well, it irritated me anyway. I expect blatant bias on messageboards from every day fans, but my expectations are higher when it comes to pro writers, especially renowned ones like Borges.
"Malignaggi (25-1, 5 KO) knows as much about defense as any fighter in the world today. He became a junior welterweight champion because of his mastery of it"
huh? while I admit Paulie has skills and can be slippery on his day, I think this is stretching things a bit far, no?
Did Borges catch Paulies last couple of outings, or the Cotto fight even? mastery of defense?
He became a title-holder by outpointing Lovemore Ndou. Note how NO reference is made to Paulies level of opposition, or how he's struggled in recent fights against fringe guys, while references to Hatton getting involved in tough, close fights are liberal.
Instead, Paulie is just simply and quickly described as a defensive genius, with no real analysis or depth to that statement, while the breakdown of Hattons' demise flows on through the article.
Even the title annoyed me. Yes its a reference to Hattons own quote, but the wording is such that it can also be taken as a prediction.
I dunno, maybe I'm reading too much into it, just biased writing (& commentating, etc) tends to annoy me
thoughts?
