BoxRec

Going 12 rounds against Golovkin and give him some fists.

apollo creed wrote: ↑01 May 2018, 16:57 Going 12 rounds against Golovkin and give him some fists.

Vanes doesn't have the size to perform like Jacobs, nor he has that style.

Doesn't have the size and strength of Jacobs.

He can't box as well.

And he hasn't fought in 2 years.

Pretty much fails at the top level.

SenorPipino wrote: ↑01 May 2018, 22:51 Doesn't have the size and strength of Jacobs.

He can't box as well.

And he hasn't fought in 2 years.

Pretty much fails at the top level.

I actually think Vanes may be more technically skilled than Jacob's. But he doesn't have the size, power, or explosiveness that Daniel has. But, Vanes has shown to be very durable. I expect G to have his hands full early on.

SenorPipino wrote: ↑01 May 2018, 22:51 Doesn't have the size and strength of Jacobs.

He can't box as well.

And he hasn't fought in 2 years.

Pretty much fails at the top level.

The guy would've beaten Charlo had they put it for 12 rounds like it was supposed to be. He had all the momentum going into the last rounds. Your post is clueless.

If he's able to give GGG the same kinda problems Jacobs did it would suggest major slippage from Golovkin.

He looks pretty quick on his feet and doesn't show much fear. It could be a tricky night for GGG. We should see if Golovkin has improved much in cutting off the ring after the last 2 fights. If not, we might see an upset on points - no way is Matirosyan is knocking out GGG.

It could be similar to the Brook fight but he too would be wise to not 'mix it' with GGG. The big question is the 2 year lay off. Usually most fighters come back worse, (only a few have come back better eg Sugar Ray Leonard).

If that's the case it will be a short fight.

I don't think there's anything productive that would come out of imagining an unlikely outcome. You could be like "Imagine Sam Sexton knocks out Hughie Fury. Wouldn't make make Fury a lot worse than we thought he was?" It would if it happened, but not if we're just imagining it.

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 00:15

SenorPipino wrote: ↑01 May 2018, 22:51 Doesn't have the size and strength of Jacobs.

He can't box as well.

And he hasn't fought in 2 years.

Pretty much fails at the top level.

The guy would've beaten Charlo had they put it for 12 rounds like it was supposed to be. He had all the momentum going into the last rounds. Your post is clueless.

I'm beginning to detect a rather predictably anti-Charlo tone to your posts.

That usually doesn't lead to a very thoughtful or accurate analysis.

But I suspect that you already know that.

Golovkin will carry Vanes in the same manner he carried Monroe Jr. and Brook. So this fight won't be the mismatch that many expect it to be.

Mayweather Jr. carried McGregor to undermine the criticism his money-grab event received and I expect GGG to adopt precisely the same mindset against Vanes.

People will start writing off Golovkin from the 6th May onwards, because they won't consider the possibility that he voluntarily underperformed in order to please the paying customer.

GGG wants to put on a "big drama show" and entertain the fans, which is precisely what we'll see when he faces Vanes.

He could also entertain by creaming the guy, which is what should happen. I don't remember GGG carrying anyone.

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.

I don't think Golovkin has carried any of his opponents. Ishida, Macklin, Geale, Rubio and Wade , all got stopped in the early rounds. I think Vanes could give us a good answer about GGG's stage of fading.

I have Vanes equally with Murray and Stevens in terms of toughness but with better boxing skills.

apollo creed wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 15:35 I don't think Golovkin has carried any of his opponents. Ishida, Macklin, Geale, Rubio and Wade , all got stopped in the early rounds. I think Vanes could give us a good answer about GGG's stage of fading.

I have Vanes equally with Murray and Stevens in terms of toughness but with better boxing skills.

Vanes' has no credibility at 160lbs. You never even mentioned him until his name was named as GGG's next opponent.

Never saw him tank, period.

SenorPipino wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 14:18

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 00:15

SenorPipino wrote: ↑01 May 2018, 22:51 Doesn't have the size and strength of Jacobs.

He can't box as well.

And he hasn't fought in 2 years.

Pretty much fails at the top level.

The guy would've beaten Charlo had they put it for 12 rounds like it was supposed to be. He had all the momentum going into the last rounds. Your post is clueless.

I'm beginning to detect a rather predictably anti-Charlo tone to your posts.

That usually doesn't lead to a very thoughtful or accurate analysis.

But I suspect that you already know that.

The fight is available to watch. Just watch it and come back looking like a clown if you disagree. Thing is, though, you don't watch fights and just post clueless, retarded crap.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:00

apollo creed wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 15:35 I don't think Golovkin has carried any of his opponents. Ishida, Macklin, Geale, Rubio and Wade , all got stopped in the early rounds. I think Vanes could give us a good answer about GGG's stage of fading.

I have Vanes equally with Murray and Stevens in terms of toughness but with better boxing skills.

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.

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:08

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:00

apollo creed wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 15:35 I don't think Golovkin has carried any of his opponents. Ishida, Macklin, Geale, Rubio and Wade , all got stopped in the early rounds. I think Vanes could give us a good answer about GGG's stage of fading.

I have Vanes equally with Murray and Stevens in terms of toughness but with better boxing skills.

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.

Conflation.

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:10

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.

Conflation.

I guess I probably should've read the first page.

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:12

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:10

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.

Conflation.

I guess I probably should've read the first page.

No worries, bro, it seems to happen on every post...And yes, Vanes is no picnic.

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:08

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:00

apollo creed wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 15:35 I don't think Golovkin has carried any of his opponents. Ishida, Macklin, Geale, Rubio and Wade , all got stopped in the early rounds. I think Vanes could give us a good answer about GGG's stage of fading.

I have Vanes equally with Murray and Stevens in terms of toughness but with better boxing skills.

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.

EO is just mad because GGG may steamroll Jermell Charlo 's biggest win on his thin resume.

apollo creed wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:18

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.

EO is just mad because GGG may steamroll Jermell Charlo 's biggest win on his thin resume.

So funny how some folks take it so personally when their fighter is dissed.

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:13 And yes, Vanes is no picnic.

Which is why Ward ducked him

I mean Vanes gave Jermell all he could handle and that fight should've been a draw but judges gave UD to Charlo.

Since Charlo got that hard work from Vanes , he went back on the bums diet.

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:08

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 16:00

apollo creed wrote: ↑02 May 2018, 15:35I have Vanes equally with Murray and Stevens in terms of toughness but with better boxing skills.

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
• 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

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
• He has been inactive for two years
• He isn't a middleweight
• He has only managed to win three fights in almost last five years (losing three others)
• 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

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