BoxRec

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 18:17

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:08

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:00
Vanes' has no credibility at 160lbs. You never even mentioned him until his name was named as GGG's next opponent.

I don't think you even read apollo's post. Your post makes no damn sense in context to what he wrote. Vanes has a good chin and is a good boxer. That's irrefutable.

Please read my post again.

Here are the facts:

• Vanes' has no credibility at 160lbs--Charlo's credibility at 160 lbs. is thin so was Sulecki's.
• Apollo creed never mentioned Vanes as a decent opponent (on a par with the likes of Murray & Stevens) until the mismatch against Golovkin was announced--He wasn't on the radar at the time of course. A weird argument from you. Fighters go off radar until they get a big fight oftentimes. I don't remember anyone talking about Khurtsidze until he beat the hell out of Douglas.

The above points are indeed "irrefutable" and here are several others that you won't be able to refute either:

• Vanes Martirosyan has never beaten a top fighter--Watch the Charlo fight. They screwed him, but this argument can be used for any fringe contender any beltholder has beaten. Martirosyan has been competitive against just about all the top fighters he's faced. He gave Charlo and Andrade their toughest fights.
• He has been inactive for two years--A fighter has to start somewhere, and if said fighter is a gym rat this becomes a non-issue. Mikey was inactive for a long ass time, but he would've beaten Zlatcanin anyways. Context matters a lot.
• He isn't a middleweight--This isn't such a good argument in this day and age. Fighters drain a lot of weight. All the top fighters at 154 lbs. are pretty much MWs. Brook came in heavier than GGG, IIRC.
• He has only managed to win three fights in almost last five years (losing three others)--Lara, Smith, and Charlo is a strong gauntlet. He got screwed in the Charlo fight, again. If you give him a draw for the Charlo fight, he becomes 1-1-1.
• The Armenian has managed to gain only one victory (coupled with two losses) within the last 3½ years against an opponent that wasn’t considered world-class--Complete BoxRec warrior argument. Absolutely useless.

Do you care to attack each point I raised head-on and attempt to undermine them? I thought not!

You're making a huge deal out of nothing, by the way. Martirosyan is a tough, solid boxer that has managed to be competitive with some of boxing's top guys. Try to refute that.

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑03 May 2018, 05:53

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 18:17

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:08

I don't think you even read apollo's post. Your post makes no damn sense in context to what he wrote. Vanes has a good chin and is a good boxer. That's irrefutable.

Please read my post again.

Here are the facts:

• Vanes' has no credibility at 160lbs--Charlo's credibility at 160 lbs. is thin so was Sulecki's.
• Apollo creed never mentioned Vanes as a decent opponent (on a par with the likes of Murray & Stevens) until the mismatch against Golovkin was announced--He wasn't on the radar at the time of course. A weird argument from you. Fighters go off radar until they get a big fight oftentimes. I don't remember anyone talking about Khurtsidze until he beat the hell out of Douglas.

The above points are indeed "irrefutable" and here are several others that you won't be able to refute either:

• Vanes Martirosyan has never beaten a top fighter--Watch the Charlo fight. They screwed him, but this argument can be used for any fringe contender any beltholder has beaten. Martirosyan has been competitive against just about all the top fighters he's faced. He gave Charlo and Andrade their toughest fights.
• He has been inactive for two years--A fighter has to start somewhere, and if said fighter is a gym rat this becomes a non-issue. Mikey was inactive for a long ass time, but he would've beaten Zlatcanin anyways. Context matters a lot.
• He isn't a middleweight--This isn't such a good argument in this day and age. Fighters drain a lot of weight. All the top fighters at 154 lbs. are pretty much MWs. Brook came in heavier than GGG, IIRC.
• He has only managed to win three fights in almost last five years (losing three others)--Lara, Smith, and Charlo is a strong gauntlet. He got screwed in the Charlo fight, again. If you give him a draw for the Charlo fight, he becomes 1-1-1.
• The Armenian has managed to gain only one victory (coupled with two losses) within the last 3½ years against an opponent that wasn’t considered world-class--Complete BoxRec warrior argument. Absolutely useless.

