so why the preference?
i dont agree at all - and i'm australian. i don't see how anyone can call tszyu a masterful boxer. he was resilient, a smart fighter, composed...
noone of those guys will make him number 1
he did look bad against urango - but was lucky enough to get the decision and got the castillo fight. you ever taken a chance in life and things...
donøt be so defensive....
its all good if people are objective. i am. but you are british, right?
dont be so defensive if you beieve in what you say. of course it's "prime champs". calzaghe has never fought a proven one. why do i have...
i already told you why prominent british fighters (generally speaking) dont get to fight the legitimate best fighgters of their era. if you want...
thats a really good point too. what lacy and kessler do from here can help to define him. but kessler has fallen back into the european mold...
good post. i agree completely that both hopkins and jones have holes in their resumes - because, like calzaghe, they ruled a weak division....
that result was in doubt even at that point and you know it. personally i would have picked lewis past that point but you're just being...
even i'm getting tired of saying it... not in the US it doesn't and not against world class fighters in their prime. is he one of the best...
what he means is calzaghe wasn't in the loop even though he was more deserving (take tarver, your example). you just judged roy jones for exact...
what a shame calzaghe didn't get "lucky" too, huh? that would have changed everything and we wouldn't have this discussion now. let's blame the...
sure it is. but i'm willing to back up anything i have to say.
