David Benavidez vs. Roamer Alexis Angulo - August 15, 2020

[margaret thatcher]

It's obviously not just a win or lose thing, you have to consider the level of who they fought and then also how they performed whether it was a loss or not. Take a rough top 50 and look how sh!tty it gets, there are guys there or near there who haven't even fought 1 half relevant opponent, so giving the clear top man a hard night should be worth a lot

And I find it a bit ironic that you're a guy who constantly complains about fighters fighting poor opponents, but then when they actually have a good showing vs the top guy in the world you don't think it's worth anything either and still complain on the guy for gettiing air time. Like come on man lol. I thought we'd agree that it means a hell of a lot more than just building up wins over 4th tier guys who themselves havent beat anyone

That's the problem with just going on win or loss, it completely disregards a good showing vs a top guy for some handpicked wins at much lower levels. I think the first has a lot more value to it.

I mean, to be specific, what type of top 50 would you have if Wallin doesn't cut it?

[jujigatame]

It's obviously not just a win or lose thing, you have to consider the level of who they fought and then also how they performed whether it was a loss or not. Take a rough top 50 and look how sh!tty it gets, there are guys there or near there who haven't even fought 1 half relevant opponent, so giving the clear top man a hard night should be worth a lot

And I find it a bit ironic that you're a guy who constantly complains about fighters fighting poor opponents, but then when they actually have a good showing vs the top guy in the world you don't think it's worth anything either and still complain on the guy for gettiing air time. Like come on man lol. I thought we'd agree that it means a hell of a lot more than just building up wins over 4th tier guys who themselves havent beat anyone

That's the problem with just going on win or loss, it completely disregards a good showing vs a top guy for some handpicked wins at much lower levels. I think the first has a lot more value to it.

I mean, to be specific, what type of top 50 would you have if Wallin doesn't cut it?

That's an odd reading. Just because I hate mismatches means I should give outsized credit to any underdog who manages to take a few rounds? I don't really follow that logic.

I'm not going purely on win/loss. I'm going on context. I think Fury was probably a bit undertrained and undermotivated, and that the cut (which tend to be chance events, not some sort of repeatable skill) changed the fight significantly. I don't think he is definitively in or out of the top 50 based on that performance, and in terms of his wins, they've been 100% against scrubs.

[jujigatame]

BTW, did anyone else think that fight was a huge robbery? Romero looked absolutely mediocre and when they announced the cards I thought the scores were reasonable, but with Marinez as the winner.

[margaret thatcher]

It's obviously not just a win or lose thing, you have to consider the level of who they fought and then also how they performed whether it was a loss or not. Take a rough top 50 and look how sh!tty it gets, there are guys there or near there who haven't even fought 1 half relevant opponent, so giving the clear top man a hard night should be worth a lot

And I find it a bit ironic that you're a guy who constantly complains about fighters fighting poor opponents, but then when they actually have a good showing vs the top guy in the world you don't think it's worth anything either and still complain on the guy for gettiing air time. Like come on man lol. I thought we'd agree that it means a hell of a lot more than just building up wins over 4th tier guys who themselves havent beat anyone

That's the problem with just going on win or loss, it completely disregards a good showing vs a top guy for some handpicked wins at much lower levels. I think the first has a lot more value to it.

I mean, to be specific, what type of top 50 would you have if Wallin doesn't cut it?

That's an odd reading. Just because I hate mismatches means I should give outsized credit to any underdog who manages to take a few rounds? I don't really follow that logic.

I'm not going purely on win/loss. I'm going on context. I think Fury was probably a bit undertrained and undermotivated, and that the cut (which tend to be chance events, not some sort of repeatable skill) changed the fight significantly. I don't think he is definitively in or out of the top 50 based on that performance, and in terms of his wins, they've been 100% against scrubs.

That is an odd reading bruh, but you're the one who read it that way, not me, so brush up. My reading is that you bitch all the time about mismatches but then when a guy fights the top f@cking guy in the division and gives him one of his toughest nights you still give pretty much no credit for having some success in a fight at the absolute highest level. I just thought you'd have more respect for someone who went up to the top---the furthest thing you can do from bottom feeding-- and had his moments.

Do you know how sh!tty the depth of the division is? How many of these other 'boarderline' guys have done something like that lately? Chances are most of them have never even gotten close to winning half a round vs the best guy. Most are probably just left with wins over the type of opponents who sh!t on anyway.

Seriously bruh, the division gets awful that low down, how about actually naming these dudes who would push Wallin out? I just don't see it

[margaret thatcher]

BTW, did anyone else think that fight was a huge robbery? Romero looked absolutely mediocre and when they announced the cards I thought the scores were reasonable, but with Marinez as the winner.

Ya, was a generous decision for sure

[lazboy]

Angulo came to fight. Bena has that stopping power. Interesting.

[lazboy]

Benavidez just a naturally hard puncher. He looks raw also, like a Carl Froch type.

[lazboy]

Basically every punch benavidez throws looks like it hurts and sounds heavy.

[margaret thatcher]

It's weird because he used to be a bit of a slow clunky plodding stalker, but somehow started getting ridick hand speed in combos

[lazboy]

It's weird because he used to be a bit of a slow clunky plodding stalker, but somehow started getting ridick hand speed in combos

I’d say he still is a plodding stalker. He looks lazy on his feet and upright but he just lets hem go effortlessly and they look hard.

[margaret thatcher]

Ya he reminds me a bit of Canelo. Sort of just casually walks around, then unleashes these rockets

[lazboy]

Not to disagree but I can shake a Carl Froch comparison.

[AntonioMartin]

Not a great fight so far but not bad fight either..I have Benavides 49-46

[margaret thatcher]

Not to disagree but I can shake a Carl Froch comparison.

Don't see that one too much

[AntonioMartin]

59-55

[lazboy]

Not to disagree but I can shake a Carl Froch comparison.

Don't see that one too much

Well I said I can’t shake it, didn’t mean I was right.

[AntonioMartin]

69-64

[margaret thatcher]

Not to disagree but I can shake a Carl Froch comparison.

Don't see that one too much

Well I said I can’t shake it, didn’t mean I was right.

Never doubt your own rightness, you da man now my lazyboy

[lazboy]

Very one-sided. Matter of time.

[lazboy]

[AntonioMartin]

79-73..this reminds me of Rigondeaux-Donaire or Donaire-Narvaez...one guy dominating, the other betting on one punch.

[margaret thatcher]

Angulo, tough but limited, we will prob be seeing him a lot more as an opponent.

[AntonioMartin]

finally a great round! better round 4 Angulo, still not enough. 89-82 David.

[AntonioMartin]

Last couple rounds the action picked up but 99-91..and oh wait, Benavides wins by tko!

[lazboy]

I’d consider stopping this. Angulo is a rock but he’s getting hit far too much.