Do you care to attack each point I raised head-on and attempt to undermine them? I thought not!

You're making a huge deal out of nothing, by the way. Martirosyan is a tough, solid boxer that has managed to be competitive with some of boxing's top guys. Try to refute that.

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑03 May 2018, 05:53

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 18:17

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:08

I don't think you even read apollo's post. Your post makes no damn sense in context to what he wrote. Vanes has a good chin and is a good boxer. That's irrefutable.

Please read my post again.

Here are the facts:

• Vanes' has no credibility at 160lbs--Charlo's credibility at 160 lbs. is thin so was Sulecki's.
• Apollo creed never mentioned Vanes as a decent opponent (on a par with the likes of Murray & Stevens) until the mismatch against Golovkin was announced--He wasn't on the radar at the time of course. A weird argument from you. Fighters go off radar until they get a big fight oftentimes. I don't remember anyone talking about Khurtsidze until he beat the hell out of Douglas.

The above points are indeed "irrefutable" and here are several others that you won't be able to refute either:

• Vanes Martirosyan has never beaten a top fighter--Watch the Charlo fight. They screwed him, but this argument can be used for any fringe contender any beltholder has beaten. Martirosyan has been competitive against just about all the top fighters he's faced. He gave Charlo and Andrade their toughest fights.
• He has been inactive for two years--A fighter has to start somewhere, and if said fighter is a gym rat this becomes a non-issue. Mikey was inactive for a long ass time, but he would've beaten Zlatcanin anyways. Context matters a lot.
• He isn't a middleweight--This isn't such a good argument in this day and age. Fighters drain a lot of weight. All the top fighters at 154 lbs. are pretty much MWs. Brook came in heavier than GGG, IIRC.
• He has only managed to win three fights in almost last five years (losing three others)--Lara, Smith, and Charlo is a strong gauntlet. He got screwed in the Charlo fight, again. If you give him a draw for the Charlo fight, he becomes 1-1-1.
• The Armenian has managed to gain only one victory (coupled with two losses) within the last 3½ years against an opponent that wasn’t considered world-class--Complete BoxRec warrior argument. Absolutely useless.

Do you care to attack each point I raised head-on and attempt to undermine them? I thought not!

You're making a huge deal out of nothing, by the way.

Sorry. That was my poor attempt at humour. I wanted to tease you.

For the record though, you didn’t actually undermine any of the facts I listed. Instead you tried your upmost to justify their existence by drawing comparison of your thoughts on other fighters.

For instance: when I say "Vanes' has no credibility at 160lbs", it's true, because he hasn't. Discussing other fighters doesn't actually disprove the accuracy of this real-world fact.

I’m not going to engage in an argument about the nature of your opinion, because everyone's entitled to one (even if it's wrong). And I am only interested in discussing facts.

This forum regularly engages in discussions like this.

For instance: Nobody from this forum mentioned the names of Igor Mikhalkin and Vyacheslav Shabranskyy until they agreed to face Sergey Kovalev, with the Russian’s die-hard fans claiming that these guys were world-beaters, which they did to address the criticism of those that believed that Krusher was engaging in mismatches under the pretence of “world title” fights.

Gennady Golovkin engages in a fight against Vanes Martirosyan and suddenly GGG’s fans start dishonestly claiming that his Armenian opponent is a world-beater at 160lbs.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑03 May 2018, 06:57

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑03 May 2018, 05:53

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 18:17
Please read my post again.

Here are the facts:

• Vanes' has no credibility at 160lbs--Charlo's credibility at 160 lbs. is thin so was Sulecki's.
• Apollo creed never mentioned Vanes as a decent opponent (on a par with the likes of Murray & Stevens) until the mismatch against Golovkin was announced--He wasn't on the radar at the time of course. A weird argument from you. Fighters go off radar until they get a big fight oftentimes. I don't remember anyone talking about Khurtsidze until he beat the hell out of Douglas.

