People don't look at the footage anymore. They post based on what they think they remember. Nowhere is it more evident than Loudon claiming that Julian Jackson was more skilled and bigger than Lemieux when it's obvious the opposite is true. Meanwhile, here's more footage - actual evidence - of the level of the guy that people think stops Golovkin for sure. This content is protected That's a guy getting beaten like a drum.
Amazing. Where's the rest of the fight? Oh, here: This content is protected A little context is fair, no?
You like to conveniently leave out key points in fights to fit your narrative in the majority of your posts. I don't know if you've noticed you do that... In any other era Lemieux would be a journeyman. He's a glass cannon way worse than Julian Jackson was. His power is grossly overrated, too.
Which key points? Points like "X was better than Y"? Is me posting "No, Y was better than X" going to be a revelation? Actually, you are wrong. Did you notice Julian Jackson getting rocked by Herol ****ing Graham? Maybe you should look at the footage. This content is protected Jackson is a caveman compared to Lemieux. He may hit harder. That's about it. Opinion.
If you knew anything about Toney you would realize he used to barely train at times and mismanage his weight. I still think that lethargic version of Toney beat Tiberi after rewatching it a couple of times.
Points like not mentioning Vanes Martirosyan is a blown up junior welter after saying he was Golovkin's 20th defense. I think telling most of the story adds momentum to your opinions. Okay kid. I get it. Lemmy is better than Jackson based on beating some cans and no hoper fragile fighters like N'Jikam. I think your ass has been torn a new one by the majority of the posters in this thread and you're clutching for straws now.
I think I amply demonstrated why Lemieux is a better boxer, with actual footage and stylistic commentary, and tore a new one for whoever thinks that Jackson is more skilled than Lemieux. I think "the majority" who think otherwise are clinging onto yellowed posters of their heroes and imagining them to be way better than they actually were, without actually objectively watching the footage. Your memories are a mish-mash equating to one long highlight reel and of course reality can't compare to that. If I'm clutching at straws, you are clutching a tear-stained pillow after accidentally clicking on Tiberi vs Toney.
So, he was a **** boxer, then? ^ My point, proven. Not even Toney thinks he won the Tiberi fight: This content is protected Props to him btw, for actually admitting it. That's rare.
I think you got mad kid. Yes, Lemieux is this amazing boxer who could tear through the competition with ease. I get it (no fanboyism bias there). And no one stated Julian Jackson was this ''elite'' boxer.
I think that doesn't make someone a ''****'' boxer if they don't train enough. Just like when Leonard admitted he lost a fight. People lose and (can get better) and improve.
Okay smarty pants. Why is it a ''strawman'' argument? You've been up Lemieux's arse for quite awhile now.
Training is most of what makes a boxer good. My point however, is not addressed. Namely, that it's fanboyism and not objectivity that is driving the comments here.
Because nobody said Jackson was an elite boxer. Somebody however did say that Jackson was a better boxer than Lemieux. That's the argument. The argument is not whether JJ has elite boxing skills. That's a false argument.
