BoxRec

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 21:40 God dammit. This forum is stuck in the 90's.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 21:53

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 21:40 God dammit. This forum is stuck in the 90's.

How's that?

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:03

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 21:53

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 21:40 God dammit. This forum is stuck in the 90's.

How's that?

I didn't mean it as against you. I just wish there was some tech to limit posts or wordcounts. Not that I agree with limiting people's free speech but EO is a special person who deserves special treatment.

oogiebe wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:07

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:03

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 21:53

How's that?

I didn't mean it as against you. I just wish there was some tech to limit posts or wordcounts. Not that I agree with limiting people's free speech but EO is a special person who deserves special treatment.

He should be limited to only one thread.

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:11

oogiebe wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:07

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:03

I didn't mean it as against you. I just wish there was some tech to limit posts or wordcounts. Not that I agree with limiting people's free speech but EO is a special person who deserves special treatment.

He should be limited to only one thread.

As a warning, the thread should have a automatic sub-heading: 'EO active in this thread', so that we can all avoid it.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:12

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:11

oogiebe wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:07
He should be limited to only one thread.

As a warning, the thread should have a automatic sub-heading: 'EO active in this thread', so that we can all avoid it.

You can always just scroll down past his posts. It only takes about 5 minutes per post

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:14

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:12

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:11

As a warning, the thread should have a automatic sub-heading: 'EO active in this thread', so that we can all avoid it.

You can always just scroll down past his posts. It only takes about 5 minutes per post

I appreciate that suggestion however I've noticed the whole topic gets derailed and the quality posts cease. Essentially the thread is ruined. LOL about the 5 minute per post scroll.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:15

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:14

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:12

You can always just scroll down past his posts. It only takes about 5 minutes per post

I appreciate that suggestion however I've noticed the whole topic gets derailed and the quality posts cease. Essentially the thread is ruined. LOL about the 5 minute per post scroll.

This thread never mattered much anyway. Eubank wants to fight Golovkin. You get it all in the title.

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:16

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:15

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:14

I appreciate that suggestion however I've noticed the whole topic gets derailed and the quality posts cease. Essentially the thread is ruined. LOL about the 5 minute per post scroll.

This thread never mattered much anyway. Eubank wants to fight Golovkin. You get it all in the title.

But i wanted to see the comment about Eubank's work rate.

oogiebe wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:18

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:16

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:15

This thread never mattered much anyway. Eubank wants to fight Golovkin. You get it all in the title.

But i wanted to see the comment about Eubank's work rate.

He has hijacked enough threads already. This GGG shite is like a plague. It's repeated all over the forum.

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:25

oogiebe wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:18

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:16

But i wanted to see the comment about Eubank's work rate.

He has hijacked enough threads already. This GGG shite is like a plague. It's repeated all over the forum.

Mate, it's fking ridiculous. It's just repetition ad nauseam. You can't argue that way in public (physical public) you would be bashed. You can't argue that way in court. Therefore...you shouldn't be able to argue that way here.

TO EO: Ok great, you have an opinion. OK great it's different, cool. We've heard you, great, grand, wonderful. Some people may agree with you, great, grand, wonderful. Unfortunately I'm not persuaded. I'm sorry. Time to move on.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:30

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:25

oogiebe wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:18
He has hijacked enough threads already. This GGG shite is like a plague. It's repeated all over the forum.

Mate, it's fking ridiculous. It's just repetition ad nauseam. You can't argue that way in public (physical public) you would be bashed. You can't argue that way in court. Therefore...you shouldn't be able to argue that way here.

TO EO: Ok great, you have an opinion. OK great it's different, cool. We've heard you, great, grand, wonderful. Some people may agree with you, great, grand, wonderful. Unfortunately I'm not persuaded. I'm sorry. Time to move on.

Prove it's just repetition ad nauseam. If you can't back up your claims I expect a full apology

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:33

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:30

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:25

Mate, it's fking ridiculous. It's just repetition ad nauseam. You can't argue that way in public (physical public) you would be bashed. You can't argue that way in court. Therefore...you shouldn't be able to argue that way here.

TO EO: Ok great, you have an opinion. OK great it's different, cool. We've heard you, great, grand, wonderful. Some people may agree with you, great, grand, wonderful. Unfortunately I'm not persuaded. I'm sorry. Time to move on.

Prove it's just repetition ad nauseam. If you can't back up your claims I expect a full apology

LOL! Spot on...except that you replied with one sentence and bits and pieces of my comments weren't displayed out of order and context throughout.

oogiebe wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:38

lazboy wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:33

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:30

Prove it's just repetition ad nauseam. If you can't back up your claims I expect a full apology

LOL! Spot on...except that you replied with one sentence and bits and pieces of my comments weren't displayed out of order and context throughout.

LFMAO! Yup! And Gil forgot to include "refute my words."

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 21:45

keirw wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 21:29

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 13:34
Golovkin recently faced Vanes Martirosyan, Steve Rolls and Kamil Szeremeta.

And GGG deemed Chris Eubank Jr. as a worthy opponent during 2016.

Eubank Jr. beat, James DeGale, Arthur Abraham, Matt Korobov, Anvi Yildrim, Dmitry Chudinov and dropped very close decisions to Grove and Saunders.

Let’s assume GGG agrees to face Eubank Jr. in April and somehow manages to beat the Brit, it would almost certainly be Golovkin’s best legitimate victory in the last four years.... by a proverbial country mile!

And let’s face it, even the majority of GGG’s die-hard fans feel he lost the Derevyanchenko fight.

I didn't think either fight was all that close.
Off the top of my head I think I probably gave him 4 rounds vs BJS and about 2 or 3 rounds vs Groves (I also feel he should have had a knockdown scored against him).

But overall I agree with your point, Eubank would be a reasonable opponent for GGG.

I do feel he needs a win on his ledger before the fight gets made though, even just to get his name back out there a bit.

Are his most recent bouts not wins?

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 22:45 And by the way guys, while I fully understand everyone's frustration with EO. As you can see, I don't like him either. I can't just ban him for being an annoying douche. He doesn't really break any rules. Being a jackass, however annoying, isn't in and of itself against the forum rules.

That being said, if some other moderator just gave his ass the boot I wouldn't argue against that. I just don't wanna be the guy to do it because it's well known that I don't like him.

Wouldn't be prudent as George Bush Sr. would say.

keirw wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 23:52

gilgamesh wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 21:45

keirw wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 21:29
I didn't think either fight was all that close.
Off the top of my head I think I probably gave him 4 rounds vs BJS and about 2 or 3 rounds vs Groves (I also feel he should have had a knockdown scored against him).

But overall I agree with your point, Eubank would be a reasonable opponent for GGG.

I do feel he needs a win on his ledger before the fight gets made though, even just to get his name back out there a bit.

Are his most recent bouts not wins?

Yes, but the most recent was over a year ago and wasn't exactly a memorable fight.

I just think he needs to fight again soon, win, look good doing so and then call out GGG in the post fight interview.

Jeff_lacy_ko wrote: ↑18 Jan 2021, 23:59 Does EO really annoy you guys?

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑19 Jan 2021, 00:03 the key to not getting banned = stay away from off topic

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑19 Jan 2021, 00:06 sure, not saying it cant happen at all outside there

what he get banned for anyway? what rule he break?