I am not advocating illegal streamsthere illegal for a reason. but sign if you think that £15 for a mayweather fight is shambolic when you know we would get in on reguler sky sports. not on ,and i wont be buying it . discuss
So: Hatton/Urango Hatton/Lazcano Hatton/Malignaggi Khan/Prescott, de la Hoya/Pacquiao, Khan/Barrera Khan/Kotelnik Khan/Salita Khan/McCloskey Khan/Judah Haye/Valuev Haye/Ruiz Haye/Harrison :-( Haye/Klitschko Groves/DeGale were all worth £225 combined. Yet the best boxer in the world isn't worthy of pay per view? atsch If you don't like it, don't buy it. I won't be. But this sudden uproar against pay per view is laughable when you consider what millions of people have bought in the past over here.
i dont see why i should pay £15 for what will basically be a crap stream and duke mcenzie? cmon Roe you know its wrong!
The difference between the above fights and this one is that we will likely have to stump up the £15 alone. Previously you could have probably got a few people to share it. £15 is too much money to watch a fight for me personally.
What's the main view on this fight? I'm guessing mayweather wins pretty easy on points or has Ortiz become something special since maidana crushed him, I know he beat berto but that man was overated anyway?
You really can't please some people, I think we have been treated pretty well getting Mayweather and Pacquiao fights for free anyway, I have no problems paying 15 quid for two modern legends (Floyd and Morales) one of them being the best of his generation and a future superstar in Canelo. I do however have a problem paying 15 quid for james Degale vs George Groves, who combined have fought only 23 times and have no reputation whatsoever.
Everyone knew that Berto wasn't the fighter HBO were claiming he was so then you are left with Floyd Mayweather versus a guy with a defeat against the man who drew with the ancient Erik Morales and who has a draw against Lamont Peterson.......not a good formline!