Re: Conor McGregor toys with Paulie Malinaggi in sparring?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
@
Beanz, why does the @ feature bug you?
Because it is childish and unnecessary like a lot of your posts. If you are replying in a thread why would you need to @mention someone ? If you have nothing new to offer then why bother?
It's also just incredibly lazy, like listing points and expecting people to reply to each point in order because you can't extrapolate an argument from a post and you want everything handed to you on a plate. If you had read anything about the history of boxing or even bothered to google the subject it would be quite obvious to you that more knockouts due to wearing gloves is just the basics. You can be a noob and pretend that they were invented for the safety of boxers and that bare knuckle fights lead to more knockouts but you are just kidding yourself.
The worst part of it is the pedantic and frankly laughable idea that you are above commenting on a fight that has more in common with the history of boxing than half the spoon fed rubbish you think is "pure", or some such nonsense. Of course it's a circus, it's always a circus, that is in it's genes, just like grappling.
If you are offended then I apologise but frankly you have missed the point if you think the point of a forum is to just rip the piss out of people and be condescending.
You are supposed to present counter arguments not just go with the flow.
:-\
:11fb8:
Re: Conor McGregor toys with Paulie Malinaggi in sparring?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
@
Beanz
I didn't realise the @ feature upsets you mate, I specifically use it so the board isn't littered with unreadable multi-quotes that people can't scroll through, this is the last time I will EVER @ you again, trust me.
I have no idea how you could possibly think i'm being "arsey" with you, mate? Seriously, If it makes you happy i'll pretend I think you're right?
It's not about making me happy you prune it's about having a difference of opinion. Every boxer on earth does not believe what you are suggesting at all. All boxing gloves today including "punchers " gloves are massive relative to a bare fist and they increase the likelihood of knockouts. Why do you think people sometimes get knocked out in sparring? If everyone wore punchers gloves then a lot of fighters would look like Hatton or Henry Cooper cut to shreds after a couple rounds but you would actually probably have less knockouts. Big accurate punchers with great timing will find a way anyway but the bigger glove thing is largely a myth. I am quite happy if you like most people don't agree but It does not make it a fact.
Re: Conor McGregor toys with Paulie Malinaggi in sparring?
If UFC fighters could hang with boxers, they would just go into boxing because they make way more money. Why would Conor remain in the UFC if he could make $20 million in one boxing match? That's probably 4 times what he would make his entire UFC career.
Re: Conor McGregor toys with Paulie Malinaggi in sparring?
Also, I don't trust anything Paulie says because he is working with Conor. Obviously he isn't going to say something like "Conor is talented but obviously isn't anywhere near the level of a top boxer." That's why he says things like he doesn't have really good power but neither do a lot of people. The only chance he has to beat Floyd is to have OMG power. If he doesn't, then his chances go from .01% chance of winning to 0% chance.
Re: Conor McGregor toys with Paulie Malinaggi in sparring?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanz
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
@
Beanz, why does the @ feature bug you?
Because it is childish and unnecessary like a lot of your posts. If you are replying in a thread why would you need to @mention someone ? If you have nothing new to offer then why bother?
It's also just incredibly lazy, like listing points and expecting people to reply to each point in order because you can't extrapolate an argument from a post and you want everything handed to you on a plate. If you had read anything about the history of boxing or even bothered to google the subject it would be quite obvious to you that more knockouts due to wearing gloves is just the basics. You can be a noob and pretend that they were invented for the safety of boxers and that bare knuckle fights lead to more knockouts but you are just kidding yourself.
The worst part of it is the pedantic and frankly laughable idea that you are above commenting on a fight that has more in common with the history of boxing than half the spoon fed rubbish you think is "pure", or some such nonsense. Of course it's a circus, it's always a circus, that is in it's genes, just like grappling.
If you are offended then I apologise but frankly you have missed the point if you think the point of a forum is to just rip the piss out of people and be condescending.
You are supposed to present counter arguments not just go with the flow.
:-\
:11fb8:
@Beanz
Because it is childish and unnecessary like a lot of your posts. If you are replying in a thread why would you need to @mention someone ? If you have nothing new to offer then why bother?
childish and unnecessary? Don't be fuckin stupid. Like @Fenster previously said (but you probably never bothered to read it) it saves loads of long meaningless quotes that most people wouldn't be bothered to go through and also find it quite annoying because they take 10 minutes to scroll to the bottom of the page. Still , you don't give a fuck about anybody else , so I'll make this a nice long fucking post to keep you happy and piss everyone else off.
It's also just incredibly lazy, like listing points and expecting people to reply to each point in order because you can't extrapolate an argument from a post and you want everything handed to you on a plate.
