Since we're exchanging pleasantries on a more formal footing, 'Mr' Simo, my thoughts on Mundine, and who he will, won't or can't fight are clear:
Now onto Choc...bailed out of super middle, why, to fight better opposition at 160. There are only three big fights for Choc at middle, Pavlik, Abraham and Sturm...in my opinion, he loses them all.
So, while Choc's struggling to get viewers for the Crazy Kim debacle, this is what's going on at 168...
Kessler regains Choc's WBA belt...
Bute will fight Andrade in October for the IBF title...
and Froch will match up with Jermain Taylor for Calzaghe's old WBC trinket...
Choc was number three in the ring ratings and with Calzaghe relinquishing his undisputed position as numero uno in the division it was all open for the Man. The potential to unify the division was there, and Choc drops to middle...
yet he'll go up two divisions for a 'big money' showdown with DG...
sounds like a bottle job to me, eh!
But onto your tedious points (that are apparently lost on me) again...
Why don't you explain what you mean regarding "computer playing people" and "hardcore" then fella, this isn't a game...and how are post counts irrelevant when you obviously spend all of your 'leisure' time spouting you opinion on these forums...obviously when you're not down the local pub discussing boxing, eh!
and while we're at it, the Collins Gem Australian English Dictionary defines forum as the following:
n. meeting or medium for open discussion or debate.
So, whilst you may have directed your two points to Mong, you posted them in an open forum and anyone can comment. If you just wanted to liaise with Mong why didn't you send him a pm ? I was simply pointing you towards some top drawer match ups as your lack of boxing knowledge was evident in your comments...a bit of care in the community Simo, just doing my bit to help those less fortunate...
now that's an arrogant comment, guilty as charged your honour...but its a binary opposition, superiority and inferiority are two sides of the same coin. So pray tell, do I post in a 'superior' manner or do you have an inferiority complex...
Rhetorical question Simo, so the toys can stay safely in the pram...
As Frank Lloyd Wright says:
"early in life I had to choose between honest arrogance and hypocritical humility. I chose the former and have seen no reason to change"
alternatively, if you agree that our environment shapes our identity, as we shape the context in which we exist, then this might interest you...
Nietzsche:
A person unlearns arrogance when he knows he is amongst worthy human beings; being alone fosters presumption. Young people are arrogant because they always associate with their own peers, those who are all really nothing but who would like to be important.
So, am I arrogant because I don't feel that I am among "worthy" posters, and if so does that make you someone who is "nothing but would like to be important". I guess we'll never know, eh!
We don't, and will never, know each other. We're anonymous, masked by the use of nom de guerres, so don't assume you know me by the 'manner' in which I post. I have no interest in your background, opinions, values etc...but mine are clear in my choice of avatar and sig, hence my earlier comment. Even so, you don't understand what I stand for, whilst I don't care what you think...that's a stalemate I believe.
Whilst I relish the opportunity to get into these verbal stoushes with you Simo, surely it's time to put this to bed now. Up to you though, I'm not arsed either way...
by the way, the lie down was enjoyable, but the tea was sh*te as I couldn't get any of those Lipton 'yellow'...the black tea bags just don't cut the mustard with me.
regards