Page 7 of 7

Re: Khan vs Canelo is on

Posted: 07 Feb 2016, 10:17
by caldo2025
Tanzio wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
Counter-puncher wrote:You said every single fight, you noodle. That's not me taking something literally. That's you saying something that is literally stupid. If what you really mean is 'most of the big fights', then say so. But as per so often you were just shooting kneejerk idiocy either without thought, knowledge, or both.
I think most people, that have been with a girl before, would understand I was speaking in generalities but there's always a dink to point out something off topic that means absolutely nothing. And, that dink is always you. Ask a girl out or something, take a chance man. You're cooped up. Go have some fun.
Typical of you to ridicule someone with the audacity to point out that you are once again talking out your ass.

Your claim was specific, not a generalization (although it is clear that you may not know the difference).

Kahn had 19 fights at LWW. He did not get buzzed in anywhere remotely close to every single one of those fights. He did not limp to the bell in anywhere close to every single one of those fights.

Kahn didn't limp to the bell in every single one of his big fights at 140. In fact, he didn't limp to the bell in a majority of his big fights at 140.

Your claim is 100% incorrect.
So i guess i need to specify that Khan didn't limp to the finish line in any fights that resulted in KO. I'm sorry, I thought that you two dipshiits could understand that the "finish line" is a full 12 round fight that ends in decision. And, i thought i told you to stop reading my stuff? Was that you? Can't tell you and CP'er apart. Probably the same people because you're always holding each other's balls in this place.

Trolls....the definition of the word.

Re: Khan vs Canelo is on

Posted: 07 Feb 2016, 10:34
by Tanzio
caldo2025 wrote:
Tanzio wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
I think most people, that have been with a girl before, would understand I was speaking in generalities but there's always a dink to point out something off topic that means absolutely nothing. And, that dink is always you. Ask a girl out or something, take a chance man. You're cooped up. Go have some fun.
Typical of you to ridicule someone with the audacity to point out that you are once again talking out your ass.

Your claim was specific, not a generalization (although it is clear that you may not know the difference).

Kahn had 19 fights at LWW. He did not get buzzed in anywhere remotely close to every single one of those fights. He did not limp to the bell in anywhere close to every single one of those fights.

Kahn didn't limp to the bell in every single one of his big fights at 140. In fact, he didn't limp to the bell in a majority of his big fights at 140.

Your claim is 100% incorrect.
So i guess i need to specify that Khan didn't limp to the finish line in any fights that resulted in KO. I'm sorry, I thought that you two dipshiits could understand that the "finish line" is a full 12 round fight that ends in decision. And, i thought i told you to stop reading my stuff? Was that you? Can't tell you and CP'er apart. Probably the same people because you're always holding each other's balls in this place.

Trolls....the definition of the word.
What a fvckin ignorant pussy.

You lack the chromosome to admit when you are wrong. You expect people to ignore when you make totally false statements about boxing history and stats, on a boxing forum tied to boxing history and stats.

This isn't one of the many mirrors that you have strategically positioned around your apartment. This is a boxing forum where you get called out when you make specious posts, which you do habitually.

And your solution for your ignorance is to order those who expose your lack of knowledge and laziness not to read your posts.

Go masturbate to your own image, punk.

Re: Khan vs Canelo is on

Posted: 07 Feb 2016, 14:27
by ImranSarwar
Caldo2025 vs. Tanzio potential. Early betting on the "attacker", Tanzio:
["Dog Fight". Alright men, I want you to shake hands at start of this. Each do the best you can and when it's done shake hands again and.."no animosity.." Please!]
"dang"! Could you both pm me please with AGE, WEIGHT, BOXING HISTORY..then I'll report back to this post if it looks like serious boxing match.
YOU NEVER KNOW! MAYBE WARREN, FRANK LIKE TO PICK YOU TWO UP UNDERCARD!

Re: Khan vs Canelo is on

Posted: 07 Feb 2016, 18:14
by SenorPipino
Kahn will last into the 7th because Canelo doesn't make the effort to take guys out quickly, unless you're in his face like Kirkland.

But the Brit will run, run, run until he eventually makes a mistake and is put to sleep.

Repeatedly rocked by feather fisted Algieri means big time trouble when Khan's made in China chin finally encounters the Mexican's potent fists.

