Welcome to the Canelo era

[oogiebe]

1. You don't think taking drugs to enhance your performance and give you the edge over an opponent is important? He's had a lot of close fights/dubious decisions in his favour... GGG twice, Lara, Cotto. Take away that advantage then possibly there's 5 loses straight off the bat

2. Do you not follow boxing closely? He literally had been caught and was suspended from boxing, hence why the GGG 2 fight was delayed. Clenbuterol, not steroids (they have similar effects)

I mainly focus on fights.
By the way, all clenbuterol and related factory-farming issues, won't give you an ounce of Canelo's skills. If you're an athlete and you wanna dope yourself, you presumably go directly for steroids, not for a substance found, coincidentally, in industrial meat. Has this issue really been cleared?
I'm saying this because I know of a famous soccer player, Del Piero, who took doping because his team-doctors gave it to him period. No roids, no anabolics, no coke... no responsible one calls him a cheater or so.

Now, the fact alone that Canelo has been disqualified for doping, is not enough to prove that he's really responsible for that. I didn't find enough information, so what do I know? Until then, I won't condemn anyone.

We'll clarify all the above-mentioned issues.

Meanwhile...
Being a dominant fighter doesn't mean "making a pizza-face out of every opponent you meet", like Margarito did to Cotto: you need to always wear plaster in your handwraps, if you wanna treat all of your opponents like that; all p4p greats have fought on equal terms with all of their opponents, that's why no genuine all-timer has a 100% KO rate. Valero is sadly, prematurely gone.

Only two categories of boxers get knocked out: journeymen going to slaughter for a payday, and ambitious boxers underestimating their opponents: the rest are just exceptions confirming the rule.
The fact that Canelo hasn't fought only cannon fodder and irresponsible fighters, brings props to Canelo, not criticism.

The fact that decisions were so close, proves again that Canelo fought very much on equal terms, considering the age/experience/weight/technique ratio of his opponents.
Claiming "close decision wins" as evidence to prove that good Canelo wasn't really dominant in his era, is pretty naif.

All the controversies (as far as I know, Canelo never went Margarito-style anyway), only prove that Canelo is human, nothing really grievous.
The guy's most probably on to have a great legacy, despite controversies. :-)

WTF are you even talking about? Sorry mate, not one sentence of that made even the remotest bit of sense

[lazboy]

An era of catch weights, rehydration clauses, ped use scandals, size discrepancies, a side b side prolonged negotiations, over marinating and taking the life out of events, mismatches, a new Canelo girlfriend every event. He’s a very good fighter though, needs to work on his PR.

[boxing_rocks]

Canelo era == Fraud era

[danconnollyeire]

I mainly focus on fights.
By the way, all clenbuterol and related factory-farming issues, won't give you an ounce of Canelo's skills. If you're an athlete and you wanna dope yourself, you presumably go directly for steroids, not for a substance found, coincidentally, in industrial meat. Has this issue really been cleared?
I'm saying this because I know of a famous soccer player, Del Piero, who took doping because his team-doctors gave it to him period. No roids, no anabolics, no coke... no responsible one calls him a cheater or so.

Now, the fact alone that Canelo has been disqualified for doping, is not enough to prove that he's really responsible for that. I didn't find enough information, so what do I know? Until then, I won't condemn anyone.

We'll clarify all the above-mentioned issues.

Meanwhile...
Being a dominant fighter doesn't mean "making a pizza-face out of every opponent you meet", like Margarito did to Cotto: you need to always wear plaster in your handwraps, if you wanna treat all of your opponents like that; all p4p greats have fought on equal terms with all of their opponents, that's why no genuine all-timer has a 100% KO rate. Valero is sadly, prematurely gone.

Only two categories of boxers get knocked out: journeymen going to slaughter for a payday, and ambitious boxers underestimating their opponents: the rest are just exceptions confirming the rule.
The fact that Canelo hasn't fought only cannon fodder and irresponsible fighters, brings props to Canelo, not criticism.

