Can Gavin Rees make Broner Jeff Lacy II?

[IamInuit]

Mt rating of Broner is more then a hunch. Its empirical concluded by observation, experience and repeatability .

Boxing is not an exact science, hence part of the enjoyment. You can indeed use "observation, experience and repeatability", but to suggest such leads to an empirical conclusion is really stretching the meaning of the word.

You, like me have a hunch Broner could be very special, time will tell.

My conclusions on Lacy are based on evidence gathered in the same manner and he's no hybrid and lots of people were taking Calzaghe at the time.

I would say your 'conclusions' were flawed then and as the majority of the evidence and the bookies favoured Lacy. Of course people supported Calzaghe, I wanted him to win for instance, but I do not think he would!

How were they flawed, I was right.

[Britkid]

How were they flawed, I was right.

It was flawed because you were right, and you needed to be wrong, to be proven right. As the evidence favoured Lacy, but Calzaghe won. You looked past the overall evidence, and had a hunch Joe would win, possibly using 'evidence' that was going against the general consensus, but hindsight shows, was proven correct. But there is no 'science' to that!