Originally Posted by TheManBearPig
Why would I bother arguing with someone who has only seen Daniel Geale fight once when he beat the number #2 middleweight yet he think is "chanceless" against a hypejob whose greatest victory is over a top 15 bum who couldn't defend himself if his life depended on it?
Like Mark Twain once said: "Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience".
Funny that you want to point out that I didn't refute anything he said. I'm still waiting for your counter argument as to why you think Felix Sturm is apparently "shot" at 33 years old?
There have been opinions given by people for why they think Golovkin beats him, raising valid points, yet the Aussie's haven't put forth anything aside from hiding behind some overrated wins. The most simple explaination is a light punching swarmer who relies on volume isnt going to beat Golovkin.
Using the logic you're hiding behind:
Macklin and Murray accomlished as much as Geale and neither of those 3 are as good as Castijello. Having it 7/5 Sturm was just as legit and Sylvester was never elite....getting demolished by Proksa right after Geale.