Why don't Manny and Nate get it on for the undisputed title?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by fitzgeraldz, Jul 13, 2008.


Page 4 of 4
  1. theunderdog

    theunderdog Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,814
    1
    Jul 4, 2006
    Who is there to beat if you already have the belts? the mandatories? you still believe in that sytem?
     
    theunderdog, Jul 14, 2008
    theunderdog, Jul 14, 2008
    #46
  2. Totomabs

    Totomabs Sauna Belt Holder Full Member

    4,226
    0
    Dec 9, 2007

    agree
     
    Totomabs, Jul 14, 2008
    Totomabs, Jul 14, 2008
    #47
  3. Thinman

    Thinman Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,474
    3
    Aug 12, 2005
    At the end we are getting somewhere. :good

    No, I am not talking about belts....I am talking about defeating the guys who are the best in that division.
     
    Thinman, Jul 14, 2008
    Thinman, Jul 14, 2008
    #48
  4. onepunch.net

    onepunch.net Active Member Full Member

    1,314
    0
    Mar 7, 2007

    Didn't Hopkins become "undisputed" when he beat Trinidad?

    Didn't Taylor become "undisputed" when he beat Hopkins?

    And didn't Pavlik become "undisputed" when he beat Taylor?


    there's three examples right there of guys becoming "undisputed" by only beating one man.
     
    onepunch.net, Jul 14, 2008
    onepunch.net, Jul 14, 2008
    #49
  5. Thinman

    Thinman Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,474
    3
    Aug 12, 2005
    I didn't say never happen.....I did say I disagree with that. Do you agree with that?
     
    Thinman, Jul 14, 2008
    Thinman, Jul 14, 2008
    #50
Page 4 of 4