Comments Thread For: Hearn Rips 'Geezer' Lennox Lewis For 'Talking ****' on Joshua

[Jax teller]

You just keep making **** up. I’ve said since December 2nd “wilder/Fury 2 is the fight people want” and you read that and go “you’re afraid of wilder fighting AJ!”

Coming from the country that “invented English” you’d think you would be able to read it.

Clearly refering to your circle jerking with the other guy that Wilder needn't be in a rush to negotiate with AJ as Hearn played captain obvious and pointed out no one knew Wilder which hurt Wilders emtions.

More people want AJ v Wilder right because it was a $100 mil fight before Wilder supposedly surpassed AJ's popularity with fighting Fury.

[NachoMan]

This is what happens, Eddie, when you screw around and treat fans of the world like they're all ******. Eventually, they all (well, most) catch on to you.

I actually believe all match-ups between these three are interesting and competitive. They all could go either way. AJ simply deserves the bad press because he was the guy in control of everything up until December. He could have made fights with anyone, and he chose to fight lesser fighters, while Fury and Wilder risked their careers.

If these three do get around to doing a round robin, I see Fury coming out on top, but all fights will be fun to watch.

Fury TKO10 Wilder (in the rematch)
Fury UD12 Joshua (close)
Wilder KO6 Joshua

[Robbie Barrett]

This is what happens, Eddie, when you screw around and treat fans of the world like they're all ******. Eventually, they all (well, most) catch on to you.

Fans of the world? ****** Americans don't represent the world. Most of you wouldn't even be able to represent your country, you'd fall below the IQ level to sign up.

[Marchegiano]

It's kind of funny. When the mainstream is well aware of a dirty history they use that dirty history against any who would dare draw an analog from that history.

For example any time any world leader does anything remotely Hitler-esque is anyway do they not get called Hitler?

When the history is less known the analog can fit the original even more closely, an exact duplicate, and still manage to never receive criticism.

If I do something Apollonian none of you will give me **** for being gay or into poetry or anything else that comes with being an analog of Apollo.

I do something that reminds you of say, Churchill of FDR, you'll sure as **** point it out. If I say something that reminds you of a famous quote from a famous boxer one of you will tell me about that quote and boxer.

There is a lot of history dealing with this sort of situation, Wilder-Joshua, and no party in this story is all together original.

Even though I've dropped names like Daniel The *** Mendoza and James Deaf Burke and Tom Cribb or even The Pugilistic Club none of you seem to believe there is anything that can be found in your history that makes the argument, both sides, really a ****** thing to be doing if you want to see that fight.

Some of you already suspect it, and you're right, but the historical perspective will show you just how right you are.


If you had no history, if you had no NASA, and if your knowledge of space and earth was equal to your knowledge of boxing ( So your history goes back as far as like 1920 because for most of you Jack Dempsey is very early boxing history and your science is totally made up and unchecked nonsense, would flat earth be as ****** as it is?

From my perspective that's the value of this argument. It's about equal to flat earth. You don't have to be ****** to believe it, but being ****** helps. All you have to do is completely disregard science and history.

How many times have I told youse to look into kinesiology and history? Did you? Oh but you're more educated on boxing subjects than a flat earther is on celestial bodies are you? Because Eddie Hearn or Frank Warren or Shelly or even the oldens like Bert Sugar or Teddy Atlas said something? It's super different from David Icke right? How the **** would you know? Lack science, lack history, and are told what to believe and go on arguing about which side of the granted belief is more correct when the truth is you're being taken for a fool everytime you choose a side.

This is like the hundredth time I've said this:

Power is something you are born with is a totally and completely unscientific explanation. Anyone who argues over that claim is a moron myself included.

[NachoMan]

Fans of the world? ****** Americans don't represent the world. Most of you wouldn't even be able to represent your country, you'd fall below the IQ level to sign up.

Haha. IQ levels? This is not a complicated issue to understand. It's not just Americans who see what has transpired. Despite the best efforts of AJ's most zealous apologists, the man has lost credibility across the globe and even in his own home country. He and his management team are to blame. AJ has the attributes to be a great HW champion, but his team simply lacks confidence in him, and it is hurting his legacy. This is not your fault. You're probably a good person and England is still a decent country.

[NachoMan]

It's kind of funny. When the mainstream is well aware of a dirty history they use that dirty history against any who would dare draw an analog from that history.

For example any time any world leader does anything remotely Hitler-esque is anyway do they not get called Hitler?

When the history is less known the analog can fit the original even more closely, an exact duplicate, and still manage to never receive criticism.

If I do something Apollonian none of you will give me **** for being gay or into poetry or anything else that comes with being an analog of Apollo.

I do something that reminds you of say, Churchill of FDR, you'll sure as **** point it out. If I say something that reminds you of a famous quote from a famous boxer one of you will tell me about that quote and boxer.

