Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Alphafighter, Jun 10, 2019.
I guess by your account Chris Byrd couldn't move either?
Or David "Ursain" Haye was also a bad mover me thinks?
Edit: Oh wait I forgot: The toe!
You tell me?
Tyson just ****s with people.. always has done.. i remember numerous occasions when he called WK a great champion etc take a lot of him with a pinch of salt..
Ye, he beat him, by about 116-111.. @ 39 years old too... Jennings was 19-0 & fresh. WK had been a pro for nearly 20 years by then. Did you think he was never going to age or something? Are you really that dumb?
As well as Jennings he also outclassed a very negative version of Haye who basically got on his bike for most of the fight, trounced slick southpaw Byrd twice & easily beat (admittedly in a stinker) Ibragimov who had a slippery southpaw boxing style. Same Ibragimov who had just whooped Briggs for the WBO..
Get over it, WK is going into the HOF & you'll still be claiming you run nightclubs on BN24..
you dont clearly beat someone by getting dropped like hit by lightning. you try and avoid such circumstances when you want to clearly beat someone.
Ah, yes, the fabled "i dont care about the judges cards if I dont like them" ruling. Tell me again how mayweather lost to castillo, dude, it's always a pleasure to hear you all talking nonsense.
I thought was closer than that like fury won by 3 or 4 rounds?
The official cards are 116-111 and 115-112 2X. Fury was deducted a point.
So that's 2 cards 8-4 and one card 9-3.
If Chambers is not a natural heavyweight, then neither is Bryant Jennings. Since Bryant Jennings practically drew against not only a cruiser weight, but a cruiser weight scrub named Mike Perez who literally got shut out and lost a unanimous decision to a career cruiser weight in Mairis Breidis whilst Perez himself needed a questionable split decision over Perez. So not only does that prove Jennings is not a heavyweight, but he isn't even a good cruiser weight either.
And no, Chambers was far more athletic than Jennings ever was. Plus he was faster, quicker, more coordinated, had better timing and so forth so on. Chambers makes Jennings look like a slow mole. Heck, even Perez made Jennings look slow.
Show you footage of Chambers using fleet footed movement around the ring? Why don't you show your claims about Jennings first, since you made the initial claim of Jennings being more athletic and fleet-footed. You telling me to show you something when you won't put in the effort yourself? Ain't going to happen!
David Haye was more 'fleet-footed' than Bryant Jennings can ever hope to be. And was faster than Jennings can ever hope to be. And was more powerful than Jennings can ever hope to be. And more athletic than Jennings can ever hope to be.
It's your 'opinion' that Bryant Jennings is more athletic and more fleet-footed than Eddie Chambers and David Haye. So no, these are not 'observable facts'. These are your agenda-based opinions. You need to prove those claims first, before they become 'facts'.
I could just as easily also state that it's an observable fact that David Haye and Eddie Chambers were significantly more fleet-footed and athletic than Bryant Jennings and my claim would hold just as much worth as yours.
And Calvin Brock got out-punched by Wladimir Klitshcko. He held his own but was still losing and got stopped in the end. That's exactly what he would've likely done to Jennings if he was the same age as then.
Do you underatand how boxing is scored?
do you understand anything? every post i read of yours is complete garbage. a product of a mind that isnt aware how ignorant it is.
Don't t use my strengths to insult a fellow poster
Oh boo hoo, get a sense of humour, sh**s funny. Reactions like yours is exactly what he's aiming for, he's laughing at you