Where are biased Diaconu fans that said...

This is the last post Im going to make in this thread, at least for now.

Dawson likes to take breaks during rounds, or for almost entire rounds. Diaconu is in your face pretty much every minute of every round. At some point, just like last night, he's going to hit you. Even if it's a slow punch. Pascal was able to take it, I don't know if Chad could. Maybe he could.

 

yea you have a point since Dawson was gonna fight him but Diaconu got injured. So you can't really fault Dawson for looking elsewhere. Even Diaconu's managers said that.

Still can't give Dawson credit because Pascal beat Diaconu. Doesn't make sense.

 

Tarver in the first fight was one of the saddest figures I have ever seen in the ring. He was the definition of 'shot.' He was better in the second fight but he's still 40 years old.

Johnson has never been regarded as a big hitter. I love Johnson, and he's a rough dude, but his rep is not as a big puncher. Diaconu may not have a ton of KO's, relatively, but he is regarded as a puncher. He can crack.

Look, it's all good. For all I know, Dawson shuts Diaconu out. But as I said earlier, styles makes fights and A > B and B > C doesn't necessarily mean A > C, as Margo could tell you.

Peace, ray. :good

 

I see two things wrong with what you said. The first is that Diaconu would still beat Dawson, even when Pascal exposed every flaw in his game. Hes a good fighter but lets be serious, him against Dawson would be even more one sided then with Jean

 

Dawson only took rounds off with Tarver because he wanted to tire him out, in fact the Tarver fight is the only fight that he used that approach, plus Diaconu and Tarver have two completely different styles. Also, Johnson may not punch as hard as Diaconu but has a much more experienced inside game and better technical skills, even at 40.

 

Yes he did make more money...It was proven before....