Carbo wrote:Yes, but it's hysterical, Horse. Honestly. It's like "HOW COULD ANYONE DISAGREE WITH ME. MY GOD, ONLY A COMPLETE RETARD WOULD THINK THAT, BECAUSE IT'S NOT WHAT I THINK."
Whatever. It's entertaining, I guess.
Is it any different from other threads where people disagree?
I honestly don't know.
I just think arguing like this is faintly ridiculous.
Probably it is like every other thread. Maybe I should think before I write.
Carbo wrote:Yes, but it's hysterical, Horse. Honestly. It's like "HOW COULD ANYONE DISAGREE WITH ME. MY GOD, ONLY A COMPLETE RETARD WOULD THINK THAT, BECAUSE IT'S NOT WHAT I THINK."
Whatever. It's entertaining, I guess.
Is it any different from other threads where people disagree?
I honestly don't know.
I just think arguing like this is faintly ridiculous.
Probably it is like every other thread. Maybe I should think before I write.
I second that!
Also please clear this up for me, are you a woman?
twenty six wrote:You simply fuel Horse's ego by responding.
So yes Carbo - think before you write !
Oh, come on. Horse is cool.
I just think that P4P lists are intrinsically subjective, and therefore shouldn't be heatedly debated as 'fact' with those who read the list incensed that their man isn't higher. Rational debate is fine, but this stuff where one guy is convinced he's right and simply can't believe anyone else would disagree is insane, because in this case it genuinely is almost all about opinion.
DG. wrote:Barrett was a weight up. Is collazo any better? Hatton struggled there! Haye beats a heavyweight collazo.
I would say that Collazo was significantly better. Collazo held the WBA title at the time and was rated in the top 10.
Barrett had never held a World title and was at best a borderline top 20 Heavyweight.
And one only need look at the quality of the welterweight division against the quality of the heavyweight division to know how their relative achievements should be assessed.
Carbo wrote:And one only need look at the quality of the welterweight division against the quality of the heavyweight division to know how their relative achievements should be assessed.
Smally Big Plums wrote:Someone has probably already mentioned this but Clinton Woods has retired! Unless you want him to plaster your walls remove him from your list.
You are the first to mention him this month.
I allow up to 12 months of inactivity before I take a retired fighter off the list, in case they change their mind.
Woods last fought in August, so I don't think it is important to take Woods out immediately.