Jump to content

shaaark

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    14,950

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

 Content Type 

Everything posted by shaaark

  1. shaaark
    Could be mate. But without overthinking things, I just preferred bruno anyway ?
  2. shaaark
    You know what mate, frank bruno definitely wasn't given the credit he deserved. One of the best nights I ever had was when he beat mcall, when a group of us watched it in my ex brother in law's uncle's pub. We all went wild and had a party til about 6-7 o clock in the morning. Again, like I said earlier about not taking to fighters, I just couldn't get behind lewis, as good as he was ?
  3. shaaark
    Put it this way, he had more fights and more wins at welterweight rather than middleweight, quite alot more actually, which you will know. I'd say that makes him more of a welterweight than a middleweight
  4. shaaark
    You've had several long conversations discussing robinson, and watched every fight of his you can find, but you're not a fan of his? Ok, no more from me ?
  5. shaaark
    ?
  6. shaaark
    Yeah that's the thing mate. Neither has paqciao been mentioned, another modern great. And again, mayweather, the only time I wanted him to win was against mcregor ?
  7. shaaark
    I understand you exactly mate ?. And I agree with you, yes the man was a very good boxer. And thinking about it, there are a few really good, 'great' even, boxers that I just couldn't take to. And some not so skillful to be termed superb, never mind 'great', that I thought/think were some of the best. ; Nigel benn, mike mcallum, michael watson, steve collins, just to name a few middleweights. And my personal favourites with their top top class trilogy, gatti and ward ?
  8. shaaark
    Exactly what deontay wilder does, you mean. How anyone can rate him as a top heavyweight beggars belief
  9. shaaark
    Lol no worries. I was referring to the buchanan fight, simply because that was one fight where duran should definitely have been disqualified. And just to be a tad controvertial, why is sugar ray robinson regarded as one of the very best middleweights, when he was really a welterweight? Lol ?
  10. shaaark
    Didn't say he couldn't box, he obviously could. But in my opinion, he was far too keen with the low blows, and as you put it, roughhousing tactics, which he rarely got pulled about, to make him a great
  11. shaaark
    We aint talking lightweight. When he moved up from lightweight he struggled, and was dirty as f**k simple. He isn't one of 'the four kings'. Like I said earlier it was the 'three kings', hagler, hearns, leonard
  12. shaaark
    Gnash, we all know it's a rough game, BUT, when a boxer has to resort to hitting someone low, so hard he ruptures his opponent's testicle, that should tell you that that particular boxer REALLY isn't a great, but a fighter that likes and needs things to go his way. I'll say it again, yes duran was a very good fighter, but a boxing great he certainly wasn't
  13. shaaark
    I'd say hagler won the 5th and 6th pretty clearly as well
  14. shaaark
    I watched it gnash, not live obviously, but about a 100 times.Duran should've been disqualified. Even lo bianco, the ref, said as much, years after the fight. Buchananan was losing on points anyway, and duran couldn't put him away. Buchananan was slowly outpointing duran the last couple of rounds of the fight, and was being awkward. Duran couldn't hack it, like he did in ALOT of his fights, and hit buchanan low, AFTER the bell in the 13th, so hard he ruptured his testicle. You think that's ok? c**t shoul'dve been disqualified, no ifs, buts or f**k all
  15. shaaark
    Yes, but lloyd honyghan beat him up ?
  16. shaaark
    Leonard wouldn't take the rematch with hagler
  17. shaaark
    You're obviously a big duran fan gnash, so what is your opinion on his win against buchanan? Putting favouritism aside, what do you think should've happened? Not judges, refs or whatever, your own personal opinion
  18. shaaark
    Lovely looking pup ?
  19. shaaark
    I totally understand you gnash. But he was always a dirty f****r. Yes, he walked away from leonard cos he was frustrated, more than anything else, not cowardice. But you can't condone the amount of severe low blows he threw on purpose throughout his career. Why is it ok for him to do that, yet when someone else does it they get warnings points taken off or whatever. Nah, he was good, but he wasn't a great in my eyes
  20. shaaark
    Cheers mate is 170 the recommended fill pressure?
  21. shaaark
    Chill aaaat lads, was joking ? lol. I know a few people that use those sites regularly. ..................... the sad, spineless c**ts! ? ?
  22. shaaark
    Careful d, I can imagine bill sharpening his clemming kit, and trying to reference your post code as we speak ?
  23. shaaark
    People that resort to dating sites are spineless wimps, FACT ?
  24. shaaark
    Barak obummer was a crackhead ?
  25. shaaark
    Also, let's not forget that as well as totally quitting 100%, duran was dirty as f**k when things weren't going his way. In his fight with ken buchanan, he continually threw low blows from the 1st round onwards, but was warned only once for it, in the 12th round! After the bell at the end of the 13th, he hit buchanan low so hard he ruptured one of his testicles and should've been disqualified but they gave him the win!! Whenever I hear people say 'the four kings' I cringe. Three kings definitely, hagler, leonard and hearns. Duran was a dirty fighter his whole career
×
×
  • Create New...