The fact that decisions were so close, proves again that Canelo fought very much on equal terms, considering the age/experience/weight/technique ratio of his opponents.
Claiming "close decision wins" as evidence to prove that good Canelo wasn't really dominant in his era, is pretty naif.

All the controversies (as far as I know, Canelo never went Margarito-style anyway), only prove that Canelo is human, nothing really grievous.
The guy's most probably on to have a great legacy, despite controversies. :-)

WTF are you even talking about? Sorry mate, not one sentence of that made even the remotest bit of sense

I read ‘journeymen get knocked out’ and that was it for me lol

[Jacopodb]

1. You don't think taking drugs to enhance your performance and give you the edge over an opponent is important? He's had a lot of close fights/dubious decisions in his favour... GGG twice, Lara, Cotto. Take away that advantage then possibly there's 5 loses straight off the bat

2. Do you not follow boxing closely? He literally had been caught and was suspended from boxing, hence why the GGG 2 fight was delayed. Clenbuterol, not steroids (they have similar effects)

I mainly focus on fights.
By the way, all clenbuterol and related factory-farming issues, won't give you an ounce of Canelo's skills. If you're an athlete and you wanna dope yourself, you presumably go directly for steroids, not for a substance found, coincidentally, in industrial meat. Has this issue really been cleared?
I'm saying this because I know of a famous soccer player, Del Piero, who took doping because his team-doctors gave it to him period. No roids, no anabolics, no coke... no responsible one calls him a cheater or so.

Now, the fact alone that Canelo has been disqualified for doping, is not enough to prove that he's really responsible for that. I didn't find enough information, so what do I know? Until then, I won't condemn anyone.

We'll clarify all the above-mentioned issues.

Meanwhile...
Being a dominant fighter doesn't mean "making a pizza-face out of every opponent you meet", like Margarito did to Cotto: you need to always wear plaster in your handwraps, if you wanna treat all of your opponents like that; all p4p greats have fought on equal terms with all of their opponents, that's why no genuine all-timer has a 100% KO rate. Valero is sadly, prematurely gone.

Only two categories of boxers get knocked out: journeymen going to slaughter for a payday, and ambitious boxers underestimating their opponents: the rest are just exceptions confirming the rule.
The fact that Canelo hasn't fought only cannon fodder and irresponsible fighters, brings props to Canelo, not criticism.

The fact that decisions were so close, proves again that Canelo fought very much on equal terms, considering the age/experience/weight/technique ratio of his opponents.
Claiming "close decision wins" as evidence to prove that good Canelo wasn't really dominant in his era, is pretty naif.

All the controversies (as far as I know, Canelo never went Margarito-style anyway), only prove that Canelo is human, nothing really grievous.
The guy's most probably on to have a great legacy, despite controversies. :-)

WTF are you even talking about? Sorry mate, not one sentence of that made even the remotest bit of sense

Bring solid arguments, dude, it's no good grabbing my [...] like this, if you don't bring arguments. How do I know, if not..? Eh.

[Jacopodb]

An era of catch weights, rehydration clauses, ped use scandals, size discrepancies, a side b side prolonged negotiations, over marinating and taking the life out of events, mismatches, a new Canelo girlfriend every event. He’s a very good fighter though, needs to work on his PR.

You mean "PR" as "Public Relations", perhaps.

I respect your view, but we barely know about the past: La Motta and Cosa Nostra, Alí and the phantom-punch, "the long count"... and much more: no one calls Alí, La Motta, Tunney, Canelo, etc. less than great... we just need some time, and all the hypers and detractors will pass... Canelo's greatness, instead, will remain: Chavez, Marquez, Morales... Canelo is in that category, despite accidents.

