If Jack wins he has one of the best resume active

But what happened to innocent until proven guilty?

If DeGale had been flagged before even as an amateur then I would completely understand where you're coming from but there is nothing to suggest DeGale is dirty other than him looking in good condition.

Canelo isn't one of my favourite fighters and he didn't do VADA against Smith, made a weight quite comfortably that most thought he couldn't make anymore and looked in great condition now I didn't cast suspicion on Canelo, I wouldn't take a leak over a fighters possible achievement or achievement without solid evidence.

And there was no evidence (Like DeGale now) that I knew of that said Canelo was doing anything dirty so I didn't make comment before or after suggesting he is tainted.

 

Whoever wins, Jack or DeGale will have roughly the 13th best record in the sport among active fighters.

Pacquiao- Sasakul, Ledwaba, Barrera, Marquez, Morales, De La Hoya, Hatton, Cotto, Margarito, Mosley, Bradley, Mayweather (16/20)
Cotto- Mayweather, Pacquiao, Alvarez, Martinez, Trout, Margarito, Mayorga, Mosley, Judah (5/10)
Salido- Marquez, Lopez, Guerrero, Gamboa, Garcia, Martinez, Vargas (3/9)
Donaire- Darchinyan, Rigondeaux, Narvaez, Montiel, Arce, Nishioka, Walters (6/8)
Klitschko- Povetkin, Byrd, Peter, Ibragimov, Thompson, Haye, Fury (6/7)
Bradley- Pacquiao, Marquez, Vargas, Provodnikov, Witter (5/7)
Alvarez- Mayweather, Mosley, Cotto, Lara, Khan, Trout (5/6)
Ward- Kovalev Froch, Kessler, Bika, Abraham (5/5)
Gonzalez- Viloria, Estrada, Sosa, Yaegashi, Cuadras (5/5)
Khan- Alvarez, Garcia, Judah, Maidana, Barrera (2/5)
Crawford- Gamboa, Burns, Beltran, Postol (4/4)
Garcia- Morales, Khan, Matthysse, Judah (4/4)
Povetkin- Klitschko, Takam, Huck, Byrd (¾)
Kovalev- Hopkins, Pascal, Ward (3/4)
Golovkin- Lemieux, Murray, Brook (3/3)
Estrada- Viloria, Segura, Gonzalez (2/3)
Lara- Alvarez, Williams, Martirosyan (1/3)
Lomachenko- Russell Jr, Salido, Martinez (2/3)
DeGale- Bute, Dirrell, Groves (2/3)
Jack- Bute, Dirrell, Groves (2/3)
Glowacki- Huck, Cunningham, Usyk (2/3)
Porter- Brook, Thurman, Broner (1/3)

 

You never know when a fighter will burst in to bloom, sometimes it just happens suddenly, unexpectedly and without one reason.

For example, one that sticks in my mind of a fighter just bursting in to bloom is Steve Robinson the Welsh featherweight who at the time was 13-9-1, he had just finished working in a department store and was called in as late replacement for a WBO world title shot against John Davidson, Robinson won and went on to make 7 defences of that world title until he ran in to Naseem Hamed.

Now I don't remember at that time boxing fans saying "what the hell is he using" or "he must be juicing". It was accepted the penny dropped for him, he snatched his opportunity and he grew in to a very good fighter and a mature world champion.

In my opinion, this "juicing" accusation that a lot of fighters have been getting over the last few years is a direct result of Mayweather basically ducking a prime Pacquiao, it is now accepted as an excuse not to fight somebody or a way to discredit a fighter and now some boxing fans start shredding and discrediting a fighter for a great win, great performance without no evidence other than a theory.

It has to stop, people can't just throw these accusations around or cast suspicion without a shred of evidence.

 

Did Marquez test positive? I can only go with what happened. I'm not an expert or a Dr and I personally can't test people just by looking at them.

I'm not in any fighters camp, I don't know what goes on and when a fighter is flagged up I believe in zero tolerance and life time bans.

I can't cast shadows on fighters, I can't cast suspicion because I simply don't know they are dirty until they test positive. I have to put my faith in the system or boxing is basically dead to me.


Let's open our minds real wide here, let's say you was a fighter, you had had an amazing training camp, sacrificed everything, everything went perfectly for once and got yourself in to amazing shape and you went out and put on a great performance....

Then I and a large swell of others come online, here, twitter or wherever and start suggesting you are a cheat without a shred of evidence, We taint your reputation. It's simply not fair or decent.

So if you know (you might have boxed before) how much hard work goes in, how much sacrifice, pain then you must understand how I personally find it difficult to damage a fighters reputation with just a theory.

 

Good question, I'm not high on Keith but he's not shy when it comes to mixing it up but I'm not sure he wants to implement that in his strategy vs Danny. Keith is the more polished fighter and if he can "box" and stay on his toes, move in and out of Danny's wheelhouse without getting caught up in a pocket warfare he can box his way to a win.

That said I don't think he can avoid all of Danny's counter attacks and Keith has predisposition to bang back when caught with a good counter once he starts to do that he will leave himself vulnerable and the fight will go down hill for him. I'm leaning towards Danny 55/45 because of Garcias durability & body attack vs Keith's more polished boxing, power and questionable durability.

 

If Terrence moves up he takes Danny's O for sure, Crawford is special and patient....Crawfords overall boxing apperception and intelligence will be too much for pretty much everyone at 147lbs minus a bull dozing Spence who I believe is Crawfords biggest danger. Imagine Spence vs Danny.....someone's losing several years off their career after that fight.

 

dude got a glass chinned was knocked out by a gatekeeper

 

You see a judge anywhere? Am I a lawyer? There ain't no court around here but public opinion. Your objection is overruled.

 

I object to this line of questioning.

 

WRONG, HE HAS ONE OF THE BEST MANDIBLES IN THE GAME~!!