There is a lot of history dealing with this sort of situation, Wilder-Joshua, and no party in this story is all together original.

Even though I've dropped names like Daniel The *** Mendoza and James Deaf Burke and Tom Cribb or even The Pugilistic Club none of you seem to believe there is anything that can be found in your history that makes the argument, both sides, really a ****** thing to be doing if you want to see that fight.

Some of you already suspect it, and you're right, but the historical perspective will show you just how right you are.


If you had no history, if you had no NASA, and if your knowledge of space and earth was equal to your knowledge of boxing ( So your history goes back as far as like 1920 because for most of you Jack Dempsey is very early boxing history and your science is totally made up and unchecked nonsense, would flat earth be as ****** as it is?

From my perspective that's the value of this argument. It's about equal to flat earth. You don't have to be ****** to believe it, but being ****** helps. All you have to do is completely disregard science and history.

How many times have I told youse to look into kinesiology and history? Did you? Oh but you're more educated on boxing subjects than a flat earther is on celestial bodies are you? Because Eddie Hearn or Frank Warren or Shelly or even the oldens like Bert Sugar or Teddy Atlas said something? It's super different from David Icke right? How the **** would you know? Lack science, lack history, and are told what to believe and go on arguing about which side of the granted belief is more correct when the truth is you're being taken for a fool everytime you choose a side.

This is like the hundredth time I've said this:

Power is something you are born with is a totally and completely unscientific explanation. Anyone who argues over that claim is a moron myself included.

What's your point and who do you suppose you are arguing with?

[REDEEMER]

This is what happens, Eddie, when you screw around and treat fans of the world like they're all ******. Eventually, they all (well, most) catch on to you.

I actually believe all match-ups between these three are interesting and competitive. They all could go either way. AJ simply deserves the bad press because he was the guy in control of everything up until December. He could have made fights with anyone, and he chose to fight lesser fighters, while Fury and Wilder risked their careers.

If these three do get around to doing a round robin, I see Fury coming out on top, but all fights will be fun to watch.

Fury TKO10 Wilder (in the rematch)
Fury UD12 Joshua (close)
Wilder KO6 Joshua

Revisionism at its best. With plentiful wishful thinking.

[REDEEMER]

It's kind of funny. When the mainstream is well aware of a dirty history they use that dirty history against any who would dare draw an analog from that history.

For example any time any world leader does anything remotely Hitler-esque is anyway do they not get called Hitler?

When the history is less known the analog can fit the original even more closely, an exact duplicate, and still manage to never receive criticism.

If I do something Apollonian none of you will give me **** for being gay or into poetry or anything else that comes with being an analog of Apollo.

I do something that reminds you of say, Churchill of FDR, you'll sure as **** point it out. If I say something that reminds you of a famous quote from a famous boxer one of you will tell me about that quote and boxer.

There is a lot of history dealing with this sort of situation, Wilder-Joshua, and no party in this story is all together original.

Even though I've dropped names like Daniel The *** Mendoza and James Deaf Burke and Tom Cribb or even The Pugilistic Club none of you seem to believe there is anything that can be found in your history that makes the argument, both sides, really a ****** thing to be doing if you want to see that fight.

Some of you already suspect it, and you're right, but the historical perspective will show you just how right you are.


If you had no history, if you had no NASA, and if your knowledge of space and earth was equal to your knowledge of boxing ( So your history goes back as far as like 1920 because for most of you Jack Dempsey is very early boxing history and your science is totally made up and unchecked nonsense, would flat earth be as ****** as it is?

From my perspective that's the value of this argument. It's about equal to flat earth. You don't have to be ****** to believe it, but being ****** helps. All you have to do is completely disregard science and history.

How many times have I told youse to look into kinesiology and history? Did you? Oh but you're more educated on boxing subjects than a flat earther is on celestial bodies are you? Because Eddie Hearn or Frank Warren or Shelly or even the oldens like Bert Sugar or Teddy Atlas said something? It's super different from David Icke right? How the **** would you know? Lack science, lack history, and are told what to believe and go on arguing about which side of the granted belief is more correct when the truth is you're being taken for a fool everytime you choose a side.

This is like the hundredth time I've said this:

Power is something you are born with is a totally and completely unscientific explanation. Anyone who argues over that claim is a moron myself included.

I highly doubt anyone is going to read whatever jibberish this mess is .I just scrolled through of what seems to be you hallucinating again and saw you said your gay or something? Take your meds chum!

[Brit_1]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yX457QsH6w

06:46.

This interview gives insight into the plan for Joshua. Wait a few years and instead of a $50m fight its a $200m fight but unfortunately for the Hearns the Heavyweight division is becoming Lit.

[Marchegiano]

What's your point and who do you suppose you are arguing with?

I'm not arguing with anyone and my points are as follows:

1) you all believe in some level

2) the only reason why you believe in this nonsense is because you lack scientific and historical understanding.