Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What is supposed to be good about Porter?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    #71
    Originally posted by Masters01 View Post
    I never once said that or even mentioned his name. You had a monologue going on, as you often do. Dont you remember, you were rambling on about how the lineal championship isnt all-important and how Golovkin is the "true" champ because he beat Geale? Guess that all got a bit confusing for you..
    You said every rule in boxing history meant that no matter what, the lineal champion was also the 'main man', which I disputed and gave you a couple of cases which you dismissed out of hand.

    As I said then and now, you don't have the wisdom to challenge me on this.

    Comment

      #72
      Originally posted by New England View Post
      the bbb of C

      your refs freaking carry your fighters to the corner when they're knocked out. british anything in boxing is a laughing stock, especially the controlling bodies.


      porter, like every other fighter in the states, get a standard piss test after he fights. there's usually a piss test during the press tour as well.


      i don't think either is clean. it's particularly laughable when i hear of a brook fan existing. add in that the brook fan talks about steroids, and it's just too much.
      The Board of Control don't carry out the testing you fat spastic

      Award for most tedious link of the week goes to this guy

      Comment

        #73
        Porter is in no danger of becoming an elite fighter, his skills leave a lot to be desired (reminiscent of a drunk scrapping outside a pub on a Saturday night), I imagine he'll lose very clearly to someone very good or perhaps even to someone less distinguished with good boxing and power. Alexander hit him with a lot of punches, unfortunately for Alexander his power wasn't sufficient to budge Porter but Brook's might be. However Brook might be mauled and bludgeoned to the canvas before he gets enough of his big punches off. There is no doubt that Porter is strong as hell, has a prestigious spring and fairly fast hands - his jab is particularly fast.

        Comment

          #74
          Originally posted by Dirk Diggler UK View Post
          The Board of Control don't carry out the testing you fat spastic

          Award for most tedious link of the week goes to this guy
          And #2 goes to that ****** Master01 who obviously doesn't have a clue about the process.

          Comment

            #75
            Originally posted by LacedUp View Post
            You said every rule in boxing history meant that no matter what, the lineal champion was also the 'main man', which I disputed and gave you a couple of cases which you dismissed out of hand.

            As I said then and now, you don't have the wisdom to challenge me on this.
            Yep, I said that "to be the man, you got to beat the man" and the lineal champion is considered "the man" as per the customs and history of boxing. That's right.

            Seeee, no "Shannon Briggs" mentioned there? Glad you've come over

            Comment

              #76
              Originally posted by Dirk Diggler UK View Post
              The Board of Control don't carry out the testing you fat spastic

              Award for most tedious link of the week goes to this guy
              One piece of information; two piece of insults. That's a negative 1:2 ratio.

              Someone needs a walk.

              Comment

                #77
                Originally posted by Masters01 View Post
                Yep, I said that "to be the man, you got to beat the man" and the lineal champion is considered "the man" as per the customs and history of boxing. That's right.

                Seeee, no "Shannon Briggs" mentioned there? Glad you've come over
                Yes, and that's not always the case - But you don't seem to understand that.

                Or give it to me now, was Shannon Briggs, the lineal heavyweight champion, the 'man' in '97?

                Comment

                  #78
                  Originally posted by Masters01 View Post
                  One piece of information; two piece of insults. That's a negative 1:2 ratio.

                  Someone needs a walk.
                  Who are you and why should I care?

                  I'm glad I could provide you with the information to save you further embarrassing yourself in here today.

                  Comment

                    #79
                    Originally posted by Dirk Diggler UK View Post
                    Who are you and why should I care?

                    I'm glad I could provide you with the information to save you further embarrassing yourself in here today.
                    June '14.

                    Seems like an alt to me.

                    Comment

                      #80
                      Originally posted by Dirk Diggler UK View Post
                      Who are you and why should I care?

                      I'm glad I could provide you with the information to save you further embarrassing yourself in here today.
                      Haha 0 pieces of information and 0 pieces of insult. That's a 1:1 ratio. A couple of inaccurate statements and subtle showings of displeasure but ultimately, Im glad I manoeuvred you back to a neutral ratio

                      (PS: you make it so easy to be controlled x)

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP