Román Alberto González Luna vs. Julio Cesar Martinez Aguilar & Mauricio Lara vs. Emilio Sanchez RBR.

Navigator below sums my feelings on Chocolatito up to near perfection. Then add in his slightly mechanical dispassionate nature. Like he's simply going through the motions. I've never seen a less exciting guy be in so many FOTY candidates. But it always comes down to how much passion his opponents bring to the table. If they don't give their all, then you get some one sided hour long beatdown that as dull as dishwater, like last night. His matches against Martinez, Viloria, Arroyo, Yafai and Israel Gonzalez were borderline painful. But Sor Rungvisai, Estrada and Cuadras, Yaegashi and Takayama brought the output to match him and they brought the passion, which is why those matches are compelling. Not because of Roman. There's a real sense of drama that he's in danger. Also, I feel as though Cuadras was robbed, as was Estrada in the first fight. I also detest the tendency of most of his overzealous fanboys to lose all perspective when it comes to scoring a match, and always reflexively side with Gonzalez, sometimes in a war, the heavier shots are worth more than volume. Like with Sor Rungvisai. One of his ramrod lefts was worth more than his weak ass flitting one twos.

So yeah, I find him to be a bit of a personalityless droid, who happens to be an incredible boxer, with an excellent skill set, who's only exciting when he's in the ring with another exciting fighter. Everything Roman does is dull that doesn't involved one of them. Whereas you'll rarely see a boring match from Sor Rungvisai, Estrada or Cuadras.

Although I disagree with the last part.... Parasite is an overrated tub of horse****.

I couldn't care less what someone's politics are.

No, I didn't like him, long before everyone started loving him.... and that triggers you, so you call me a hipster and a contrarian, because you know that triggers me in an attempt to get even.

Be quiet. Find out the actual answer before you start making assumptions. Do I have contrarian tendencies? Yes. But never when it's detrimental to myself. I'm no sadomasochist, I'll never deprive myself of joy and root against something that's popular if I like them too, I'll only do that when I feel there's a valid reason for it and I genuinely dislike them. However... will I sit down on my shots, and go all out when that's the case? Yes. Also, you never know where I'm going to end up, sometimes I go with the popular opinion, and go against the hardcores, and sometimes I go out on a limb. Whatever feel is the genuine and the right side of the argument, sometimes even when everyone disagrees with me... that's where I plant my feet.

Well.. I did put all my eggs in the Rungvisai basket, and lest you forget...... he delivered twice. So why the **** would I hate him for that?

Okay Mr. Radiohead, and I Hate Bill Murray..... you're not one to talk.

For years I was one of the most vocal anti-Canelo posters on this site, I also despise Marquez, can't stand Valdez, root against Zurdo Ramirez. So much so, I've been accused by several Mexican posters of having an anti-Mexican bias. Now, most of those posters are also now friends of mine on here and come to the realization that that's not the case. Because some of my favorite boxers are also Mexican. However, I do find it rich that you being completely uninformed, would make such an asinine assumption like this. Especially when one of my favorite fighters from the last 15 years was TakashI Miura, who was literally nicknamed The Mexecutioner. I like the fighters that I like, because I like them, and they come from the furthest reaches of the world, there's not rhyme or reason. So never make an attempt to decode it. It's futile.

 

Thank you, I'm touched, that really means a lot. It almost brings a tear to not one... but both of my eyes. Although, come to think of it, I'm very weepy lately... it must be the clinical depression.

This content is protected