[Jacopodb]

WTF are you even talking about? Sorry mate, not one sentence of that made even the remotest bit of sense

I read ‘journeymen get knocked out’ and that was it for me lol

Not all journeymen get knocked out, obviously, I hope you didn't read it like that... I wouldn't know if doubting your honesty or your intelligence... or both...

The Calzaghes, the Marcianos, the Floyd M. Jrs. don't get knocked out, because they don't put paydays over responsibilities: paradoxically, you can make more money like that, with the due exceptions.

[Jacopodb]

Forums like this are a paradise for conformists: cowards craving for a gang, to unload heir own frustrations, which come from their own lack of commitment, on the first outside-voice.
There can be no serious argument supporting any flaunted disregard.

[greg]

Forums like this are a paradise for conformists: cowards craving for a gang, to unload heir own frustrations, which come from their own lack of commitment, on the first outside-voice.
There can be no serious argument supporting any flaunted disregard.

..may I ask you what keeps you here?

[Jacopodb]

Forums like this are a paradise for conformists: cowards craving for a gang, to unload heir own frustrations, which come from their own lack of commitment, on the first outside-voice.
There can be no serious argument supporting any flaunted disregard.

..may I ask you what keeps you here?

What keeps me here, is the opportunity to share my knowledge with some users, about some arguments: you can learn a lot by sharing opinions respectfully. This looks pretty obvious.
I hope you weren't thinking that I stick around here because I believe I'm the Messiah, Neo, or something... we must not throw away the baby out with bath-water.

[oogiebe]

Forums like this are a paradise for conformists: cowards craving for a gang, to unload heir own frustrations, which come from their own lack of commitment, on the first outside-voice.
There can be no serious argument supporting any flaunted disregard.

..may I ask you what keeps you here?

What keeps me here, is the opportunity to share my knowledge with some users, about some arguments: you can learn a lot by sharing opinions respectfully. This looks pretty obvious.
I hope you weren't thinking that I stick around here because I believe I'm the Messiah, Neo, or something... we must not throw away the baby out with bath-water.

Personally, I like to gain new knowledge and see other's opinions. I find a lot of posters really enlightening on many topics. I must add that those I refer to are more humble posters and don't make attempts to 'show' they are knowledgeable or try to overly 'prove' their value. Their posts just speak for themselves.

[greg]

Forums like this are a paradise for conformists: cowards craving for a gang, to unload heir own frustrations, which come from their own lack of commitment, on the first outside-voice.
There can be no serious argument supporting any flaunted disregard.

..may I ask you what keeps you here?

What keeps me here, is the opportunity to share my knowledge with some users, about some arguments: you can learn a lot by sharing opinions respectfully. This looks pretty obvious.
I hope you weren't thinking that I stick around here because I believe I'm the Messiah, Neo, or something... we must not throw away the baby out with bath-water.

..that "baby" is healthy allright ..boxrec has been a solid forum all along irrespective of whether you agree with other posters or not...just take it easy

[Counter-puncher]

Forums like this are a paradise for conformists: cowards craving for a gang, to unload heir own frustrations, which come from their own lack of commitment, on the first outside-voice.
There can be no serious argument supporting any flaunted disregard.

oh for fvck's sake you're such a little drama queen, sitting there on threads preening yourself and demanding acknowledgement 'you must admit i brought serious arguments', 'you must at least give me credit for humour', anyone diagrees with you and you start bleating about persecution, conformity and your unique IQ; you're not special, precious, you're a boring fvcking windbag who takes himself and his opinions way too seriously, it's an internet forum, people may disagree with your views, if you don't wish to be disagreed with go shout your sh1t at a wall or a dog, if you post on a forum get used to the fact people may disagree and don't act like such a whiney little child when they do.