The above points are indeed "irrefutable" and here are several others that you won't be able to refute either:

• Vanes Martirosyan has never beaten a top fighter--Watch the Charlo fight. They screwed him, but this argument can be used for any fringe contender any beltholder has beaten. Martirosyan has been competitive against just about all the top fighters he's faced. He gave Charlo and Andrade their toughest fights.
• He has been inactive for two years--A fighter has to start somewhere, and if said fighter is a gym rat this becomes a non-issue. Mikey was inactive for a long ass time, but he would've beaten Zlatcanin anyways. Context matters a lot.
• He isn't a middleweight--This isn't such a good argument in this day and age. Fighters drain a lot of weight. All the top fighters at 154 lbs. are pretty much MWs. Brook came in heavier than GGG, IIRC.
• He has only managed to win three fights in almost last five years (losing three others)--Lara, Smith, and Charlo is a strong gauntlet. He got screwed in the Charlo fight, again. If you give him a draw for the Charlo fight, he becomes 1-1-1.
• The Armenian has managed to gain only one victory (coupled with two losses) within the last 3½ years against an opponent that wasn’t considered world-class--Complete BoxRec warrior argument. Absolutely useless.

Do you care to attack each point I raised head-on and attempt to undermine them? I thought not!

You're making a huge deal out of nothing, by the way.

Sorry. That was my poor attempt at humour. I wanted to tease you.

For the record though, you didn’t actually undermine any of the facts I listed. Instead you tried your upmost to justify their existence by drawing comparison of your thoughts on other fighters.

For instance: when I say "Vanes' has no credibility at 160lbs", it's true, because he hasn't. Discussing other fighters doesn't actually disprove the accuracy of this real-world fact.

I’m not going to engage in an argument about the nature of your opinion, because everyone's entitled to one (even if it's wrong). And I am only interested in discussing facts.

This forum regularly engages in discussions like this.

For instance: Nobody from this forum mentioned the names of Igor Mikhalkin and Vyacheslav Shabranskyy until they agreed to face Sergey Kovalev, with the Russian’s die-hard fans claiming that these guys were world-beaters, which they did to address the criticism of those that believed that Krusher was engaging in mismatches under the pretence of “world title” fights.

Gennady Golovkin engages in a fight against Vanes Martirosyan and suddenly GGG’s fans start dishonestly claiming that his Armenian opponent is a world-beater at 160lbs.

Can you point specifically to who has said that? You get stuff from you ass for someone "invested in facts."

how many ppl were really saying mikhalkin and shabrasnky were world beaters?

It's silly and speculative to state GGG has carried opponents in the past to make fights exciting. This is unfounded and sounds like an excuse for G not performing as expected.

If Vanes gives G trouble it will most likely be due do to how skilled Vanes is, not because G carried him.

Loooooooong posts give me a headache. Just sayin'.

Impractical Poster wrote: ↑03 May 2018, 08:32 It's silly and speculative to state GGG has carried opponents in the past to make fights exciting. This is unfounded and sounds like an excuse for G not performing as expected.

If Vanes gives G trouble it will most likely be due do to how skilled Vanes is, not because G carried him.

Agreed. And thanks for keeping it short! I avoid the long-winded posts and responses! LOL!

jim carrey has herpes doesnt he? dirty f@cker!

jamamb wrote: ↑03 May 2018, 11:17 jim carrey has herpes doesnt he? dirty f@cker!

LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑03 May 2018, 05:53

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 18:17

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:08

I don't think you even read apollo's post. Your post makes no damn sense in context to what he wrote. Vanes has a good chin and is a good boxer. That's irrefutable.

Please read my post again.

