That's not the assertion that I'm challenging. That's you changing your argument. The assertion I'm challenging is what you initially wrote about Golovkin not being a champion, then switching to not having won a belt in the ring.
Because that's what you said. When you said something about Cotto being better, I said, It's a shame they were never in the same division. That's when you said "non champions get in queue." You didn't say Golovkin was a great, and Cotto deserved an easy fight. You said Golovkin wasn't a champ.
So why are you now asking me to refute a position you didn't take?
Because that's what you said. When you said something about Cotto being better, I said, It's a shame they were never in the same division. That's when you said "non champions get in queue." You didn't say Golovkin was a great, and Cotto deserved an easy fight. You said Golovkin wasn't a champ.
So why are you now asking me to refute a position you didn't take?

Comment