Comments Thread For: Shawn Porter: I Can't Make Excuses, Say I Was Robbed

[Fire4231]

You're the idiot here - I never said Porter won.

My point was that he had lot's of success, landed a lot of hard punches and made it a close fight, much closer than Wallin did, but you seem like you want to deny Porter that.

Nooo buddy, don’t twist and turn now. Or is it that not only are you dumb but you have short term memory.

My original message to another poster was about robbery’s not fights close on rounds.

Some clowns were saying the Spence vs Porter fight was a robbery and should be a rematch. However Fury vs Wallin should be considered a robbery before Errol vs Spence.

You initially got emotional and interjected making it about both Wallin winning less rounds than Porter.

However By your own estimate Porter only one 4 to 5 rounds? Your explanation ended up making my point, Errol wasn’t a Robbery because he clearly won more rounds and received a point for the knock down.

Then I justified Wallin was robbed because the Fury fight should have been stopped due to that nastiest of cuts. A cut caused by a Wallin punch. So if the fight was stopped Fury would lose as he could not safely finish the fight. Just to remind you the original context is below....

[ORIGINAL QUOTE=davidw9785;20094739]Does anyone seriously think Porter won? He put on a great performance and exceeded expectations, but that was a clean win for Spence. BoxingScene scored it 115-112... It was a clear Spence win to me. He was aggressive too and landed the harder cleaner punches... he was also never hurt or in any kind of trouble. I don't see how anyone could think Porter won. It was a competitive but dominant performance by Spence.[/QUOTE]

ME: I agree bro, Shawn was a killer that night. However Errol was rolling a lot of that frenetic offense. The response from Spence was usually landing clean. That was the difference.

It’s the classic illusion of Porter doing much better than these guys thought he would and then Spence struggling more than we have seen.

However there is a difference between the hard fought win that took place and the embellished loss some have claimed.

Anytime some one claims a “Robbery,” and the fight was close, the intent always shows up dubious to say the least. And if guys are saying Errol must rematch, I want too see similar requests for Fury vs Wallin.

Anything else bright guy?

[apollocreed]

Nooo buddy, don’t twist and turn now. Or is it that not only are you dumb but you have short term memory.

My original message to another poster was about robbery’s not fights close on rounds.

Some clowns were saying the Spence vs Porter fight was a robbery and should be a rematch. However Fury vs Wallin should be considered a robbery before Errol vs Spence.

You initially got emotional and interjected making it about both Wallin winning less rounds than Porter.

However By your own estimate Porter only one 4 to 5 rounds? Your explanation ended up making my point, Errol wasn’t a Robbery because he clearly won more rounds and received a point for the knock down.

Then I justified Wallin was robbed because the Fury fight should have been stopped due to that nastiest of cuts. A cut caused by a Wallin punch. So if the fight was stopped Fury would lose as he could not safely finish the fight. Just to remind you the original context is below....

[ORIGINAL QUOTE=davidw9785;20094739]Does anyone seriously think Porter won? He put on a great performance and exceeded expectations, but that was a clean win for Spence. BoxingScene scored it 115-112... It was a clear Spence win to me. He was aggressive too and landed the harder cleaner punches... he was also never hurt or in any kind of trouble. I don't see how anyone could think Porter won. It was a competitive but dominant performance by Spence.

ME: I agree bro, Shawn was a killer that night. However Errol was rolling a lot of that frenetic offense. The response from Spence was usually landing clean. That was the difference.

It’s the classic illusion of Porter doing much better than these guys thought he would and then Spence struggling more than we have seen.

However there is a difference between the hard fought win that took place and the embellished loss some have claimed.

Anytime some one claims a “Robbery,” and the fight was close, the intent always shows up dubious to say the least. And if guys are saying Errol must rematch, I want too see similar requests for Fury vs Wallin.

Anything else bright guy?[/QUOTE]

The reason I replied to your post was because you originally tried to claim that:
a) Porter was hitting gloves most of the time.

b) Wallin was as deserving of a rematch as Porter.

Both of those points are bull****.

Porter clearly buzzed Spence with power shots at numerous points throughout, and won 4/5 rounds.

