You write paragraph after paragraph that have no points worth responding to. Your a foggy headed nuthugger that does nothing to contribute to anything worthwhile on any topic on this forum. If you ever make anything close to a rational point I'll gladly respond. As it is, conversing with you is about same thing as holding a conversation with a nerdy, below average IQ, 14 year old. You really should focus on a sport where blind devotion is rewarded. Go watch some soccer and get loaded. No one will knock you for your hero worship and nuthuggery in the world of soccer.
Insults again Robert (I feel so deeply offended) but if you feel there is so much not worth responding to, why keep posting on my posts? . I think if you were to read through this thread you will see that my contributions may have been a little more worthwhile than yours, though I admit I have had to spend some time correcting you on here though. Still Ill give you a question explain the faults with M Veit. :good
You hold a higher opinion of yourself than most. Veit is not the worst opponent slappy faced. Beating Veit really doesn't add up to a career defining moment. Joe's a ***** for retiring without ever testing his limits. He had two career defining victories and one was a sloppy performance over a man nearly old enough to collect a pension. If he faced suitable opponents more consistantly Joe would command a little more respect.
Yes. Eubank was past his best. Its pretty ****ing obvious. And even if he wasn't, that Eubank was clearly not the same Eubank that fought Watson. Calzaghe fought a Chris Eubank that was far from his best. Full Stop.