Naoya Inoue Vs. Marlon Tapales Undisputed Title Fight Set For 12/26!

14 pounds isn't much in the higher divisions? Then, why, out of active fighters, have only Inoue, Usyk and Canelo managed to become #1 14 pounds apart? It's a much larger climb than you realize, and it's bigger the smaller you are.

 

He didn't have the money to make it happen. Choc fought Cuadras twice, Wangek twice, Estrada once, Estrada fought Cuadras and Estrada and Wangek fought twice. The other guys were worth more, and probably in their minds they were basically equal risk fights. Boxing is all cost-reward.

 

He had more money than Wangek lol and he managed like 5 fights against those 3.

Whatever the reasons are, it's disappointing that those 4 all made the division set on fire and Inoue bypassed them all.

 

Should be a good fight and looking forward to this!

 

Spence being considered a top-five pound-for-pound fighter was some hilariously political B.S.

 

Every time the subject of Inoue's super-flyweight campaign comes up I have to sigh and remind myself that people may not actually know what happened but here we go again...

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Sigh all you want mate, it won't be as hard as a sigh that we missed out on the fights which is the only thing that's important here.

I'm not really interested in someone trying to explain to me why Inoue managed to spend time in the division without having fought any of the top guys aside from Narvaez (who was arguably number 1 when they fought)

I'm not here to debate it after the fact, I lived through the era. Inoue smashed Narvaez, stayed around for 3 years, didn't fight anyone of note and then became a phenomenon at BW.

 

Or your post is some revisionary B.S.

Do I need to pull up receipts?

 

I mean, if you can find a single post of me saying Errol Spence was top five pound for pound be my guest.

 

It isn't the only thing that is important when you are trying to discredit him for it, because the implication is that it was his fault when he was the only one blameless throughout the whole process.

I'm sure you aren't, because then you'll have to be confronted with the fact that an entire division avoided that man, and then galaxy-brains tried to paint that as some black mark on Inoue's record.

Then why are you saying anything about Inoue's time at Super Flyweight other than, "Shame Narvaez was the only top guy who wanted any smoke?", because anything other than that lays at least some blame at Inoue's feet?

 

There's no need to discredit anyone, what's happened has happened.

There's nothing to confront me with you strange person.

Here's what I said about his time at SFLW:
"Not sure about him not ducking

He managed to avoid fighting everyone at SFLW when the division was on fire and everyone had 2/3 fights against each other."

 

"I'm not discrediting anyone, I'm just not sure he didn't duck anyone (literally the most discrediting thing you can do to a boxer short of cheating accusations), because here's a list of fights that didn't happen while not bringing up relevant facts like Chocolatito very publically saying he wouldn't fight Inoue or the WBC ordering an endless merry-go-round of rematches for mandatory status."

Do you...do you read your own posts? In like, a comprehensive kind of way? Because I'm not sure you do.

 

I don't know if you read your own posts, probably not. Like most posters you have your favourites and resort to copy and paste arguments.

As I said, the only thing that actually matters is that the fights never happened. We never had opportunity to debate it at the time as you weren't around back then. Probably too young to remember that era.

 

I actually gave you several arguments for why the fights didn't happen, all of which involve either promotional nonsense or everyone ducking Inoue, but you copy-paste your response of, "I don't care WHY the fight didn't happen, only that it DIDN'T happen!" even though the whole crux of there being any argument to begin with...is you saying Inoue is the reason they didn't happen. Despite the evidence to the contrary.

Can you comprehend that last point? Because it's really, really important. Like, the entire reason this back and forth is happening in the first place.

Why is it that when people have no real comeback they always resort to citing their age as if having no control over one's bowel movements is a sign of wisdom?

If all that matters to you is the fights didn't happen, then you would never have used the very precise language of, "I'm not sure about Inoue not ducking." How can you not be sure, when all available evidence points to him not ducking?

 

There is no argument, I can't have been any clearer on that.

I never said Inoue wasn't the reason, someone said he never ducked, I said:

"Not sure about him not ducking

He managed to avoid fighting everyone at SFLW when the division was on fire and everyone had 2/3 fights against each other."

There is no back and forth. You think we're in a fan boy argument, but we're not.

Well it was your first response on the thread. Talking about people who weren't around at the time, which is ironic since you weren't around at the time.

Yes very precise wording of "I'm not sure..." As I said this was all discussed at the time, I'm not interested in debating the situation after the fact.