If JMM beats Casamayor while Calzaghe beats up a faded legend, should JMM jump to #2?

It's 44 votes for No and 43 votes for Yes.


Pacfan has just been TKO'd by a slappy verbal volley over numerous pages from Cuchulain. Joecaldragon was throwing the towel in from the pacfan corner just as the final flurry of slaps were adding to the ownage.
Enjoy your holiday pacfan, I am sure the poll will go to the wire but joe as usual will find a way to win and stay ahead of the game

Come back refreshed unless you hols are in the uk where rain will undoubtedly ruin the week.

 

Good strong point-by-point refutation.

While much of the post was summative in nature and did not require response, the refutation of your earlier gaffe could have used a response:

This content is protected

How the thread starts doesn't necessarily restrict the scope of its discussion as it evolves.

If I see a post that I feel needs a response that takes the thread in a different direction , that's fair enough.

Besides, if you look at post 31 of this thread, you will see that I have already addressed the thread topic. See below:

You will also notice where things got personal and abusive if you care to reread the entire thread.

See post #61 below. I believe that's where it started.

 

Definitely #2 for JMM. He BEAT Pacman in their second fight and outboxed him from 2-12 after the 3 KD's in their first fight.

 

i agree on putting him at #2 but i can't believe that some people are still scoring rounds 2~12 of the first fight for jmm. can you please rewatch at least round 2 of that fight?

 

I'm just saying that he outboxed him from 2-12. Not that he won all of those rounds.

 

because it just sounded that marquez took all the remaining rounds from what you wrote. it's all good then.

 

Thank you Pacfan for that summary of the dialogue.

Fortunately for your friend , and anyone else who cares, the entire thread is there and available to be read.

I'm sure people can draw their own conclusions without your little piece of spin.

Once again, I believe I addressed the thread topic in post #31, long before things got heated here.


I believe I will, in keeping with your friend joecaldragon's counsel, let things drop here. Not much more can be accomplished. I have answered the thread question and attempted to clarify my position on Calzaghe's resume.


Enjoy your vacation !

 

Did anybody forgot that Casamayor is also way past is prime ?

 

The question posed in the thread was addressed. Period.

A conditional response is perfectly acceptable, as in

This content is protected

Any prediction about something in the future can be qualified with conditions.


Please see posts #15, 18 and especially 23, posts which all addressed the question in a similar fashion.

Pacfan claimed I didn't address the thread question.

Clearly, I did. He just didn't see the post, or care for the answer.

????

Which friend ?

What proclamation of victory ?

As I mentioned earlier, it takes two sides to keep things going.

Ironically (there's that word again), the thread had already strayed from the thread question to a discussion on Joe's best chance of a stoppage, before I responded to Pacfan's post. If Pacfan wants to widen the scope of the discussion, he openss the door to counterpoints.

Such as?

What do I know of his private life?

I only see what he posts here on the board, and go from there.

I think it's pretty obvious from reading the thread, who got annoyed.

I accused him of bias, which IMO, he has. I'm but one of several who have noticed his anti-Calzaghe bias for some time.

He may take that as an insult if he choses. I believe it to be true.

That is NOT an attack on his character, a matter on which I know nothing.

Let me get this straight.

You counsel both of us to drop things.

I take your advice and do so.

Rather than put yet another lengthy spin on things , I say:

" for anyone else who cares, the entire thread is there and available to be read."

I wish Pacfan well and leave the thread.



And then you, who counseled an end to the back-and-forth, come along and, in a lengthy post, try to put YOUR spin on things,
and then (more irony coming up) state that I'm the type of poster who will keep things going forever in order to win.

A bit rich wouldn't you say ?

You advised an end to it. It was ended.

But then you resurrected it again.

And you took over, like a tag team wrestler, from your friend and carried on the same tone: "...your childish nature simply would not allow it "

The lad demonstrated clearly, for all who can read , that he has little or no grasp of the concept at all.

That has been evident ever since he got embarrassed in the 25 year thread some time back.

He just didn't get it, even when it was explained to him and went so far as to tell me that he thought I was using the cover of a wind-up just to back away from my true opinion of Joe.

You, of course, know better, as I PMd you at the time to let you in on it. At that time , I was unaware that you and Pacfan were friends.

Do you have a mouse in your pocket or are you using the royal "we" here ?

Who, besides yourself, among the Calzaghe fans, is being embarrassed ?

Again, you believe what you must re the thread. I will only comment that it's all still there and available to be read.

I have seen little evidence of that so far.

We have a certified Calzaghe-basher with another boxer's name in his username and "Legend Killer" emblazoned on his crest, and he's calling other posters fanboys ?

We have a Ph.D. candidate who tosses around teenage insults, doesn't get it when he's the victim of a wind-up and resorts to name-calling and abuse to make his points.

I'll leave it to the readers to draw their conclusions as to what Pac "will do to ya"

This exchange was over.

You brought it back to life , and then accused ME of being someone who wouldn't let it die.

You tried to introduce yourself as a disinterested bystander, when your OWN biases in this matter,
are on display throughout the post.


Pacfan has made his points, as have I.

We will probably not make any further progress here.

Each of us is aware of the other's position(s) and we have both argued our points vigorously.

I hope Pac is having fun, wherever he went.

 

Cal's already number 3 (no higher)... Beating up today's version of RJJ won't move him up higher... EVEN if both Pac and JMM lose their next fights.

You don't get to be p4p no. 1 (or 2) by beating up on an old, shot, 40 year old Roy Jones. Sorry.

Especially when you take into account his last performance (his only one of this year).

 

If you have him at number 3 who's your # 2 ??

 

JMM... IMO, he beat Pac the 2nd time. And even if he didn't, those 2 fights were so close and too hard to split that it is almost impossible (to me) to split them on a p4p list.

 

And yet again, despite this thread having been concluded in post 117 in late August with

A fairly civil conclusion, I felt, even if we did not reach agreement.




But not the end, apparently, for you.


Upon returning from your vacation, you felt the need to resurrect the matter yet again , by way of private message:

I replied to your PM with:

And still you continue, with another PM:

And so you finish off with more parting abuse, despite my efforts to end this on a civilized note.

As I indicated to you, this is now on the forum.


Please refrain from any further PMs.