Here are the facts:

• Vanes' has no credibility at 160lbs--Charlo's credibility at 160 lbs. is thin so was Sulecki's.
• Apollo creed never mentioned Vanes as a decent opponent (on a par with the likes of Murray & Stevens) until the mismatch against Golovkin was announced--He wasn't on the radar at the time of course. A weird argument from you. Fighters go off radar until they get a big fight oftentimes. I don't remember anyone talking about Khurtsidze until he beat the hell out of Douglas.

The above points are indeed "irrefutable" and here are several others that you won't be able to refute either:

• Vanes Martirosyan has never beaten a top fighter--Watch the Charlo fight. They screwed him, but this argument can be used for any fringe contender any beltholder has beaten. Martirosyan has been competitive against just about all the top fighters he's faced. He gave Charlo and Andrade their toughest fights.
• He has been inactive for two years--A fighter has to start somewhere, and if said fighter is a gym rat this becomes a non-issue. Mikey was inactive for a long ass time, but he would've beaten Zlatcanin anyways. Context matters a lot.
• He isn't a middleweight--This isn't such a good argument in this day and age. Fighters drain a lot of weight. All the top fighters at 154 lbs. are pretty much MWs. Brook came in heavier than GGG, IIRC.
• He has only managed to win three fights in almost last five years (losing three others)--Lara, Smith, and Charlo is a strong gauntlet. He got screwed in the Charlo fight, again. If you give him a draw for the Charlo fight, he becomes 1-1-1.
• The Armenian has managed to gain only one victory (coupled with two losses) within the last 3½ years against an opponent that wasn’t considered world-class--Complete BoxRec warrior argument. Absolutely useless.

Do you care to attack each point I raised head-on and attempt to undermine them? I thought not!

You're making a huge deal out of nothing, by the way. Martirosyan is a tough, solid boxer that has managed to be competitive with some of boxing's top guys. Try to refute that.

Impractical Poster wrote: ↑03 May 2018, 08:32 It's silly and speculative to state GGG has carried opponents in the past to make fights exciting. This is unfounded and sounds like an excuse for G not performing as expected.

If Vanes gives G trouble it will most likely be due do to how skilled Vanes is, not because G carried him.

apollo creed wrote: ↑03 May 2018, 11:56

Impractical Poster wrote: ↑03 May 2018, 08:32 It's silly and speculative to state GGG has carried opponents in the past to make fights exciting. This is unfounded and sounds like an excuse for G not performing as expected.

If Vanes gives G trouble it will most likely be due do to how skilled Vanes is, not because G carried him.

Make that two

Vanes is a solid fighter, I don't think he troubles GGG much after the 3rd or 4th round though. Vanes has enough skills and tricks he will more than likely make GGG even look a bit sloppy early. But don't get excited because it will only be a matter of time before GGGs pressure catches up with him and GGG will be in route to a TKO victory and practically running Vanes out of the ring.

I don't think this is a bad replacement for GGG, since it was such short notice. It will probably be a bit like the Brook fight, maybe a little slower paced, but with the same story line. The smaller guy having enough of a speed advantage and enough skill to trouble GGG at first, but the size and power being too much down the stretch.

NateJR wrote: ↑04 May 2018, 23:40 Vanes is a solid fighter, I don't think he troubles GGG much after the 3rd or 4th round though. Vanes has enough skills and tricks he will more than likely make GGG even look a bit sloppy early. But don't get excited because it will only be a matter of time before GGGs pressure catches up with him and GGG will be in route to a TKO victory and practically running Vanes out of the ring.

I don't think this is a bad replacement for GGG, since it was such short notice. It will probably be a bit like the Brook fight, maybe a little slower paced, but with the same story line. The smaller guy having enough of a speed advantage and enough skill to trouble GGG at first, but the size and power being too much down the stretch.

