I hope Margarito wins...

[erics44]

I see Eric is in a pickle again lol.

You gotta love the guy, he has surely got to be related to Hornfinger.

what are you on about skell, im in no pickle, im winning the argument by a clear margin

have a read through

In your own little world Yes I agree In the real world I have to disagree mate.

just to recap skel, the debate started because someone said a win for margs would be nothing but bad for boxing

i disagreed because of the points I have made

do you not think my points are valid?

[JazMerkin]

I see Eric is in a pickle again lol.

You gotta love the guy, he has surely got to be related to Hornfinger.

what are you on about skell, im in no pickle, im winning the argument by a clear margin

have a read through

In your own little world Yes I agree In the real world I have to disagree mate.

just to recap skel, the debate started because someone said a win for margs would be nothing but bad for boxing

i disagreed because of the points I have made

do you not think my points are valid?

No, the point you've made show why a Margarito win would be good for Margarito. None of them are good for boxing as a whole.

Whether you like one, both or neither, Mayweather & Pacquiao are the best thing to happen to boxing in the past decade. Two small ATGs who've gone through numerous weight-classes beating around half a dozen future hall of famers each. A possible fight between the two would be the biggest the sport has seen since Leonard-Hearns.

Sorry, I'm being all serious again. Let's talk about something funny like the cost of cheese in brothels.

[erics44]

I see Eric is in a pickle again lol.

You gotta love the guy, he has surely got to be related to Hornfinger.

what are you on about skell, im in no pickle, im winning the argument by a clear margin

have a read through

In your own little world Yes I agree In the real world I have to disagree mate.

just to recap skel, the debate started because someone said a win for margs would be nothing but bad for boxing

i disagreed because of the points I have made

do you not think my points are valid?

No, the point you've made show why a Margarito win would be good for Margarito. None of them are good for boxing as a whole.

Whether you like one, both or neither, Mayweather & Pacquiao are the best thing to happen to boxing in the past decade. Two small ATGs who've gone through numerous weight-classes beating around half a dozen future hall of famers each. A possible fight between the two would be the biggest the sport has seen since Leonard-Hearns.

Sorry, I'm being all serious again. Let's talk about something funny like the cost of cheese in brothels.

your wrong dude, check out posts 5 and 6 where the debate started

you are right when you say a between pac and may would be big

[JazMerkin]

I see Eric is in a pickle again lol.

You gotta love the guy, he has surely got to be related to Hornfinger.

what are you on about skell, im in no pickle, im winning the argument by a clear margin

have a read through

In your own little world Yes I agree In the real world I have to disagree mate.

just to recap skel, the debate started because someone said a win for margs would be nothing but bad for boxing

i disagreed because of the points I have made

do you not think my points are valid?

No, the point you've made show why a Margarito win would be good for Margarito. None of them are good for boxing as a whole.

Whether you like one, both or neither, Mayweather & Pacquiao are the best thing to happen to boxing in the past decade. Two small ATGs who've gone through numerous weight-classes beating around half a dozen future hall of famers each. A possible fight between the two would be the biggest the sport has seen since Leonard-Hearns.

Sorry, I'm being all serious again. Let's talk about something funny like the cost of cheese in brothels.

your wrong dude, check out posts 5 and 6 where the debate started

you are right when you say a between pac and may would be big

Except then you ARE saying that Margarito's wraps have boxing in a hole??

But that can't be saying that, because you've said it isn't. So what are you saying?

[erics44]

I see Eric is in a pickle again lol.

You gotta love the guy, he has surely got to be related to Hornfinger.

what are you on about skell, im in no pickle, im winning the argument by a clear margin

have a read through

In your own little world Yes I agree In the real world I have to disagree mate.

just to recap skel, the debate started because someone said a win for margs would be nothing but bad for boxing

i disagreed because of the points I have made

do you not think my points are valid?

