Gatti was a completely shopworn paper titlist when he fought Mayweather. Even in his prime he was never anything more than a mediocre boxer that made full advantage of the day-before-the-fight weigh in's.
He won a vacant title and defended it against legit competition several times.
No one debates Gatti was a mediocre boxer compared to that eras best. But we're comparing him to Provodnikov. Not Mayweather, De La Hoya, Tszyu etc.
No, retard, Chavez, at 43 years of age, wasn't better than Alvarado; having actually seen post-De La Hoya ll Chavez fights (including a lopsided loss to Willy Wise) I've a fair idea of what level he was performing at the time and what he had left, which was fuck all.
Using your asinine logic, Freddy Hernandez >>>> Maidana, right? :icon_lol:
any version of Chavez > Alvarado. I think you read his record on boxrec and are trying to sell it as though you've seen it.
I honestly have no idea where you came up with the Hernandez > Maidana thing. I can't make heads or tails out of what that is supposed to mean.
It's not a particularly difficult idea to grasp: you post here because the overall knowledge not this sport and it's history is piss poor, which allows you to be as stupid and ignorant as possible without ever being corrected. The real, knowledgeable posters in this section up and left a while back.
lol, sort of exposed yourself with that last comment. What shitty, previously banned poster are you?
You call Gatti a paper champion, nothing like the great Provodnikov right? Its not like Provodnikov was gifted a title fighting a guy who had never fought at 140 pounds or anything right? Oh yeah, it was exactly that. Difference being that Gatti actually defended his title against guys ranked at the weight. So in your own example, Provodnikov falls short compared to Gatti. Self ownage.
I'm just not stupid and retarded
Yes, you are. your points are stupid and retarded. I still don't get the Freddy Hernandez >>>>>>>>>>Maidana thing. Your arguments are complete shit, and you know it , which is why you got up on your soapbox at the end of the post. Literally no one here agrees with anything you've said. Everyone here knows the sport better than you too.
Frankly, you sound like you threw yourself into a stupid argument to try to prove you're not stupid and tried to support it with some boxrec nonsense that you've spent a couple of days rehearsing.
The bit about the "knowledgable posters" gave you away. Either you're some loser who has spent the last two days searching over posts about people on this site, or you're from one of those shit sites and are just here trolling. I suspect the former. Either is pathetic.
) makes him some astute historian. Guy's scope is so f*cking limited that he had to resort to listing someone so closely associated with Pep after struggling to think of anyone else.
