Better victories: Pac over Morales and Barrera or Floyd over Chico and Castillo

I've asked you nicely before to just post a scorecard of the Roy-Tarver fight, yet you call me crazy for scoring the fight for Jones. Yet you later admitted you had only watched the fight but not scored it. :rofl



All I am asking if that you give me a complete scorecard of these two fights. Ive given mine but if you would like me to repost them I will.

 

If the you're going to go down the 'fighter A lost to fighter B, who lost to fighter C, so that means that fighter A's victory is the best of the bunch' route then that really says a lot about the tenous nature of your argument.

The only aspect that I can see in favour Chico/JLC topping MAB/EM is the respective career freshness.

On paper Chico was coming into the fight with FMJ at a very good stage with a good record and a lot of hype. In reality there were all sorts of external issues that might mean he was not at his best.

I'm not suggesting any of these are credible reasons to discredit an awsome performance and win for FMJ, just pointing out that its easy to pick holes in virtually any opponent and every win - which is what you're doing by default with Pac's wins over MAB and EM.

 

I just find it a bit tedious that all you have to bring to the table is 'show me your scorecard' for every single debate.

I've already made it clear to you that I didn't score Tarver-Jones I, but I felt it was a clear win for Tarver, by a significant number of rounds. I didn't think it was a particualrly close fight, and neither did all the RJJ fans in the arena who booed when Tarver lost.

I also stated that I'm open to the idea that my initial perceptions might be incorrect (unlikely, but it happens, and if it did I'm man enough to accept that) and when I do get around to re-watching it, I will score it properly and let you know.

 

Well so far you claim you have Tarver ahead by significant amount of rounds but did not score the fight.

You also then claim to give Castillo 8 rounds.

Did you really give Castillo the last 8 rounds?

 

Oh, its definetely tenous. No doubt about that. When you're bringing up stuff like 'Morales lost to Zahir, who lost to Corrales' as this is some kind of indisputable proof of your point.

I agree with the sentiment of what your suggesting though. Obviously in the freshness stakes MAB and particularly EM were not what they could have been when Pac beat them. I just don't think that fact alone is enough to tip the balance in favour of FMJ's wins of Chico and JLC being 'better'.

 

You're a seriously repetitive mother****er aren't you?

There really isn't much point twisting my words, your half-hearted attempts to legitimize your own opinions by discrediting mine haven't worked in the past, and I see no reason to believe that they will work in the future.

Like I already said, this obviously isn't sinking in, so I will again repeat for the benefit of the simple minded amongst us... I didn't think Jones-Tarver I was a particualry close fight, and therefore I didn't feel uncomfortable about not scoring it.

I'm assuming that you, like me, are capable of knowing and understanding and judging who won a round of boxing without the aid of a pencil and a piece of paper? Or maybe I'm setting impossibley high standards for you with this crazy notion? If so, I apologize profusely!

 

Spin the story however you wish, you openly admit to not scoring the fight but then claim to have Tarver ahead by signigicant amount of rounds.

You're a joke. No wonder no one takes you serious in the General Forum.

 

I'd rather lose a close decision to an ATG and then knock him out twice than win a highly controversial decision to a borderline HOFer and then avenge it by winning a close decision in the rematch.

 

Exactly, so you're adding another variable: 'Morales lost to Zahir who lost to Freitas who lost to Corrales and thats why I'm correct'. I understand that. And your right to suggest that Corrales what a fresher opponent for FMJ, than EM was for Pac.

What I'm asking is; freshness aside, do you believe that Diego Corrales was a more FORMIDABLE opponent than a slighty faded Eric Morales? Given that Chico was only ever a fairly limited 'B' class fighter and Morales was the epitome of a grade 'A' legend?

Then you have to judge; was getting a gift and a close win against JLC better than beating a good/still credible version of MAB?

In some way I think I've done your initial question a disservice. It's actually quite a good one, when you weigh up the variables. :good

 

Like I said, your opinion carries no weight or credibility with this poster. So you can attach whatever childish labels you like to me, it's really of no consequence.

Anyway, another obvious attempt to perpetuate your pathetic agenda... I actually said when I watched the fight I felt that it was an obvious win for Tarver, by an unspecified but significant number of rounds.

That's different to saying 'I scored it to Tarver by four rounds' or whatever.

I'm not sure if you are just trying to twist my words, or if you have legitimate learning difficulties that make it impossible for you to correctly read what I actually wrote :huh