Re: Khan vs Canelo is on

Posted: 08 Feb 2016, 07:27
by Kingfield
caldo2025 wrote:
Tanzio wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
I think most people, that have been with a girl before, would understand I was speaking in generalities but there's always a dink to point out something off topic that means absolutely nothing. And, that dink is always you. Ask a girl out or something, take a chance man. You're cooped up. Go have some fun.
Typical of you to ridicule someone with the audacity to point out that you are once again talking out your ass.

Your claim was specific, not a generalization (although it is clear that you may not know the difference).

Kahn had 19 fights at LWW. He did not get buzzed in anywhere remotely close to every single one of those fights. He did not limp to the bell in anywhere close to every single one of those fights.

Kahn didn't limp to the bell in every single one of his big fights at 140. In fact, he didn't limp to the bell in a majority of his big fights at 140.

Your claim is 100% incorrect.
So i guess i need to specify that Khan didn't limp to the finish line in any fights that resulted in KO. I'm sorry, I thought that you two dipshiits could understand that the "finish line" is a full 12 round fight that ends in decision. And, i thought i told you to stop reading my stuff? Was that you? Can't tell you and CP'er apart. Probably the same people because you're always holding each other's balls in this place.

Trolls....the definition of the word.
why not post the science you said you were relying on?!

Re: Khan vs Canelo is on

Posted: 08 Feb 2016, 08:12
by caldo2025
Tanzio wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
Tanzio wrote: Typical of you to ridicule someone with the audacity to point out that you are once again talking out your ass.

Your claim was specific, not a generalization (although it is clear that you may not know the difference).

Kahn had 19 fights at LWW. He did not get buzzed in anywhere remotely close to every single one of those fights. He did not limp to the bell in anywhere close to every single one of those fights.

Kahn didn't limp to the bell in every single one of his big fights at 140. In fact, he didn't limp to the bell in a majority of his big fights at 140.

Your claim is 100% incorrect.
So i guess i need to specify that Khan didn't limp to the finish line in any fights that resulted in KO. I'm sorry, I thought that you two dipshiits could understand that the "finish line" is a full 12 round fight that ends in decision. And, i thought i told you to stop reading my stuff? Was that you? Can't tell you and CP'er apart. Probably the same people because you're always holding each other's balls in this place.

Trolls....the definition of the word.
What a fvckin ignorant pussy.

You lack the chromosome to admit when you are wrong. You expect people to ignore when you make totally false statements about boxing history and stats, on a boxing forum tied to boxing history and stats.

This isn't one of the many mirrors that you have strategically positioned around your apartment. This is a boxing forum where you get called out when you make specious posts, which you do habitually.

And your solution for your ignorance is to order those who expose your lack of knowledge and laziness not to read your posts.

Go masturbate to your own image, punk.
To get everyone up to speed on the history of this troll's infatuation with me, Tanzio was policing the beat here on the site one sunny Summer Day when he noticed an error one one of my posts. You would have thought by his reaction that he had a picture of Bigfoot or an alien. Unfortunately, it was just an error on a boxing message board in which my memory failed me about a Trinidad fight in 1995. I know, I should have come clean and went right to the police. But I was scared. Tanzio's been interrogating me ever since and vetting every opinion I have.

The Trinidad piece was Tanzio's Bigfoot and landmark case here on the site. But since then, he's been going to the press with garbage and nitpicking like i'm some reporter that needs to site sources. For instance, i'll say something like "Kenny Bayless refs every big fight and he's horrible". Tanzio then puts the blues on and wales the siren and calls me an idiot and liar and then references the big fights that Kenny Bayless hasn't ref'd in. Obviously, I didn't mean to imply that Bayless does EVERY single big fight but then he goes down to the local police bar and celebrates with some drinks for a job well done.

Warren Buffet once said "If a Cop follows you for 500 miles, you're gonna get at ticket" and Tanzio proves this statement to be true. So keep it up if it helps you live in your world and feel complete. Just do me one favor, don't go looking for Warren Buffet concert tickets after reading this. Wrong Buffet bro.

Re: Khan vs Canelo is on

Posted: 08 Feb 2016, 14:24
by man
Counter-puncher wrote:You said every single fight, you noodle.
what a funny way to insult someone on
a boxing forum. next you will throw pink
puffy balls at each other.

