Yeah it's probably wise to split em.
It is bold, I certainly wouldn't favour him to beat all three, but there's a chance that he could. I think he had quite a few good solid showings...
Yeah, classic example of talent only taking you so far.
Buddy had a tendency to gas, but he was otherwise quite a complete fighter at his best (that is, he was at least good in every facet of the game)....
An all-time chess match/technical masterpiece thread would be great to read about. Mike did get a bit sloppy towards the end of the first Toney...
I think both Curry-Starling fights are good value. I've underplayed them in the past but they are highly skilled affairs with good action...
Out of mind, out of sight. Moochie wasn't even knocked down! :lol:
Michael should win. Jimmy could avoid the punches of a fat washed up Ali and gorrilas like Foreman and Norton, but Spinks still had a bit of speed...
Would be one of those bouts that you think one man wins easily until you watch it multiple times and notice just how many punches are actually...
Agreed. It's probably more the fact that he was so deficient in other areas and had such a distinct defensive style that made him stand out for...
Yeah, kind of how I see it. Oscar gets the judges vote here, but answering who actually won would be much harder to do. Starling might edge it for...
Spot on Mante. Relied almost exclusively on reflexively jerking his head back to avoid punches. Ugly, and at the end of the day not all that...
Francisco Bojado. Looked something special early on. Thought he'd turn out at least as good as a Fernando Vargas. I guess he did ... minus the heart.
Locche would be first for me. The guy could be lackadaisacal as **** and still not get hit. Who the hell starts conversations with the crowd...
Do you think dominance should be a bigger factor than the quality of opponents beaten? How would you split you categories up, by what kind of...
