BoxRec

lefty wrote:You're not even responding too. Ciao.

Lol, clown shoes. Your exact question was answered before you asked it. Hopefully you're drunk. Stubborn is one thing, mind numbing stupidity is another.

I asked you to clarify the comments regarding me claiming they're chasing the Canelo fight hard and you claiming they're not. If you have to copy and paste it by all means do.

lefty wrote:I asked you to clarify the comments regarding me claiming they're chasing the Canelo fight hard and you claiming they're not. If you have to copy and paste it by all means do.

As I said, I'm on my phone. Not that I would anyway. It's on the previous page. You should have read it the first time instead of just writing. Reading is crucial to these discussions. Give it a try.

Oddly, you responded to being called stubborn from the same post.

It's getting boorish now Saad come back with something of substance.

lefty wrote:It's getting boorish now Saad come back with something of substance.

Cool, if you can't bother going back to get your answer. Shut up and go away.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:
The actual buy rates were 290k-310k. How did I check my facts? I researched it. What did you do? pluck a number out of the sky?

What did you research? Opinions on internet? There is no official data.

Where did you get your 250k from?

A correct number is somewhere in the middle between a Glaser's number and a promoter's number.

No I'm good. I'll go away when I feel like it.

I re-read the thread- you just regurgitated the same thing repeatedly about how Golovkin isn't chasing the fight hard and one of the reasons being because he didn't mention Canelos name is his last post fight interview.

Totally ignoring the articles and "blogs" posts as you so derisively label them.

You then started talking about bloggers making pennies, like boxing blogging used to be some incredibly lucrative industry which has only very recently fallen into dire financial straits.

You then came up with some bizarre hypothesis of how it was golden boy that invited Golovkin to the Khan fight even though in most people's opinions they have no intention of fighting Golovkin. Seems logical that. Ps liam smith claimed Golovkin was flying in to watch the fight in one of the interviews leading up to the fight.

lefty wrote:No I'm good. I'll go away when I feel like it.

I re-read the thread- you just regurgitated the same thing repeatedly about how Golovkin isn't chasing the fight hard and one of the reasons being because he didn't mention Canelos name is his last post fight interview.

Totally ignoring the articles and "blogs" posts as you so derisively label them.

You then started talking about bloggers making pennies, like boxing blogging used to be some incredibly lucrative industry which has only very recently fallen into dire financial straits.

You then came up with some bizarre hypothesis of how it was golden boy that invited Golovkin to the Khan fight even though in most people's opinions they have no intention of fighting Golovkin. Seems logical that. Ps liam smith claimed Golovkin was flying in to watch the fight in one of the interviews leading up to the fight.

Bizarre hypothesis is a good one. So ggg bought his own seat and then gbp called him into the ring for a huge show of nothing.

You're completely clueless to the business side of the sport.

I thought you were .....

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:You're completely clueless to the business side of the sport.

Yeah and I suppose you are pal.

Sorry I don't type it out with "substance" like you saying you're bored. Difficult to explain everything to you. The point of blogging wasn't that they used to make money. It's that they'll type anything for hits. Like Mayweather/ McGregor. I bet you thought that was going down too!

lefty wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:You're completely clueless to the business side of the sport.

Yeah and I suppose you are pal.

Absolutely.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Sorry I don't type it out with "substance" like you saying you're bored. Difficult to explain everything to you. The point of blogging wasn't that they used to make money. It's that they'll type anything for hits. Like Mayweather/ McGregor. I bet you thought that was going down too!

Yeah i gathered that the first time round, old boy. You don't need to explain to me how bloggers try to get hits. I was laughing at you claiming that it's only in recent times that bloggers have had to resort to this. Like it's a "new" thing.

Boxing bloggers have never made substantial money- hence why the majority of them have full time jobs outside of boxing and their sites have always has been a hobby more than anything.

lefty wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Sorry I don't type it out with "substance" like you saying you're bored. Difficult to explain everything to you. The point of blogging wasn't that they used to make money. It's that they'll type anything for hits. Like Mayweather/ McGregor. I bet you thought that was going down too!

Yeah i gathered that the first time round, old boy. You don't need to explain to me how bloggers try to get hits. I was laughing at you claiming that it's only in recent times that bloggers have had to resort to this. Like it's a "new" thing.

Boxing bloggers have never made substantial money- hence why the majority of them have full time jobs out of what is and always has been a hobby.

I never claimed that and you clearly didn't get it. It's ok, lefty, you're not very bright. Sharp as a bowling ball.

You overestimate your own intelligence Saad, that's the funny thing.

lefty wrote:You overestimate your own intelligence Saad, that's the funny thing.

I'm intelligent enough not to argue about topics I know nothing about. That escapes you.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

lefty wrote:You overestimate your own intelligence Saad, that's the funny thing.

I'm intelligent enough not to argue about topics I know nothing about. That escapes you.

What have you been doing this entire thread then, dummy?

You do play a hell of a victim in a delightfully hypocritical way. Where's your substance? In your nose?

How am I playing the victim exactly?

lefty wrote:How am I playing the victim exactly?

Pretending like you're coming with only substance, while I attack you like the mean bully, when you never even took the time to read what I wrote in advance of your predictably inane question. It's like you always do. When you don't get your way you pout and scream bully. Boo hoo, poor Lefty.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

lefty wrote:How am I playing the victim exactly?

Pretending like you're coming with only substance, while I attack you like the mean bully, when you never even took the time to read what I wrote in advance of your predictably inane question. It's like you always do. When you don't get your way you pout and scream bully. Boo hoo, poor Lefty.

I didn't call you a bully at all Saad. It must be senility slipping in. I didn't pout and scream at all. The difference between me and you is when I commented on Glowacki-Usyk I thought about it and I said I was unfair in my criticism of Usyk. In your entire time on this forum you've never admitted to being in the wrong- not once.

lefty wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

lefty wrote:How am I playing the victim exactly?

Pretending like you're coming with only substance, while I attack you like the mean bully, when you never even took the time to read what I wrote in advance of your predictably inane question. It's like you always do. When you don't get your way you pout and scream bully. Boo hoo, poor Lefty.

I didn't call you a bully at all Saad. It must be senility slipping in. I didn't pout and scream at all. The difference between me and you is when I commented on Glowacki-Usyk I thought about it and I said I was unfair in my criticism of Usyk. In your entire time on this forum you've never admitted to being in the wrong- not once.

All you've done here is lie and be wrong. As for your latest attack, more bullshit. Not to mention it took pages and pages of you refusing to give Usyk even the smallest credit before you owned up. I would do that immediately in that scenario.