Vanes has good skills, he's tested at a top level and his durable. I think in this fight it's more about GGG's age and his fuel tank.

apollo creed wrote: ↑05 May 2018, 09:41

NateJR wrote: ↑04 May 2018, 23:40 Vanes is a solid fighter, I don't think he troubles GGG much after the 3rd or 4th round though. Vanes has enough skills and tricks he will more than likely make GGG even look a bit sloppy early. But don't get excited because it will only be a matter of time before GGGs pressure catches up with him and GGG will be in route to a TKO victory and practically running Vanes out of the ring.

I don't think this is a bad replacement for GGG, since it was such short notice. It will probably be a bit like the Brook fight, maybe a little slower paced, but with the same story line. The smaller guy having enough of a speed advantage and enough skill to trouble GGG at first, but the size and power being too much down the stretch.

Vanes has good skills, he's tested at a top level and his durable. I think in this fight it's more about GGG's age and his fuel tank.

Yeah. This will give us an accurate mark at where G's at right now. Vanes is top notch.

It's a mismatch. GGG will decide to close the show, whenever he deems fit, which will likely be after a few rounds where he allows Vanes to land a few shots in order to put on a "big drama show" for the paying audience.

The majority of those that currently claim that Vanes is a "world class" or "top notch" fighter didn't even mention his name until he was announced as GGG's opponent.

We heard the same sort of silly dishonest comments when Shabranskyy and Mikhalkin were announced as Krusher's opponents.

I understand people supporting their favourite fighter, but they need to maintain their integrity instead of pretending their heroes are facing top drawer opposition instead of accurately and honestly conceding that they're simply engaged in a mismatch.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑05 May 2018, 16:32 It's a mismatch. GGG will decide to close the show, whenever he deems fit, which will likely be after a few rounds where he allows Vanes to land a few shots in order to put on a "big drama show" for the paying audience.

The majority of those that currently claim that Vanes is a "world class" or "top notch" fighter didn't even mention his name until he was announced as GGG's opponent.

We heard the same sort of silly dishonest comments when Shabranskyy and Mikhalkin were announced as Krusher's opponents.

I understand people supporting their favourite fighter, but they need to maintain their integrity instead of pretending their heroes are facing top drawer opposition instead of accurately and honestly conceding that they're simply engaged in a mismatch.

G may win, but I'll be surprised if he stops him. It's like you haven't seen Vanes fight before. He is ultra talented and I see him troubling G early on. He may wilt in the late going. But I highly doubt G stops him.

Impractical Poster wrote: ↑05 May 2018, 17:17

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑05 May 2018, 16:32 It's a mismatch. GGG will decide to close the show, whenever he deems fit, which will likely be after a few rounds where he allows Vanes to land a few shots in order to put on a "big drama show" for the paying audience.

The majority of those that currently claim that Vanes is a "world class" or "top notch" fighter didn't even mention his name until he was announced as GGG's opponent.

We heard the same sort of silly dishonest comments when Shabranskyy and Mikhalkin were announced as Krusher's opponents.

I understand people supporting their favourite fighter, but they need to maintain their integrity instead of pretending their heroes are facing top drawer opposition instead of accurately and honestly conceding that they're simply engaged in a mismatch.

G may win, but I'll be surprised if he stops him. It's like you haven't seen Vanes fight before. He is ultra talented and I see him troubling G early on. He may wilt in the late going. But I highly doubt G stops him.

If your prediction is ultimately proven to be accurate, I'll concede to being proven wrong and award you kudos for your superior knowledge of the situation.

I hope you're able to return the same courtesy when my prediction comes to fruition.

Matirosyan is coolly talking about catching GGG coming in has confidence in his trainer to change plans during the fight. He seems absolutely fearless and confident. Armenians are noted for their mental toughness but the body has limits, and sometimes you do need tactics.

10/10 for confidence 0/10 for tactics. He can't win this on bravery alone, nor by meeting Golovkin head on. No one short of Marvin Hagler should attempt that.

