Damn you Joe "Old Bones" Brown!

Some of them weren't that bad either.
Dave Charnley was a solid contender.:good

 

33-year-old Brown was a 12-5 favorite over 24-year-old Charnley in their bout in Houston.

 

That might be because Brown was very very good?

 

He was 3-to-1 in his previous defense vs Rosi, and didn't impress the journalists who covered that bout. 8 of them having Rosi ahead at the time of the stoppage, 4 had Brown ahead and two had it even. Hardly a reason to consider him very-very good. Brown barely got a draw in his previous bout before Charnley defense.

 

The Charnley first fight was very close ,it was a points win for Brown.Brown had a comfortable lead in the second fight when Charnley was badly cut.
I worked with Charnley's brother he said Charnley was butted but I don't think he was.
I'm not looking for an argument here, if you think Brown wasn't much ,that's your prerogative.

 

I haven't said a word about my opinion about Brown. I just said I don't think his opponents in title defences were that good. Kind of like I feel the same way about Roberto Duran's reign at lightweight. Doesn't mean I think Duran was no good at lightweight.

 

And all I said was Charnley was a solid contender:good

 

And I remarked that he wasn't given much of a chance by people who were there, even by British writers who had come there to cover the bout. Just debating.

 

The US writers don't appear to think Charnley was much of a threat, and the reports of their second fight seem to give the lie to the British "versions " that it was a," nip and tuck" affair.
Charnley came strong in the last few rounds but had convincingly lost the early ones.
Just debating:good

 

Brown looks awesome on film. One of the most skilled, wily old veterans out there at his best.