Re: Khan vs Canelo is on

Posted: 08 Feb 2016, 14:31
by man
caldo2025 wrote:To get everyone up to speed on the history of this troll's infatuation with me
i didn't follow you feud, so i don't have any
opinion on it, but i know it can be quite nasty
if you are stalked on a forum you love to spend
time on.

Re: Khan vs Canelo is on

Posted: 08 Feb 2016, 14:48
by caldo2025
man wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:To get everyone up to speed on the history of this troll's infatuation with me
i didn't follow you feud, so i don't have any
opinion on it, but i know it can be quite nasty
if you are stalked on a forum you love to spend
time on.
It's more sad than anything to me. I could get mad and make a scene but I honestly feel bad for people like Tanzio. To get THAT mad and spend so much time insulting people on a silly boxing message board because of something they said a year ago that was incorrect tells you all you need to know about the persons life.

I mean, I'm not a sports writer or getting paid for this. This site is mostly a bunch of dudes giving their opinions on boxing. It's not like we're tasked with coming up with a plan to stop ISIS.

Re: Khan vs Canelo is on

Posted: 08 Feb 2016, 22:00
by Tanzio
caldo2025 wrote:
Tanzio wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
So i guess i need to specify that Khan didn't limp to the finish line in any fights that resulted in KO. I'm sorry, I thought that you two dipshiits could understand that the "finish line" is a full 12 round fight that ends in decision. And, i thought i told you to stop reading my stuff? Was that you? Can't tell you and CP'er apart. Probably the same people because you're always holding each other's balls in this place.

Trolls....the definition of the word.
What a fvckin ignorant pussy.

You lack the chromosome to admit when you are wrong. You expect people to ignore when you make totally false statements about boxing history and stats, on a boxing forum tied to boxing history and stats.

This isn't one of the many mirrors that you have strategically positioned around your apartment. This is a boxing forum where you get called out when you make specious posts, which you do habitually.

And your solution for your ignorance is to order those who expose your lack of knowledge and laziness not to read your posts.

Go masturbate to your own image, punk.
To get everyone up to speed on the history of this troll's infatuation with me, Tanzio was policing the beat here on the site one sunny Summer Day when he noticed an error one one of my posts. You would have thought by his reaction that he had a picture of Bigfoot or an alien. Unfortunately, it was just an error on a boxing message board in which my memory failed me about a Trinidad fight in 1995. I know, I should have come clean and went right to the police. But I was scared. Tanzio's been interrogating me ever since and vetting every opinion I have.

The Trinidad piece was Tanzio's Bigfoot and landmark case here on the site. But since then, he's been going to the press with garbage and nitpicking like i'm some reporter that needs to site sources. For instance, i'll say something like "Kenny Bayless refs every big fight and he's horrible". Tanzio then puts the blues on and wales the siren and calls me an idiot and liar and then references the big fights that Kenny Bayless hasn't ref'd in. Obviously, I didn't mean to imply that Bayless does EVERY single big fight but then he goes down to the local police bar and celebrates with some drinks for a job well done.

Warren Buffet once said "If a Cop follows you for 500 miles, you're gonna get at ticket" and Tanzio proves this statement to be true. So keep it up if it helps you live in your world and feel complete. Just do me one favor, don't go looking for Warren Buffet concert tickets after reading this. Wrong Buffet bro.
You are a lazy fool who thinks that he can get away with making claims about boxing stats and history that are 100% false. If anyone points out your ignorance and / or your intellectual slothfulness you accuse them of following you trolling you and being infatuated with you.

You simply have a problem with the truth and supporting your empty headed claims, but most importantly you have a problem with admitting that you are mistaken. When called on your mistakes you choose to act like an adolescent and hurl insults and ridicule at those who have the gumption to point out the inaccuracy of your posts.

You misdirect the conversation in order to camouflage your ignorance. Your original claim here is still 100% false. There is no rationale for your claim. There is no excuse. The reasons for it are that you thought that you could get away with defending your position with 100% bvllsh!t and you are too lazy to actually click into the available stats to verify what you are pulling out of your ass.

