Adrien Broner vs Scott Harrison

i got the joke haha

some people are thick

 

:rofl:rofl yeah okay

 

So what your doing is trying to compare two different style of boxer and because your preference of style is quite clearly Broner, Harrison would never stand a chance? I don't see how you've come to this conclusion.

Also why does being naturally heavier mean you are all of a sudden a better fighter than the next guy?

 

To me? Broner is just the modern day Guzman, but with HBO behind him. Same ****ish behaviour i.e arrogance & coming in heavy...

Now my hero scotty was a ****, but at least when he fought? he made the weight. Theres levels of ****ishness in boxing, & Scotty was a nutter, BUT he nevr pulled cheap tricks on fighters like Broner does.

Have to laugh at the thread title, as if Broner would take the risk of fighting a proper hardcase if he didnt have to

I laugh at the thought of where Scotty would shove that comb:smoke

 

Haha your level of stupidity when it comes to harrison would be laughable if it wasnt so sad.

Let me start by saying i hope ricky burns gets his chance with Broner on a massive american card because he would Lacy him but...

I think when it comes to ****ishness Harrison is a master compared to Broner. Broner failed to make the weight because he grew out of the weight as he is still fairly young. He shouldnt have been fighting at that weight really.


Harrison also failed to make the weigh in, because he was too busying getting pissed and probably terrorising Asda staff.

Add this to trying to car jack a couple, terrorising a pregnant woman, Beating a man up that eventually lead to his suicide and Being a **** in General. I think Harrison Wins in the P4P of ****ishness.

 

Harrison was a big strong guy, decent fundamentals. But it was the big and strong that made him. Billy you say Broner is predictable, Harrison was obvious, Burns is predictable, the problem with all 3 is can you over come it. Harrison was awful against Medina, look what a flu ridden Hamed did to him years before ? Broners jab would never miss against Harrison, and his strength would cope with Scots too. Then what is Scot gonna do ?

 

At Featherweight, what was Scott's biggest strength?

Hint: The answer is in the question.

 

****, even I agree that the first loss to Medina was a bad un, but many great fighters have a bad night. Scotty rectified it in the rematch.

Now to throw your Naz argument on its head? What about McCullough? Scotty spanked that man black & blue, whereas Naz resorted to running like an olympic sprinter to steal a points victory.

As for the Naz flu excuse? It was an excuse. Just like all but a few boxers do when they have a bad night.

 

blah blah poor Broner blah BLAH. So Scotty was a **** outside of the ropes. He never took liberties INSIDE of the ropes though like Broner, did he?

Wrong supermarket btw, if you are going to engage me in a Scotty debate, you have to get your facts right about where scotty likes to take a **** after he has indulged in a few swallys

 

He was utterly flu ridden, and he knocked him out. Johnson got destroyed years before he was rolled out against Scot. McCullough was also much older against Scot. How about Polo ?

But who that Scot fought at the time he fought them beat Broner ? If he was as good as you think why was he kept away from the real class. To say Broner is afraid of fighting the best is silly, when you see Scots defenses.

 

Did you know that when scotty lost the first fight against medina it was widely reported that Scotty too was unwell before the fight & was vomiting in the dressing room before he lost?

Its called excuse making, no matter how you dress it up riggers. Just like your excuse for Naz running like a chicken against McCullough, "but Wayne was younger then! Naz HAD to run to win!!!" Wheras by the time he fought Harrison, you could see in Waynes eyes he was past it, & was already planning a future career dancing in suspenders to Beyonce songs, probably due to brain damage incurred by being hit by a Naz corkscrew uppercut"

 

Scott was also defending his title at the same time as he was having bevvy troubles. Not many can drink that much and still operate at the top level, I can only imagine how good Scott would have been if he was tee total

The jury is still well and truly out with broner. So far he looks no different to what Andre Berto looked on his rise and we all know how great he was looking. Until you fight regularly at the top its hard to predict how good a young boxer will become.

 

Hamed won against a better version than Scot lost to.

Who did Scot fight that Broner would not have beaten. You can even put them at their peaks and not the shadows of themselves Scot lost to or beat if you like.

 

Scott had the runs the day of that fight and shouldn't have fought,better judged by the rematch when he was spot on

 

Harrison would thrash Boner. Boner got mauled off a guy called Ponce FFS.:rofl:dead