Did Adrien Broner peak at the Maidana fight?

I agree with that.

But do you say Muhammad Ali has 6 losses?

Because, well, everybody and their mama scored at least one of his two wins against Norton for Norton.

Or that Joe Louis has 4 losses?

Because everybody and their mama scored the first Walcott fight to Walcott.


No. You don't.

And obviously I am talking about the Paulie fight more than the other two as my post goes on to further insinuate and clarify.

 

Your posting is heavily generalizing, or sarcastic, in predictable contexts. That would be just fine if you didn't have a totally different tone in other predictable contexts. That is all.

 

Broner was always been an overrated bum. He just got attention to the media because he has connections a friend of floyd and showtime showcasing him.

 

What about all the points Broner should've been deducted if the ref wasn't on his side? At one point he kicked Paulie in the nuts.

And the people you see as 'respectable' posters are probably fellow Mayweather fanatics like Pimp C and Scar and we know who they wanted to win.

 

The difference is that those guys just aren't simply numbers on a record.

These guys transcend their record. Plus, comparing them to modern day is just wrong for this reason.

We're at the point whereby keeping that 0 intact is the most important thing in the sport. It isn't like past greats where challenges were taken regardless of win/lose. Broner lost his 0 a long time ago.

 

No more like robney and/or Rodney (I forget which one until I see their posts), IB, kirk, and those cats.

Tons of fighters deserved to get more warnings or point deductions that didn't. Should we go through and deduct points when somebody hits someone when their knee is down but the ref lets it go? Should we add points when somebody gets deducted one that we don't agree with?

Should the proper score for the first Mares vs. Agbeko fight be 115-102 for Agbeko? Or just outright DQ win for Agbeko? You just can't do it. You can say Mares is a cheap shotting little kunt if you want. You could say he got away with way too much. But he got the victory. I scored the fight one point away from a Draw even with the most outrageous KD in recent times. I can explain that, but if I start marching around saying Agbeko beat him, then I'm an idiot.

You say Maidana should have been deducted several points for his antics, including kicking Paulie in the nuts. But do you say the same thing in other Maidana fights when it applies? Do you say he should have been deducted several points during the Mayweather fight, in which he punched Floyd in the nuts more than 3 seconds after the ref called break, also kneed him in the nuts, AND Goldberg speared him later on? No, you don't.

That's all relevant in the discussion of a fight, it's true. But to as.sess a fight in that manner is too awkward and in order to be consistent you'd have to rewatch every fight ever with the purpose of designating what you personally feel were point deductions. And surely it would expose anyone doing so as a hypocrite for when they feel this or that should have applied. As far as claiming a result, sure it's relevant to how the fight played out to get the result, but it judges what COULD or SHOULD have happened as opposed to what DID ACTUALLY HAPPEN. And you know I've said that many many times, over and over. Your personal score is your personal score. But, often times unfortunately, things like deductions/breaks/long counts/etc. are at the discretion of just one man.

 

I'm ultimately cool with almost everybody on here. I don't get or take things personal. I know I come across like a jackazz in the form of written text to many people... Perhaps being able to read a poster isn't a good thing, however? Everyone establishes their tone (indirectly) and I'm guilty of it too. Impossible not to be.

Favorite poster: Boxed Ears. That dude has swag. And he's impossible not to read (if you're a frequenter of the forum) but only in the best ways imaginable.

 

Honestly... I don't know what your point is. You didn't answer my questions.

So Broner didn't get the losses because of marketability and potential money-making while Ali and Louis didn't get the losses because they were the money-making fan-favorite A-sides... That's more in favor of my point than anything.

So are you consistent or not? Did Broner lose those fights just like Ali and Louis lost those fights? Or are you somehow saying, "yeah, but no" because you're a big fan of one of those two other guys?

 

He lost to none of them. The Quintero fight was a close one (most fighters have close ones early in their careers). Ponce and especially Paulie fights though.........just no. Stop it.

 

Yup. Unfortunately this is quite a large market segment here in the states, and not just for boxing. Very unfortunate.

 

He peaked and got ktfo

 

no, he was just exposed as a hypejob who can't beat opponents his own size at world level

 

I wouldn't say he's peaked during that fight or he's damaged goods, I think he just bit off more than he can chew. He fought OK vs guys he should've beat easy, I'm still a believe in his talent, just not his mentality. I think the only thing holding him back is that thick ass noggin. He has all of the physical tools to be an elite contender in his division. He doesn't make adjustments and fights the same every night out. He could've beat Maidana and Porter but chose not to, he gave up mentally.

Unless his mentality changes, I think he'll remain where he's at.