Wallin won 2 rounds at best.
So how the fu .k would he be as deserving of a rematch as Porter. Idiot.

[DeadPrezBoxing]

Spence outboxed the boxer when he fought Mikey and he out bullied the bully when he fought Porter. He said he was going to outbox Mikey....that's what he did.
He said he was going for the knockout again Porter....that's what he did. Brought the fight to him all night.
If they did rematch I'm sure he could make it easier and outbox him but the dog in him makes him just want to fight it out. Great fight for both competitors but I though Spence clearly won. #FOTY Candidate

[Fire4231]

ME: I agree bro, Shawn was a killer that night. However Errol was rolling a lot of that frenetic offense. The response from Spence was usually landing clean. That was the difference.

It’s the classic illusion of Porter doing much better than these guys thought he would and then Spence struggling more than we have seen.

However there is a difference between the hard fought win that took place and the embellished loss some have claimed.

Anytime some one claims a “Robbery,” and the fight was close, the intent always shows up dubious to say the least. And if guys are saying Errol must rematch, I want too see similar requests for Fury vs Wallin.

Anything else bright guy?

The reason I replied to your post was because you originally tried to claim that:
a) Porter was hitting gloves most of the time.

b) Wallin was as deserving of a rematch as Porter.

Both of those points are bull****.

Porter clearly buzzed Spence with power shots at numerous points throughout, and won 4/5 rounds.

Wallin won 2 rounds at best.
So how the fu .k would he be as deserving of a rematch as Porter. Idiot.[/QUOTE]

Lol... bro I am not playing games. If your reading comprehension and short term memory is this low quit participating in threads.

Just know you can pretend like you don’t understand or see truth, however that only protects your ego not outside perceptions.

The optics problem that you have is that everyone else does understand and see it clearly.

In other words making a new POV in the last thread you write doesn’t erase all that already exists. So retreating inward and screening out the logical argument written previously “the Fury fight should have been stopped on a disastrous cut caused by a Wallin punch,” just makes you look even more foolish and cowardly on the outside.

Keep hiding from the truth you don’t want to see. But it doesn’t go away. Anyone else can reread the thread and see the reality behind Wallin winning if the fight is stopped therefore getting robbed of a certain victory.

Once again entitlement is confusing folks. Making them believe just because they themselves have ignored the truth and will not read the whole thread that the rest of the world will somehow respond in kind.

This generation of online idiots is so self-absorbed it has become a mental handicap. I think the proper diagnosis is self-induced delusion.

[Fanofreason]

It reminded me of a Bradley PAC 1.

Bradley countered PAC clean all night. Much like Spence did to Porter.

[theface07]

Porter ran his mouth saying he and he alone promoted the fight. Spence replied and it got outta hand. Speak facts bro

Speak facts? Yeah ok. Whatever you say Mr. One Post.

[Truth Serum]

That's not going to happen. Crawford is miles ahead of these Welterweights. Remember when sugar shane cracked Mayweather in round 2. Mayweather was able to make adjustments, and walked shane down. Ok Pacquiao cracked Thurman and kept on cracking, no adjustments made. Porter cracked Spence and kept on cracking him. Gamboa cracked Crawford and adjustments were made. See my point. Most of the WW are one trick ponies without the ability to adjust. That's what sets Crawford apart from these dudes.

Naw. Crawford lost 2 rounds to Khan before his nuts gave out and several to Benevidez before his knee gave out. I think Porter beats Bud and by KO.

[garfios]

Seemed like the winner of this fight was pre-determined with all the hype around Spence. Anyone who knows boxing knew Porter wasn’t gonna get mowed over. I felt he deserved the W based on the fact he landed the better punches in the majority of the rounds pushed the pace and made adjustments. Spence never really made adjustments his main plan was just keep coming forward and throwing to the gut which strayed below the belt quite often. But either way both guys fought a great fight that was very entertaining which you don’t always get.

Just like when porter fought Ugas, most experts saw Yordenis win, but the house fighter got the nod. The ref didn't count the knock down and it clear.

[patostar89]

Wtf are you talking about? The whole world and even Stephen A. Smith who hates manny admitted manny got robbed, you are blind.