Too bad a quitter like Kovalev dominated Bernard Hopkins (a Hopkins who did no meaningful drug testing to top it all off). That makes BHop look pretty bad. And a quitter already at past prime age of 33 years old, drunk and not training, lasted 12 rounds vs Ward (he cant even make a quitter quit? Must not be very good either), knocked down Ward in the 2nd, almost dropped Ward to the body in the 12th (What's that quitter doing lasting to the 12th and still dishing out big damage in the first place? Damn Ward you letting your fans down!), and beat Ward on Ward's home soil.
I know what you're going to say, Hopkins was past his prime. Well to that I say, so were GGG and Kovalev! I know what you're going to say to that, "Hopkins was 49, GGG is only 36." Well I can play that game as well. At 36 years old, Roy Jones got knocked out two fights in a row to lesser opponents than Canelo. At 33 years old, Marvin Hagler already showed his age vs Leonard and then retired, and that was without good drug testing, meaning Hagler and Leonard both had a potential BENEFIT that GGG did not have which should have made Hagler have a LONGER prime than GGG did, and yet GGG still IMO beat Canelo twice 2-3 years after the age Hagler retired.
And I can go on for hours with examples of all the top fighters, even ones with clean lifestyles like GGG, who declined at age 30, 31, or 32 usually at the latest. And that's because that's normal. Anything after 31 years old is usually past prime in almost every sport unless you are using PEDs, or you're a rare exception to the rule.
So you are celebrating hollow victories. Canelo ducked prime GGG, and Ward ducked prime Kovalev choosing to stay weight bullying at 168 for years instead of fight the best guys his size. They never fought prime GGG or prime Kovalev, so they have no wins over prime GGG or prime Kovalev, they have no wins at all that count or mean anything outside of corrupt and therefore meaningless official Vegas decisions. If you were objective, you would never say prime Ward is better than prime Kovalev or prime Canelo is better than prime GGG any more than you would ever say that prime Joe Calzaghe is better than prime Roy Jones Jr and prime Bernard Hopkins. But since you are biased, your standards change with the wind, and you never keep your standards consistent, so posts like this one you made that I quoted are what result from your double standards. In the words of Nate Diaz, Im not surprised.
I know what you're going to say, Hopkins was past his prime. Well to that I say, so were GGG and Kovalev! I know what you're going to say to that, "Hopkins was 49, GGG is only 36." Well I can play that game as well. At 36 years old, Roy Jones got knocked out two fights in a row to lesser opponents than Canelo. At 33 years old, Marvin Hagler already showed his age vs Leonard and then retired, and that was without good drug testing, meaning Hagler and Leonard both had a potential BENEFIT that GGG did not have which should have made Hagler have a LONGER prime than GGG did, and yet GGG still IMO beat Canelo twice 2-3 years after the age Hagler retired.
And I can go on for hours with examples of all the top fighters, even ones with clean lifestyles like GGG, who declined at age 30, 31, or 32 usually at the latest. And that's because that's normal. Anything after 31 years old is usually past prime in almost every sport unless you are using PEDs, or you're a rare exception to the rule.
So you are celebrating hollow victories. Canelo ducked prime GGG, and Ward ducked prime Kovalev choosing to stay weight bullying at 168 for years instead of fight the best guys his size. They never fought prime GGG or prime Kovalev, so they have no wins over prime GGG or prime Kovalev, they have no wins at all that count or mean anything outside of corrupt and therefore meaningless official Vegas decisions. If you were objective, you would never say prime Ward is better than prime Kovalev or prime Canelo is better than prime GGG any more than you would ever say that prime Joe Calzaghe is better than prime Roy Jones Jr and prime Bernard Hopkins. But since you are biased, your standards change with the wind, and you never keep your standards consistent, so posts like this one you made that I quoted are what result from your double standards. In the words of Nate Diaz, Im not surprised.
Comment