[Jacopodb]

Forums like this are a paradise for conformists: cowards craving for a gang, to unload heir own frustrations, which come from their own lack of commitment, on the first outside-voice.
There can be no serious argument supporting any flaunted disregard.

oh for fvck's sake you're such a little drama queen, sitting there on threads preening yourself and demanding acknowledgement 'you must admit i brought serious arguments', 'you must at least give me credit for humour', anyone diagrees with you and you start bleating about persecution, conformity and your unique IQ; you're not special, precious, you're a boring fvcking windbag who takes himself and his opinions way too seriously, it's an internet forum, people may disagree with your views, if you don't wish to be disagreed with go shout your sh1t at a wall or a dog, if you post on a forum get used to the fact people may disagree and don't act like such a whiney little child when they do.

Your post is clearly emotional, and I'm not used to rage against troubled ones.

My IQ is not something I've earned, nor something I'm guilty of, so I don't brag about it: I only bring it as an argument, when needed. :-)

I don't demand acknowledgement, but respect, when people like you insults me on a personal level, with no point whatsoever.

The fact that you frequently attempt to get personal at me, without bringing the shred of an argument, and your subsequent, punctual failures to bring me down, make me pity you.

I'm not mad at you. You just act like a living parody... you're utterly tragicomic.

[Jacopodb]

..may I ask you what keeps you here?

What keeps me here, is the opportunity to share my knowledge with some users, about some arguments: you can learn a lot by sharing opinions respectfully. This looks pretty obvious.
I hope you weren't thinking that I stick around here because I believe I'm the Messiah, Neo, or something... we must not throw away the baby out with bath-water.

..that "baby" is healthy allright ..boxrec has been a solid forum all along irrespective of whether you agree with other posters or not...just take it easy

That's why I'm sticking around: I have learned a lot in a few time, taking it as easy as I could.

I'm perfectly calm, dude. Calmer than you are...

[boxing_rocks]

Forums like this are a paradise for conformists: cowards craving for a gang, to unload heir own frustrations, which come from their own lack of commitment, on the first outside-voice.
There can be no serious argument supporting any flaunted disregard.

oh for fvck's sake you're such a little drama queen, sitting there on threads preening yourself and demanding acknowledgement 'you must admit i brought serious arguments', 'you must at least give me credit for humour', anyone diagrees with you and you start bleating about persecution, conformity and your unique IQ; you're not special, precious, you're a boring fvcking windbag who takes himself and his opinions way too seriously, it's an internet forum, people may disagree with your views, if you don't wish to be disagreed with go shout your sh1t at a wall or a dog, if you post on a forum get used to the fact people may disagree and don't act like such a whiney little child when they do.

Almost a clone of EO.

[Jacopodb]

Forums like this are a paradise for conformists: cowards craving for a gang, to unload heir own frustrations, which come from their own lack of commitment, on the first outside-voice.
There can be no serious argument supporting any flaunted disregard.

oh for fvck's sake you're such a little drama queen, sitting there on threads preening yourself and demanding acknowledgement 'you must admit i brought serious arguments', 'you must at least give me credit for humour', anyone diagrees with you and you start bleating about persecution, conformity and your unique IQ; you're not special, precious, you're a boring fvcking windbag who takes himself and his opinions way too seriously, it's an internet forum, people may disagree with your views, if you don't wish to be disagreed with go shout your sh1t at a wall or a dog, if you post on a forum get used to the fact people may disagree and don't act like such a whiney little child when they do.

Almost a clone of EO.

Awww... <3

[Jacopodb]

Look: as I'm planning to stick around, I'm gonna write this, so I'mma explain myself Once and for all...
This is pretty much my policy:

1. I bring an argument, getting, among all, the following possible options:
a) I'm answered with another argument.
b) I'm insulted with no point.
c) I don't get any answer at all.

2. I answer back, and:
a) if the argument is more valid than mine, I reckon; if not, I bring new arguments.
b) since I cannot answer a pointless post, I claim a little respect.
c) got it...

3. I answer back only if:
a) the counterpart keeps bringing less-valid arguments than mine.
b) the counterpart keeps disrespecting me (getting groundlessly personal, without bringing any argument at all).