Uh, no. Replying point by point is
A. Being polite and ensuring that every point is replied to, not cherry picking bits that you can answer and ignoring bits you have no answer. I have noticed that you're a bit of an expert at that.
B. For Clarity.
If you had read anything about the history of boxing or even bothered to google the subject it would be quite obvious to you that more knockouts due to wearing gloves is just the basics. You can be a noob and pretend that they were invented for the safety of boxers and that bare knuckle fights lead to more knockouts but you are just kidding yourself.
Again, like I said many times previously. I wasn't necessarily arguing with you on this subject. @Batman came up with a statement that pretty much sums up where I stand on this. The safety element regarding cuts with less padded gloves is equally as relevant as your point about broken hands. My actual point was your pathetic , desperate reply to a post "anyone who disagrees with me is full of shit" ;D;D you made yourself look a proper cunt tbf
The worst part of it is the pedantic and frankly laughable idea that you are above commenting on a fight that has more in common with the history of boxing than half the spoon fed rubbish you think is "pure", or some such nonsense. Of course it's a circus, it's always a circus, that is in it's genes, just like grappling.
The main reasons I don't wish to comment on this joke fight, therefore supporting it like twats like you, are:
A. You have a guy earning crazy money having never boxed professionally in his life fighting the best Boxer of the last 20 years.Thousands of Boxers worldwide have spent their whole lives making sacrifices to try to be the best Boxer they can be that will never get this kind of opportunity, yet many of them would beat McGregor, how can that be right?
B. It's immoral that they earn these ridiculous sums when people are fucking starving in some parts of the World.
C. It's probably gonna be a fix , but if mugs like you want to fucking analyse this shite, crack on. It's pathetic really.
If you are offended then I apologise but frankly you have missed the point if you think the point of a forum is to just rip the piss out of people and be condescending.
I did say I was a TINY bit offended, as I always respond with facts , like I'm doing now.
You are supposed to present counter arguments not just go with the flow.
I think it's safe to say that I've done that. Beanz, you seem to have a load of pent up anger and frustration in your irrational posts. I think you probably need to get laid or something so you can relax . Perhaps you'll stop talking so much shite then!;);D;D
Re: Conor McGregor toys with Paulie Malinaggi in sparring?
30 day mark and still no official opponent for belt of Gervonta Davis. Pretty clear these will be window dressing filler fights, title fight or not.
Re: Conor McGregor toys with Paulie Malinaggi in sparring?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
30 day mark and still no official opponent for belt of Gervonta Davis. Pretty clear these will be window dressing filler fights, title fight or not.
It's a shame, one thing I always enjoyed about Floyd fights was the way he made the whole thing a good package. This is a literal and figurative outrage. Still I listen to the guys at work who aren't boxing fans and they are excited about the fight. I try to keep my mouth shut as who am I to ruin hype they bought into
Re: Conor McGregor toys with Paulie Malinaggi in sparring?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
30 day mark and still no official opponent for belt of Gervonta Davis. Pretty clear these will be window dressing filler fights, title fight or not.
The latest I heard after Salido wouldn't be ready in time and Farmer literally left for Africa was that it would be Rocky Martinez and he is and has been in camp preparing. So yes, a showcase fight.(although I don't particularly trust the source that said Rocky has been preparing)
Re: Conor McGregor toys with Paulie Malinaggi in sparring?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
30 day mark and still no official opponent for belt of Gervonta Davis. Pretty clear these will be window dressing filler fights, title fight or not.
It's a shame, one thing I always enjoyed about Floyd fights was the way he made the whole thing a good package. This is a literal and figurative outrage. Still I listen to the guys at work who aren't boxing fans and they are excited about the fight. I try to keep my mouth shut as who am I to ruin hype they bought into
Its a one trick pony show. Man you're a bigger man than I in that regard..I had a staff member ask me what I thought would happen and all I could do was hand her a fecal loop and lube for the pooch on table and tell her 'save your money you're living it' ;D. Love to see Davis challenged and not fed some glorified piñata.
Re: Conor McGregor toys with Paulie Malinaggi in sparring?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
30 day mark and still no official opponent for belt of Gervonta Davis. Pretty clear these will be window dressing filler fights, title fight or not.
The latest I heard after Salido wouldn't be ready in time and Farmer literally left for Africa was that it would be Rocky Martinez and he is and has been in camp preparing. So yes, a showcase fight.(although I don't particularly trust the source that said Rocky has been preparing)
Figure even a Martinez would be let known by now, name at least and ties to Loma, Salido etc. This is why the IBF is the shadiest as they always maintain number 1 or 2 rankings as "not rated". They could just ship Kenny Getup right in ffs.