I watched the spence domination last night and I didn't expect him to stop the tough iron chinned Algieri like that. Provodnikov and pacquiao couldn't even stop him, but spence did it with relative ease. Spence has fought literally no one of note but he knocked out a fighter a bonafide ATG couldn't knock out. People bet against spence based on the fact that he didn't beat anybody. Algieri being "battle tested and experienced" didn't help him whatsoever last night. Discuss.
The fight against Pacquiao should have been stopped multiple times after the 8th round. Errol had a good ref.
Yes, it's absolutely irrelevant. Past events provide evidence is all. Just because a theory hasn't been proven yet doesn't mean it isn't true.
Not entirely irrelevant but there's two distinct schools of thought. Those who use resume to judge, those who use film to judge.
This is a fact, how people claiming to be fans have yet to grasp this is beyond a reasonable discussion
