How did I know when I made this thread, despite emphasizing that it is not about 'Zaggers, Berol will be here with his *****ing. I'll tell you how I knew, because: This content is protected
noway wassen gets together £3 million for the Hopkins fight in 2002, joe was a nothing nobody back then. another pack of lies from calzaghe camp. note how all the lies come from calzaghes corner, and all the none events too. not a coincidence. meanwhile a warrior like Hopkins keeps on fighting, winning and losing some in his 40s, but always trying and not telling any fibs of his own about calzaghes bid.
Big well known name who was mentioning going up to SMW. Who was more known than Hopkins at SMW at that time? Nobody. Thats like saying why does Ward mention Golovkin, or why did Hopkins mention so many LMWs and WWs, difference was Hopkins had had many fights above MW, possibly more than MW at that time and had been inside CW before. Still Hopkins was mentioning going up to SMW and had mentioned B Mitchell at one time as someone he was interested in. You could ask why was Hopkins mentioning Mitchell as a SMW opponent
Yes I would have liked to have seen that match up and i to would have favoured Calzaghe to win a very clear wide decision. I recall reading an article with Ottkes trainer where he mentioned Sven didnt want to know and seemed open about that
Berol again making up lies about 'Zaggers on a thread that has nothing to do with him. Get some vaseline for that butt son. You have an unhealthy obbession.
how is pointing out others lies, a lie? you are commiting something even more heinious than a lie by claiming that I lie whenI am truthful. you are double-lying, handman.
The German judges get slated a lot on here but they watch the fights in slo mo and have for years.if u watch ottke Reid back in slo mo ottke clearly wins the fight
Once again you make things up like Joe's fear of flying. Did he walk to Germany you moron? So what did Joe do to you to make you so butthurt that 95% of your life is focused on hating him. Did you lose your house on Jeff Lacy
Have you checked out the new lounge yet bailey. Take a look at this thread: http://www.x-boxing-forum.com/showthread.php/140-Let-s-list-every-fighters-personal-BerolGee-poster
bailey, I don't believe I have. Tyson and Oscar being older and inactive, is completely irrelevant. I said that Benn was at the end of the road, and then gave two examples of other fighters being in that very same position. Do you understand? How they ended up there isn't important. I don't care that Benn wasn't as old etc. He was clearly no longer the fighter he'd once been against Collins. Malinga was a good fighter but nothing more. He was at the same level as Woodhall, Reid, and Nardiello etc, and the title interchanged between them all. I thought Benn was faded even before he fought Collins, against Malinga. Collins being the only man to beat him inside the distance, doesn't mean much to me, just like how Manny made Oscar quit. All wins and losses need to be put into context. I wouldn't say that Eubank had been mixing at a higher level. Like you say, Benn had a close fight with Malinga the first time around, and Eubank also had problems with him. Yet Roy beat him easy. You love playing the 'A fighter beat B fighter, who then went onto beat C fighter' etc. So let's do that. You think that Benn is a top win for Collins. Yet Benn lost to Malinga who Roy had beaten with ease, three years earlier. So if I apply the logic and the criteria that you often use, then Roy's easy knockout win over Malinga, trumps Collins' wins over Benn. Then you have Roy easily beating Toney, while Collins had to work extremely hard to beat Eubank. So Roy had to have had the better SMW reign over Collins. Roy beat a guy who was the pound for pound number 2 fighter in the world, for the IBF belt, whereas Collins beat Eubank for the lightly regarded WBO belt, in a very close fight the first time around. So however you look at it, Roy comes out on top. As above. Toney's SMW resume didn't have to have been as good as Eubank's resume, for Roy's victory over Toney to be declared a better win than Collins' victory over Eubank. Why was Roy's win over Lucas a lesser win than Collins's win over Benn? Roy beat Lucas easily, and tret the match as a sparring session. Lucas beat Ottke and Catley who you rate. Why am I trolling? Again, I think that Eubank was a better fighter than Froch when he was at his best. But I think that the versions of Eubank that fought Collins, Calzaghe and Thompson etc, were around the same level as Froch. You classed Bute as a top, undefeated fighter, and you punish Ward hard for not fighting him. So you thought very highly of him. So it must have greatly impressed you when Carl destroyed him, especially as you always say that he was tired from all of the travelling that he did in the Super Six. No, I don't think Carl could fight at CW. But Carl isn't a big guy and he stays just above SMW when not in training. Okay. I respect your opinion.
I'm only playing the game mate, like you do. But feel free to pull me on anything you wish. Bailey's posts are highly entertaining, but are full of bias and double standards. If he wants to show a fighter in a good light, he spins their highlights. If he wants to show them in a negative light, he spins the negatives. If you talk to him about Lucian Bute, he'll tell you that he was a top class undefeated fighter who Ward ducked. Which is fine. As we all know, Froch went and destroyed him in emphatic fashion, which was a great win. But that win was after he'd lost to Ward, who'd had a fractured hand. Now obviously styles make fights. But he basically gives Ward zero credit for beating Froch, even though he normally loves following the trail of the guy who beat the guy, who beat the guy. He spins things to suit his agenda, and he debates using stats. So he can't complain if others do it. :good