4. Every other possible scenario will be faced on the spot.

Just so you know, and avoid me writing down the same concepts, over and over again.
Peace.

[tiny_acres]

Look: as I'm planning to stick around, I'm gonna write this, so I'mma explain myself Once and for all...
This is pretty much my policy:

1. I bring an argument, getting, among all, the following possible options:
a) I'm answered with another argument.
b) I'm insulted with no point.
c) I don't get any answer at all.

2. I answer back, and:
a) if the argument is more valid than mine, I reckon; if not, I bring new arguments.
b) since I cannot answer a pointless post, I claim a little respect.
c) got it...

3. I answer back only if:
a) the counterpart keeps bringing less-valid arguments than mine.
b) the counterpart keeps disrespecting me (getting groundlessly personal, without bringing any argument at all).

4. Every other possible scenario will be faced on the spot.

Just so you know, and avoid me writing down the same concepts, over and over again.
Peace.

I've seen the forum rules.
Maybe since you have such an over inflated self worth you might ask the mods to pin your personal rules. That might gain some self worth for you.
Find your safe place no one here will harm you. It's ok

[boxing_rocks]

Maybe since you have such an over inflated self worth you might ask the mods to pin your personal rules. That might gain some self worth for you.
Find your safe place no one here will harm you. It's ok

Or just f*cking take your meds.

[oogiebe]

So we're done with the Canelo era and onto therapy?!

[tiny_acres]

Maybe since you have such an over inflated self worth you might ask the mods to pin your personal rules. That might gain some self worth for you.
Find your safe place no one here will harm you. It's ok

Or just f*cking take your meds.

that might help

[kimbroughski]

Canelo future fights: Jacobs and Andrade at 160 unification bouts, Lemieux as a showcase fight; future mega-fight with Callum Smith at 168 WBA unification ... All fighters signed under DAZN .

[Counter-puncher]

Look: as I'm planning to stick around, I'm gonna write this, so I'mma explain myself Once and for all...
This is pretty much my policy:

1. I bring an argument, getting, among all, the following possible options:
a) I'm answered with another argument.
b) I'm insulted with no point.
c) I don't get any answer at all.

2. I answer back, and:
a) if the argument is more valid than mine, I reckon; if not, I bring new arguments.
b) since I cannot answer a pointless post, I claim a little respect.
c) got it...

3. I answer back only if:
a) the counterpart keeps bringing less-valid arguments than mine.
b) the counterpart keeps disrespecting me (getting groundlessly personal, without bringing any argument at all).

4. Every other possible scenario will be faced on the spot.

Just so you know, and avoid me writing down the same concepts, over and over again.
Peace.

lol you're so full of yourself you sh1t limbs every time you post.

You need to get over yourself man.

[Jacopodb]

Look: as I'm planning to stick around, I'm gonna write this, so I'mma explain myself Once and for all...
This is pretty much my policy:

1. I bring an argument, getting, among all, the following possible options:
a) I'm answered with another argument.
b) I'm insulted with no point.
c) I don't get any answer at all.

2. I answer back, and:
a) if the argument is more valid than mine, I reckon; if not, I bring new arguments.
b) since I cannot answer a pointless post, I claim a little respect.
c) got it...

3. I answer back only if:
a) the counterpart keeps bringing less-valid arguments than mine.
b) the counterpart keeps disrespecting me (getting groundlessly personal, without bringing any argument at all).

4. Every other possible scenario will be faced on the spot.

Just so you know, and avoid me writing down the same concepts, over and over again.
Peace.

I've seen the forum rules.
Maybe since you have such an over inflated self worth you might ask the mods to pin your personal rules. That might gain some self worth for you.
Find your safe place no one here will harm you. It's ok

Look: I always try with dialogue, until I don't understand that it's no use, like in this very context. So, no problem, dude, as long as you keep at least one palm distance from my arse.
Cheers.