If that's your idea off entertainment to watch a 49-0 boxer beat the crap out of a 0-0 fur coat MMA Fighter go have it.Badhusker wrote:MachoTime wrote:It does not matter does it. Your a Mayweather Nutthugger. You love the guy. You will defend him fighting a 0-0 Boxer.Badhusker wrote:
Mayweather vs McGregor isn't about boxing, its about entertainment. Much like when Floyd "fought" Big show. Ignore it. Harboring too much hate shortens your life.
By the way, if you want to rattle my cage, be my guest.
I admit being a fan of Mayweather's skills and accomplishments. I think personally he is a piece of crap, much like Tyson, but not as bad. I don't even think of this as a boxing match. Just entertainment.
Let me ask, who is your favorite boxer? Imagine that person fighting McGregor and having the chance to make $100 million plus? Would you be as critical then? You could put many of the top boxers in there with McGregor and the result would be the same, and in many cases worse.
Miguel Cotto at 168
Re: Miguel Cotto at 168
Re: Miguel Cotto at 168
The guy is a fool. He says Lemieux's power is overrated?MachoTime wrote:WTF does Wilder have to do in a 168 Miguel Cotton Thread?SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I don't rate much at all from heavyweights outside of Joshua. I do think wilder has a ton of power, his poor technique exemplifies it imo. But if he ever steps up I wouldn't be shocked if his power turned up as overrated as lemieux. Yet to be proven.
Oh I get it your a Boxing Genius !!!![]()
![]()
Underrated more than anything.
-
IRLangmaid25
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 3316
- Joined: 01 Feb 2010, 19:08
Re: Miguel Cotto at 168
I am in agreement with you Saad. Cotto medalled at the 1998 World Amateur Championships as a Lightweight which is 132lbs, boxed at the Sydney Olympics as a Light-Welterweight which is 141lbs so 168lbs is a daft idea.SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Ummmm, no.