The "All Things Mayweather/Pacquiao" Express!!!!!!

woman please. you dont think people remember what you write and just go on what you are currently posting? you are one of the main people on here who have aquired a rep for being a dumbass and cheerleader. posting a "no i didnt" aint going to change that. i really cant think of another poster who is less respected than you (now that we are rid of nallege) and considering some of the beauties on esb, thats saying a whole lot.

 

"You see I saw my parents physically fight and get over it." sorry if it was your mom doing the ass whoopin, that would explain your femenine ways. punk dads often raise punk sons.

 

Now you cling to BS. I said I saw them physically fight. I never said what happened. You live in fantasy land huh?

You are a clown. You don't like it because I don't back down and try to befriend your stupid ass. The more BS you talk I will rip you for it. I know you *******s hate me. I go out of my way to be a troll.

I realize, you are the one who didn't have a father. That is why you talk about it like you do. It is some magical experience you know nothing about.

 

When did I say anyone's ass was whooped?

You see. You are in fantasy land. That feminine world you speak of. :think

 

Dude, not even the blindest ***** or the most bitter Pac hater would claim that Pac is what you claim him to be. You have to be both in order to have the gutlessness to use blatant lies to defame his character so despicably. And guess what, you are!

 

The problem isn't the 'new' fans that Pac attracts. It's when those 'casual' fans decide to engage in boxing conversations way beyond their depth and then only left with responses like '***', 'Gayweather', or flying duck gifs.

Let me give you an example.

I watched very little golf before the Tiger Woods phenomenon jumped off. And in all honesty, I was only interested IF Tiger was involved. As more time passed, my golf knowledge increased and I've got a much better feel for the sport, athletes, impact of courses, etc.

But during those early years, it would have never occurred to me to flood a bunch of golf websites and messageboards, full of people who had been following the sport for years, to loudly and repetitively proclaiming how great Tiger was (and he was), how he 'outworked' everyone else, how he was more 'disciplined' than all the others, and, more germane to this conversation, declare how weak/softminded the rest of the golfers were.

Hell, alot of folks who follow golf on those boards may have been equally excited and shared my views about Woods. Difference being, if challenged, those posters would have been much more equipped to articulate and contextualize Woods' greatness/impact way better than I could, at least in a conversation with other long time golf fans.

That has been the problem on this site recently. At some point, a poster has to recognize the limits of their own knowledge. You look foolish if you can only respond to critique with dancing chicken avatars.

That's not about 'arrogant elitism'. That's about being able to articulate or defend a position with something other than volume and repitition.

Just my thoughts.

 

lol, you know absolutely nothing. i love to clown marshmallows like you. especially when they do all the work for me. its like shooting battered women in a barrel. you have single handedly proved yourself to be a pitiful scrub who couldnt behave like a man if his boyfriends **** depended on it. what makes it all so hilariously surreal, is the fact that you believe people actually take you seriously on this board. you are a clown. let me repeat that. you are a clown, nothing you say means **** because you have 0 credibility. your life is a waste of time and energy when you spend so much of it glued to some forum defending a known criminal bred by known criminals. that is the realiy of your situation.

 

both your zookeepers feather fisted?

 

good post:good

 

Same could be said of Floyd. Cheating Marquez on the scales on top of the catchweight. KO'ing Hatton after Lazcano dented his chin. Beating Mosley after Cotto defeated him.

 

Claim? You can Google anything I said there and read the evidence yourself. Half of your defense for it was "But FMJ did worse..." or "Yeah he cheated, but now it is OK so..." You won't Google any of it because you don't want reality to intrude on you delusion. So is Pac the guy you think he is or what?

Nothing is clouding my vision and I honestly don't care about any of it. He is a complicated man with a complicated life. If you feel it is a worthy subject to talk about Mayweather's life outside of Boxing, I feel the same goes for Pacfraud.

Funny thing is that you get in a huff when you take a dose of your own medicine.

 

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=009314&cat=boxer
here I'll let you figure out why that's a dumb statement atsch

 

Sorry, the fight was contracted at WW. Also, two pounds over made no difference. Lazcano lost the fight.

Mosley? Good one, but it goes to the Pacfan point of a guy who can't return from a loss. Cotto didn't dominate/destroy Mosley. Mosley also DESTROYED the man who destroyed Cotto. Think Pac fought Mosley when both men were available? Nope. He chose the diminished fighter.

 

Your critique of new posters holds true for all new posters regardless of who they admire. It is up to each poster to prove whether he is capable of intelligent discourse or whether he can only go up to the dancing chicken avatar level. Hell, even credible, old-time posters are guilty sometimes of resorting to personal attacks to get their point across.

If you can only convert one true ESB-boxing fan out of a hundred casual fans, then it would be worth putting up with all the childishness in these boards.