BoxRec

ArmaanCFC wrote:

tiny_acres wrote:

ArmaanCFC wrote:Khan. Mark my words.

Either you are joking.Or are insane

your mums insane

Nice comeback.
What makes Khan a potential ppv star and the next p4p king?
Please explain this to us so we all don't think you are a freaking troll.

Triple G for a few more years
Alvarez
Kovalev
Beterbiev
Kudryashov
Verdejo
Crawford
Lomachenko
The Monster Inoue
Joshua
Uysk

sykessta wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:

world ranked wrote:
People are taking it like everyone loses to Floyd so lets not punish him for that

He was also just 23 at the time, and had to cut a little more weight. The weight was a non-issue to me, but all things considered that loss doesn't look bad at all right now.

Yea he has made a good comeback and I like canelo but like I said just knowing the top guy from the previous era was far better with obvious proof just irritates me lol

I think its a good thing becuse we dont have to have that stupid era1 fighter vs era2 fighter debate between these two.

world ranked wrote: I think its a good thing becuse we dont have to have that stupid era1 fighter vs era2 fighter debate between these two.

That debate will still be very plausible because Canelo was so young.

punchoutsb wrote:

world ranked wrote: I think its a good thing becuse we dont have to have that stupid era1 fighter vs era2 fighter debate between these two.

That debate will still be very plausible because Canelo was so young.

Not really because Floyd was not in prime either

world ranked wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:

world ranked wrote: I think its a good thing becuse we dont have to have that stupid era1 fighter vs era2 fighter debate between these two.

That debate will still be very plausible because Canelo was so young.

Not really because Floyd was not in prime either

He was closer than Canelo, and still the #1 p4p in the world. The fact that he is still #1 and beat other top p4p fighters in the three years following the bout says a lot.

punchoutsb wrote:

world ranked wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:
That debate will still be very plausible because Canelo was so young.

Not really because Floyd was not in prime either

He was closer than Canelo, and still the #1 p4p in the world. The fact that he is still #1 and beat other top p4p fighters in the three years following the bout says a lot.

disagree Canelo is much closer to his prime than Floyd. If ur in ur early to mid 20's ur closer to your prime than a fighter in his mid to late 30's

world ranked wrote: disagree Canelo is much closer to his prime than Floyd. If ur in ur early to mid 20's ur closer to your prime than a fighter in his mid to late 30's

Depends on the fighter. Floyd hasn't lost that much. Canelo was a kid when they fought. I personally feel Floyd would win at any point, but we don't really know because we haven't seen the best Canelo yet.

punchoutsb wrote:

world ranked wrote: disagree Canelo is much closer to his prime than Floyd. If ur in ur early to mid 20's ur closer to your prime than a fighter in his mid to late 30's

Depends on the fighter. Floyd hasn't lost that much. Canelo was a kid when they fought. I personally feel Floyd would win at any point, but we don't really know because we haven't seen the best Canelo yet.

It just seems like we making an excuse for the loser being as though neither were in their prime. It seems like were excusing that he lost.

world ranked wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:

world ranked wrote: disagree Canelo is much closer to his prime than Floyd. If ur in ur early to mid 20's ur closer to your prime than a fighter in his mid to late 30's

Depends on the fighter. Floyd hasn't lost that much. Canelo was a kid when they fought. I personally feel Floyd would win at any point, but we don't really know because we haven't seen the best Canelo yet.

It just seems like we making an excuse for the loser being as though neither were in their prime. It seems like were excusing that he lost.

We're not. I'm just saying it would be premature to say the debate is over since Canelo was so young when they fought.

punchoutsb wrote:

world ranked wrote:

punchoutsb wrote: Depends on the fighter. Floyd hasn't lost that much. Canelo was a kid when they fought. I personally feel Floyd would win at any point, but we don't really know because we haven't seen the best Canelo yet.

It just seems like we making an excuse for the loser being as though neither were in their prime. It seems like were excusing that he lost.

We're not. I'm just saying it would be premature to say the debate is over since Canelo was so young when they fought.

If can't put a bed opinions with in ring proof I guess any truth can be argued.

world ranked wrote:
If can't put a bed opinions with in ring proof I guess any truth can be argued.

Say what now?

davie wrote:

world ranked wrote:
If can't put a bed opinions with in ring proof I guess any truth can be argued.

Say what now?

I guess there's still doubt that Canelo would beat Floyd if both were in prime.

tiny_acres wrote:

ArmaanCFC wrote:Khan. Mark my words.

Either you are joking.Or are insane

Or....ArmaanCFC is Khan or his mom incognito.


One thing about Khan though, a lot of people tune in with high hopes of getting to see his famous chicken dance!

[/quote]

He was closer than Canelo, and still the #1 p4p in the world. The fact that he is still #1 and beat other top p4p fighters in the three years following the bout says a lot.[/quote]

disagree Canelo is much closer to his prime than Floyd. If ur in ur early to mid 20's ur closer to your prime than a fighter in his mid to late 30's[/quote]

Disagree there, if a fighter is still in good physical shape, which Floyd undoubtedly is, then all those extra years of experience count for an awful lot. Look at Wlad, pushing 40, and still head and shoulders above everyone in the division.

davie wrote:

world ranked wrote:
If can't put a bed opinions with in ring proof I guess any truth can be argued.

Say what now?

world ranked, there's a lot that goes in to "in ring proof". Ross Purrity is not better than Wladimir Klitschko, for example.

I would favor Floyd over Canelo at any point in their careers right now, but we still haven't seen the best Canelo yet in my opinion. Floyd was (even though he has been declining a bit) on top of the world when they fought. To take that fight as definitive proof doesn't make a lot of sense when you consider the big fights Canelo may still yet have.

punchoutsb wrote:

davie wrote:

world ranked wrote:
If can't put a bed opinions with in ring proof I guess any truth can be argued.

Say what now?

world ranked, there's a lot that goes in to "in ring proof". Ross Purrity is not better than Wladimir Klitschko, for example.

I would favor Floyd over Canelo at any point in their careers right now, but we still haven't seen the best Canelo yet in my opinion. Floyd was (even though he has been declining a bit) on top of the world when they fought. To take that fight as definitive proof doesn't make a lot of sense when you consider the big fights Canelo may still yet have.

Is a clear difference from somebody getting upset by a KO punch than someone who dominated for 12 rounds and the guy didn't win a round. I can see is the fight was close but anyone who loses 12-0 or 11-1 on the cards never had a shot.

digzee wrote:Crawford, he's got all the talent and the start of a fan base.

That was one of my picks. . Great all round package

For me it's Crawford, Walters, Golovkin, Canelo, Joshua, Lomachenko and Thurman.

Who will carry the torch?

The fighter who is somehow able to get passed all the political BS and make fights with other great fighters and then win those fights...

It could be anyone mentioned so far...but, it has less to do with who is the MOST talented or who can be sold most effectively, in the end, you have to beat talented fighters in front of a lot of people to become a PPV star....

I wish them all the best...it's easy to get lost in the political cesspool....