It doesn't look like he's going to follow the Danny Jacobs plan. It looks more like its going to be a brutal fight.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑05 May 2018, 17:26

Impractical Poster wrote: ↑05 May 2018, 17:17

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑05 May 2018, 16:32 It's a mismatch. GGG will decide to close the show, whenever he deems fit, which will likely be after a few rounds where he allows Vanes to land a few shots in order to put on a "big drama show" for the paying audience.

The majority of those that currently claim that Vanes is a "world class" or "top notch" fighter didn't even mention his name until he was announced as GGG's opponent.

We heard the same sort of silly dishonest comments when Shabranskyy and Mikhalkin were announced as Krusher's opponents.

I understand people supporting their favourite fighter, but they need to maintain their integrity instead of pretending their heroes are facing top drawer opposition instead of accurately and honestly conceding that they're simply engaged in a mismatch.

G may win, but I'll be surprised if he stops him. It's like you haven't seen Vanes fight before. He is ultra talented and I see him troubling G early on. He may wilt in the late going. But I highly doubt G stops him.

If your prediction is ultimately proven to be accurate, I'll concede to being proven wrong and award you kudos for your superior knowledge of the situation.

I hope you're able to return the same courtesy when my prediction comes to fruition.

No need to concede as the proof will be in the outcome. It's just that I don't see GGG stopping the caliber and character of fighter that is Vanes. Despite his 3 losses, Vanes is about as quality and tough as they come.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑05 May 2018, 16:32 It's a mismatch. GGG will decide to close the show, whenever he deems fit, which will likely be after a few rounds where he allows Vanes to land a few shots in order to put on a "big drama show" for the paying audience.

The majority of those that currently claim that Vanes is a "world class" or "top notch" fighter didn't even mention his name until he was announced as GGG's opponent.

We heard the same sort of silly dishonest comments when Shabranskyy and Mikhalkin were announced as Krusher's opponents.

I understand people supporting their favourite fighter, but they need to maintain their integrity instead of pretending their heroes are facing top drawer opposition instead of accurately and honestly conceding that they're simply engaged in a mismatch.

Fcuk the punters. GG needs to come out and wipe the floor with this character. I agree I feel it's a big mismatch. Hope VM getting paid well cos he's on a hiding to nothing.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 14:48

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 14:37 He could also entertain by creaming the guy, which is what should happen. I don't remember GGG carrying anyone.

That's an issue with your memory, which you can easily address by watching those bouts.

Watch the first round of the GGG-Brook bout and tell me Golovkin didn't voluntarily chooose to take the foot of the gas when he had his opponent in trouble? He allowed the Brit to recover during the second round, by hardly throwing a punch.

The same applies to the Monroe fight.

Yes, just watched it. I see what you mean.

is the fight on yet lol? probably not even going to stream this dump of a fight

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑05 May 2018, 17:26

Impractical Poster wrote: ↑05 May 2018, 17:17

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑05 May 2018, 16:32 It's a mismatch. GGG will decide to close the show, whenever he deems fit, which will likely be after a few rounds where he allows Vanes to land a few shots in order to put on a "big drama show" for the paying audience.

The majority of those that currently claim that Vanes is a "world class" or "top notch" fighter didn't even mention his name until he was announced as GGG's opponent.

We heard the same sort of silly dishonest comments when Shabranskyy and Mikhalkin were announced as Krusher's opponents.

I understand people supporting their favourite fighter, but they need to maintain their integrity instead of pretending their heroes are facing top drawer opposition instead of accurately and honestly conceding that they're simply engaged in a mismatch.

G may win, but I'll be surprised if he stops him. It's like you haven't seen Vanes fight before. He is ultra talented and I see him troubling G early on. He may wilt in the late going. But I highly doubt G stops him.

If your prediction is ultimately proven to be accurate, I'll concede to being proven wrong and award you kudos for your superior knowledge of the situation.

I hope you're able to return the same courtesy when my prediction comes to fruition.

I concede.