To me it seemed like he wanted to win the fight without committing to his punches, i.e. win a decision with his jab. Now, as most should know, Roy...
(My emphasis.) Again, run on much?
(My emphasis.) American spelling, good chap, American spelling! Now, seeing as the only way that last sentence can make sense, is if it's...
(My emphasis.) Criticizing someone for trying to sound intelligent in a post which is itself rife with clichés and unnecessary "big words"......
It's true that usually, whenever a fighter or trainer promises a return to form, or something new, it's more often than not complete nonsense;...
Being more aggressive doesn't necessarily mean being the aggressor. If anything, in the case of Bernard, it would mean occasionally leading, i.e....
I might be wrong, but I believe it was mentioned in another thread that it was a mandatory.
Well, yes, sure, but also, you must admit it's kind of silly to say, "well, he doesn't really, really mean that? Our Joe is so great, he can't...
It was a close, but good win, yes. Although Calzaghe should be able to adjust, I don't see him "stinging the **** out of him". I could see him...
Ahh, so you what you're saying is that you're purely speculating?
I wasn't disputing that Calzaghe won, I was just pot-shotting your posts. :tong
Before the fight took place, (and I sat for 12 rounds of boxing in a total state of awe), I thought Pavlik would eke out a decision due to Hopkins...
Yes, and '3 brits' is a statistical sample of such size, that it cannot possibly be skewed!
Actually, after the Pavlik-fight, during the post-fight interview, Hopkins said he'd go to Wales to fight Calzaghe.
If you're going to give an opinion on who won the fight, isn't it better to pretend to not be a fan of either, and actually be objective?
