in general are a momentum thing.
                      In boxing is just like that. Take for example GGG KO streak the dude was a beast, after the KO streak now all of sudden he "is not that good" right?
                      Guess what? He lost a bit of momentum there.

                      Same logic applies here. Postol got a decent win over mathisse, and he got the momentum after a few wins. He then fought Crawford and got beat, not looking good after that. Hence why you got now bookies underestimating him

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      TOP