I have made thousands of posts on this site over the years. Very, very few of them have been in response to your posts. However, if I happen upon more of your ludicrously false claims about boxing stats and history, rest assured that I will call you out on them, whether you like it or not, you sniveling little pudendum.

Re: Khan vs Canelo is on

Posted: 09 Feb 2016, 03:08
by man
caldo2025 wrote:It's not like we're tasked with coming up with a plan to stop ISIS.
though that might be a good theme for an
additional segment on the board: "boxrec
tackling world problems" ...

now that would lead to really weird threads.

Re: Khan vs Canelo is on

Posted: 09 Feb 2016, 07:44
by caldo2025
Tanzio wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
Tanzio wrote: What a fvckin ignorant pussy.

You lack the chromosome to admit when you are wrong. You expect people to ignore when you make totally false statements about boxing history and stats, on a boxing forum tied to boxing history and stats.

This isn't one of the many mirrors that you have strategically positioned around your apartment. This is a boxing forum where you get called out when you make specious posts, which you do habitually.

And your solution for your ignorance is to order those who expose your lack of knowledge and laziness not to read your posts.

Go masturbate to your own image, punk.
To get everyone up to speed on the history of this troll's infatuation with me, Tanzio was policing the beat here on the site one sunny Summer Day when he noticed an error one one of my posts. You would have thought by his reaction that he had a picture of Bigfoot or an alien. Unfortunately, it was just an error on a boxing message board in which my memory failed me about a Trinidad fight in 1995. I know, I should have come clean and went right to the police. But I was scared. Tanzio's been interrogating me ever since and vetting every opinion I have.

The Trinidad piece was Tanzio's Bigfoot and landmark case here on the site. But since then, he's been going to the press with garbage and nitpicking like i'm some reporter that needs to site sources. For instance, i'll say something like "Kenny Bayless refs every big fight and he's horrible". Tanzio then puts the blues on and wales the siren and calls me an idiot and liar and then references the big fights that Kenny Bayless hasn't ref'd in. Obviously, I didn't mean to imply that Bayless does EVERY single big fight but then he goes down to the local police bar and celebrates with some drinks for a job well done.

Warren Buffet once said "If a Cop follows you for 500 miles, you're gonna get at ticket" and Tanzio proves this statement to be true. So keep it up if it helps you live in your world and feel complete. Just do me one favor, don't go looking for Warren Buffet concert tickets after reading this. Wrong Buffet bro.
You are a lazy fool who thinks that he can get away with making claims about boxing stats and history that are 100% false. If anyone points out your ignorance and / or your intellectual slothfulness you accuse them of following you trolling you and being infatuated with you.

You simply have a problem with the truth and supporting your empty headed claims, but most importantly you have a problem with admitting that you are mistaken. When called on your mistakes you choose to act like an adolescent and hurl insults and ridicule at those who have the gumption to point out the inaccuracy of your posts.

You misdirect the conversation in order to camouflage your ignorance. Your original claim here is still 100% false. There is no rationale for your claim. There is no excuse. The reasons for it are that you thought that you could get away with defending your position with 100% bvllsh!t and you are too lazy to actually click into the available stats to verify what you are pulling out of your ass.

I have made thousands of posts on this site over the years. Very, very few of them have been in response to your posts. However, if I happen upon more of your ludicrously false claims about boxing stats and history, rest assured that I will call you out on them, whether you like it or not, you sniveling little pudendum.
Someone got an insult thesaurus for Christmas. What a perfect gift for you, you must be loved. I have a serious question for you and i'm not trying to be (i don't have an insult thesaurus but let me try) zempadopious or inasdfoujlsdous. Ok those are not words. My serious question to you is....when was the last time you had your blood pressure checked bro? Honestly. There's no way this stuff should make you this mad.

We've had this conversation before, Tanzio. You don't need to take every single comment so literally and bore the rest of the readers with a tussle that had nothing to do with the conversation. I can't tell you how many great debates you've killed on this site by hitting the buzzer on someone for something silly. Like a human speedbump.

There are some members of the site that I don't enjoy reading, so i don't. I've continually asked you to let me be that person to you. Don't make me beg man. I have pride. Not reading me will be everything you didn't want it to be and more. I promise. So let's have a silent contest starting now....you can't beat me. i'm beraticouscjoius.