No, the point you've made show why a Margarito win would be good for Margarito. None of them are good for boxing as a whole.

Whether you like one, both or neither, Mayweather & Pacquiao are the best thing to happen to boxing in the past decade. Two small ATGs who've gone through numerous weight-classes beating around half a dozen future hall of famers each. A possible fight between the two would be the biggest the sport has seen since Leonard-Hearns.

Sorry, I'm being all serious again. Let's talk about something funny like the cost of cheese in brothels.

your wrong dude, check out posts 5 and 6 where the debate started

you are right when you say a between pac and may would be big

Except then you ARE saying that Margarito's wraps have boxing in a hole??

But that can't be saying that, because you've said it isn't. So what are you saying?

what has that got to do with the last 2 posts?

and your last sentence is daft man because we have already cleared those points up, do i really need to go back through the thread and show you up again?

[JazMerkin]

I see Eric is in a pickle again lol.

You gotta love the guy, he has surely got to be related to Hornfinger.

what are you on about skell, im in no pickle, im winning the argument by a clear margin

have a read through

In your own little world Yes I agree In the real world I have to disagree mate.

just to recap skel, the debate started because someone said a win for margs would be nothing but bad for boxing

i disagreed because of the points I have made

do you not think my points are valid?

No, the point you've made show why a Margarito win would be good for Margarito. None of them are good for boxing as a whole.

Whether you like one, both or neither, Mayweather & Pacquiao are the best thing to happen to boxing in the past decade. Two small ATGs who've gone through numerous weight-classes beating around half a dozen future hall of famers each. A possible fight between the two would be the biggest the sport has seen since Leonard-Hearns.

Sorry, I'm being all serious again. Let's talk about something funny like the cost of cheese in brothels.

your wrong dude, check out posts 5 and 6 where the debate started

you are right when you say a between pac and may would be big

Except then you ARE saying that Margarito's wraps have boxing in a hole??

But that can't be saying that, because you've said it isn't. So what are you saying?

what has that got to do with the last 2 posts?

and your last sentence is daft man because we have already cleared those points up, do i really need to go back through the thread and show you up again?

You're genuinely brilliant mate, set yourself up every time. Maybe you do need to go back through the thread as you're always advising others to do. Although in your own warped world, you'll find some way to use this to justify Carl Froch being the greatest fighter who has ever lived

[erics44]

I see Eric is in a pickle again lol.

You gotta love the guy, he has surely got to be related to Hornfinger.

what are you on about skell, im in no pickle, im winning the argument by a clear margin

have a read through

In your own little world Yes I agree In the real world I have to disagree mate.

just to recap skel, the debate started because someone said a win for margs would be nothing but bad for boxing

i disagreed because of the points I have made

do you not think my points are valid?

No, the point you've made show why a Margarito win would be good for Margarito. None of them are good for boxing as a whole.

Whether you like one, both or neither, Mayweather & Pacquiao are the best thing to happen to boxing in the past decade. Two small ATGs who've gone through numerous weight-classes beating around half a dozen future hall of famers each. A possible fight between the two would be the biggest the sport has seen since Leonard-Hearns.

Sorry, I'm being all serious again. Let's talk about something funny like the cost of cheese in brothels.

your wrong dude, check out posts 5 and 6 where the debate started

you are right when you say a between pac and may would be big

Except then you ARE saying that Margarito's wraps have boxing in a hole??

But that can't be saying that, because you've said it isn't. So what are you saying?

what has that got to do with the last 2 posts?

and your last sentence is daft man because we have already cleared those points up, do i really need to go back through the thread and show you up again?

You're genuinely brilliant mate, set yourself up every time. Maybe you do need to go back through the thread as you're always advising others to do. Although in your own warped world, you'll find some way to use this to justify Carl Froch being the greatest fighter who has ever lived

how have i set myself up dude? i cant see any link between your the last 2 posts

i never said froch was the best fighter that ever lived i said bruno was