You have right to your opinions. Though I think they may be wrong, I'm not about to dismiss them as "garbage".
What by saying that he might get lucky and land a big punch? A lot of people rate Hearns as the greatest LMW of all time, and you think a fighter who never showed anywhere near the ability needed to stop him?
OK, I'll be fair and say defeat. Where I was coming from was that I envision Hearns beating Tony in a rematch, after Tony demolishes him in the first one (or two), and is expected to win again. Hence the word "upset".
every great figter has their share of critics and Tony was no exception but he was the best fighter to ever come out of the duva stable. so what if he was crude? who says crude fighters cant win titles? mike tyson was crude as they come. so was joe frazier who threw the same punch all the time. jack dempsey, jake lamotta, harry greb, ketchel, and even berbick all won titles.
Who says Greb ,Dempsey ,Tyson ,and Frazier were crude? Who says Ayala was a great fighter? What would you base his greatness on?Apart from the fact he was unproven he is a piece of ****,who got more chances than he deserved.
If you read closely,which you didnt,you would see i was responding to the poster labelling him as crude. This poster said he wouldnt have made it because he was "crude" I responded by giving examples of great fighters with crude styles. what's so hard to understand about that?
Tony was looking good and moving along, but to go on 22 fights and assume he could deal with the top guys is pure speculation. Look at his record, who did he beat that was a legit contender, Epps, Herrera. Maybe if I had some video, I would see it differently. Aside from that, had he had a brain, maybe he could have been a great fighter. But instead, your and up and comer making money, and you rob a house and **** a woman. F him.