People will always hate on Merchant because...

Larry used to slobber all over Wlad before Wlad really proved himself and started beating ranked heavyweight contenders/titlists on a consistent basis.

 

That's the other argument that comes up ad nauseum.
Why is Merchant's favoring certain fighters nuthugging, but Kellerman and Steward's favoritism the truth?

 

No one proclaimed Kellerman or Steward as completely objective commentators. But people in this thread, however, argue that Merchant is an unbiased voice which is patently untrue.

 

Merhant's always been the man. He calls it like he sees it, very unapologetically.

 

Who considers Kellerman's and Steward's favoritism (or HBO shilling) the truth?



Here are some classics from Steward:

"Oscar looks as good tonight (against Forbes) as he did 10 years ago"

"Shambra Mitchell is just as fast as Floyd Mayweather"

 

Well, I can't argue with Omar! His four fives beats the hand I draw any day of the week!

Yeah, I was reaching a bit by including Steward in there, but I wanted to balance how tired I am of over-the-top crushes on the other guy. Didn't want to come across as too unfair or singling you out, but did a bad job at both - sorry. Pretty much just asking for parity on how each panelist's shilling is perceived; maybe I'll word it better next time.

 

They're all pretty bad with their biases, although I think Merchant is less of an HBO shill and goes more by his personal likes and dislikes.