Jones's resume is better than Calzaghe's though. Not biased - analytical. We have gone over this a million times so let's leave it. Calzaghe has a weak resume, but because he's British then it's okay. That's what I call biased crap.
He's probably just so happy that this is the first fight that picked right, so logically anyone who didnt go with Joe is stupid. At least in an idiots mind
C'mon man......lets get real. Honestly. You are gonna tell me and everyone else you've always made the correct prediction in your history as a boxing fan? Who did you pick for PAV vs BHop Who did you pick for Bhop vs Tarver Who did you pick for Cotto vs Marg who did you pick for Williams vs Quintana Who did you pick for Hatton vs Mayweather Going bust on one fight prediction shouldn't mean that someone's credibility is hindered b/c that would mean respect for boxing anaylsty, pundits, historians and "experts" would go out the window b/c EVERYONE made bad calls in the past if you are a hard core fan of this sport.....and that's the truth.
That's what I'm referring to by different strokes. If Pac produced the same 118-109 times three to a badly cut Morales in a couple of months, I would not praise him for that. If Calzaghe produced the same 118-109 three times to a badly cut Dawson in a couple of months, I would praise him for that.
Exactly, I hate when these clowns try to give people **** for making false predictions, as if theyre some ****in boxing experts or something
Let him say my credibility is shot for picking Jones. He then has to agree that Calzaghe's win over Jones is all but meaningless then. Calzaghe picked a fight against a guy who NO CREDIBLE person would pick to beat him. He may have insulted me, but he definitely agrees with my original post :good
Nope. If Pac was in scintillating fashion against Morales and ripped him to pieces, I would not enjoy it or praise it. As I said, to me it is not impressive to beat up a shot fighter. It is easy meat.