See this is the problem, you think its a stupid statement, why ?? Because its rose tinted Michael Spinks ?? Kovalev's jab matches up against anyone ever, its that good, whether he would beat Spinks is another question, but as far as comparing jabs, there is f all wrong with it, its in the same category of thee best jabs at 175 ever !
Hey mark may have made a lot of stupid threads in the past but this is pretty good by he's standards.
I couldn't give a ****, could you ?? Never offends anyone..I can handle the odd daft thread, this is a legit thread though imo..Kov's jab is a thing of beauty on form, it extends out and lands on anyone and it hurts, absolute wicked to be taking constantly
In what way no, in what time. If you think that kovalevs jab is better than spinks in round 8... well, then we dont agree. Kovalev has 6 rounds to ko spinks, if not, the fight would become such a hell for him that he would 100% quit. Btw, 11cm reach.... is A LOT of reach. You dont need your jab to be better with 11cm reach advantage, specially with the sense of distance (next to perfection) that spinks had. Anyway, even if you dont agree with that...7 rounds AT MOST, then downhill, then kovalev quits. At 15 rounds we better dont even talk about... that would be nonsense, as I said kovalev wouldnt do 15 roudns not even vs the heavy bag.
If you throw enough darts you'll eventually hit a bullseye I guess.. Just think he makes far too many threads like this. I know they're harmless, just don't understand why he carries on doing it so often.
Curiosity maybe. We have all made some daft threads or post. I posted that the lomachenko vs Campbell fight was held this weekend because hull are playing Millwall that weekend in London. Now looking back i can see how this was idiotic and not something brought up in negotiations but a great co incidence. that was outright dumb by me, mark has made some out there hypothetical threads but nothing as thick as what i posted in regard to that. Its a forum after all we are here to discuss boxing. IMO there are no stupid questions
Fair enough - easy for me to ignore Mark's threads I suppose. Can't promise I won't call him out now and again though!
