Pavlik wants Froch..Popkins wants Froch... Froch wants Bute

[Nameless]

1) Russ Anber is one of the finest and most impartial analyst in Canada, as for example, when Margarito (who used to be his favorite boxer) got caught with loaded gloves, he didn't get into no bullshits using arguments like "it could have been hand cream and stuff) he just said: "he's guilty, it's unfortunate, I can't defend him. You can't discredit him on the sole fact that he's canadian otherwise everytime, let's say an american defends or agree with an american boxer, it would be easy to pull the card of "well he's american and americans defend their boys therefore we can't take acount of it".

2) I never said there was no controversy, I said that Bute won fair and square according to the rules, which doesn't change what kimball said and what I stated, get the fact straight, I just said Bute won fairly the fight, the end was dramatic but nowhere there has been "cheating".

3) Marlon just followed the rules according to most specialists, sure he did let Bute grab but once again, he never come close to grab as much as Lennox Lewis used to do, Ruiz or Hatton, so where is the problem there? should he be solely blamed for something countless referee did let happen but in much worst and "exaggerate" way with the likes of Hatton, Lewis et cie?

4) On Guy Jutras, the guy is an international judge, do you think he minds to say that the guy lost? Absolutely not. Also, Bute is not canadian by the way, he trains in Montreal but he's Romanian (just like Andrade trains in Montreal too, by the way and is hugely popular over here too, almost as much as Bute). I don't know why the link doesn't work but here' another link, in french but with babel fish you should be able to get a correct translation: jminforme.ca - Guy Jutras explique les circonstances du 12e round Bute-Andrade | Par Marc Tougas, LA PRESSE CANADIENNE - Jminforme.ca

5) As for Russ Anber, it seems like in the last 24 hours Tsn did wash up their video section as most have been voided, stupid coincidence. However , here's a link that quotes him as saying, in the text, that no matter what we could say about the referee (which, once again, didn't allow more grabbing than most of Lewis matches, Ruiz or Hatton), Bute would have had time to stand up and make th count Lucian Bute defeats Librado Andrade, but questions remain - ESPN

6) I'Ve seen these videos COUNTLESS times, sure Bute has difficulties in the 30 last seconds but what the rules does say is: "as long as the boxer is able to defend himself and act consciously, the fight's on". Bute has no more juice, sure, but he was conscious and was moving logically to avoid the shots and as far as I know the rules, to do such thing to survive is legal and accepted, what is not is if ou get in a corner (for example) get bombed without any defense/resistence REPEATEDELY and getting in danger for health. This was obviously not to that point as he could moved till he get cornered and went down... to went up on time.

7) It takes one second to make sure that the other fighter goes to the corner as stipulated to the rules, the way you describe falsily it it's like if the referee would have looked at Andrade for 30 seconds ignoring that he was on the floor.

Do you really think that everytime there is a fight and that a referee doesn't act "correctly" the president of the alphabetic organisation looks bad? If he would pick a brand new out of the school referee for an important match, sure, when he picks a guy that has around 20 years of service? I don't think so, in fact, no, he can't be responsible for the mistakes somebody normally competent makes, it's like if you say that a whole police service (for example) would be responsible if an agent with 20 years of service burst his bubbles once and beat for no reasons somebody or to blame a school if one of his teachers decide to go to his work one morning totally wasted.

9) If you want to take the bet, sure, I accept, there is no proofs that YOU will pay as I don't know you but it is absolutely not a proof to contest my good will or or my honesty solely based on what YOU would do. I could even foster this argument further in saying that no matter with who you bet (even a close friend) you can't be 100% certain that he'll pay and even there there wouldn't much you could do. Also, such bet is kinda done publicly, on one hand, I do not want to lose my credibility infront of the whole community here and as you questioned my integrity, if I would win and that you wouldn't want to honor your bet, you can be sure that I would gladly use the "integrity and credibility" every time you would argue with somebody where you're defending a "controversial" point to show how we cannot give much credibility to your saying because you,re just not up to your words. 100 bucks which aren't lost but that should have been gained, that's not that much to nag at somebody for his inconsistency when he called somebody elses on that

10) I do not see where my impartiality is scorched, Bute made the count, the referee did let him grab because it was legit and not exagerated, I find our reason to question my integrity on that shallow actually, I agree with you it was a dramatic end and that it would have been a lot better if it wouldn'thave happened for everybody but controversy and dramatic doesn't mean that the victory wasn't legit and legal.