The Danny Garcia Hate

[JayE]

hes a pressure fighter with power in both hands. garcia has excellent timing and could counter and catch him coming in but if the russian has granite i think he wears garcia out through a war of attrition like what i believe is going to happen in lara/hurd

imo, danny garcia does not have a provo/bradley fight left in him and thats exactly what a fight with kava could and would probably turn into.

Garcia can box well enough against limited pressure fighters. I don't see much that would suggest Kavaliuskas is any more polished than Matthysse was (if anything, I'd say that he is less polished), or that he hits harder. In order for me to think Kavaliuskas is likely to beat Garcia, we need to assume that he is an elite chin and can cut off the ring. That would make him a fairly gifted fighter (and a threat to anyone in the division). I haven't seen nearly enough from him to assume that.

 

[Seano]

It was a drawish fight. I had Garcia winning, but it was very close. I said that Peterson was a good win. It's his only genuinely good win of the last half decade.

I still feel like you guys are extending harsher criticism to Garcia for the same shit every fighter does.

 

[Seano]

Garcia can box well enough against limited pressure fighters. I don't see much that would suggest Kavaliuskas is any more polished than Matthysse was (if anything, I'd say that he is less polished), or that he hits harder. In order for me to think Kavaliuskas is likely to beat Garcia, we need to assume that he is an elite chin and can cut off the ring. That would make him a fairly gifted fighter (and a threat to anyone in the division). I haven't seen nearly enough from him to assume that.

He boxed well against Thurman. Some of the defense in the exchanges in that fight was fun to watch.

This highlight has some really good slo mos of the exchanges.

 

[JayE]

I still feel like you guys are extending harsher criticism to Garcia for the same shit every fighter does.

Some of the criticism he does get is overblown, and a lot of people do forget that he does actually have one of the more impressive resumes (just in terms of who he has fought) of any active fighter still close to the elite level in the sport. Still, when you go from his JWW run (Morales to Matthysse) to only having two fights against genuinely good fighters over nearly a 5 year period, some criticism is in order.

 

[BluntTrauma21]

BS. Garcia beat Peterson. You can't make up results to suit your argument.

Settle down Seano, I never said Lamont beat him, just that many ppl, not me, but there were others who thought Lamont deserved the nod or at least a draw. It was very close. Don't put words in my mouth.

 

[borntoloseNOT]

He boxed well against Thurman. Some of the defense in the exchanges in that fight was fun to watch.

This highlight has some really good slo mos of the exchanges.

You had Garcia winning this fight, right?

 

[BusterKeaton]

Garcia looked beatable and at points in matches he looks beatable and maybe looks like he doesnt have great power but then lands a great punch. he is hard to gauge how good he is but he is better than most give him credit for. the thurman fight was close.

 

[ProBoxingInsidr]

just had shawn porter on our show. he said of all the people he has fought, or might fight, danny garcia is the only one he doesnt like. that includes thurman and broner

 

[eternaldarkness]

the fight with thurman sums it up. never seen so many swinging punches between two high level boxers since firpo vs dempsey. he does not have an aesthetically pleasing punching style.

 

[nastyleft]

You're joking right? Kick his Dad to the curb because hes racist? So you think somebody should kick their Dad to the curb because he said some racially insensitive crap. You must be a liberal.

Not directed at you just wanna say this while you're on the subject:

Guys for the record, calling someone a "bitch-ass ni@#a" is not racist. It's in an entirely different context. If you think it is racist, you clearly have no concept of the culture or what that phrase means, and just need to shut the hell up.

 

[The Can Opener]

I still feel like you guys are extending harsher criticism to Garcia for the same shit every fighter does.

Yeah when people do it to Garcia you can't fathom how they feel that way but when you do the same thing on a way harsher level to Lomanchenko it's totally fine.

You'll defend Garcia versus EVERYONE because you say that's what fighters do but you'll shit on Loma against Rigo/Walters/Russel until you're blue in the face.

 

[quincy k]

Garcia can box well enough against limited pressure fighters. I don't see much that would suggest Kavaliuskas is any more polished than Matthysse was (if anything, I'd say that he is less polished), or that he hits harder. In order for me to think Kavaliuskas is likely to beat Garcia, we need to assume that he is an elite chin and can cut off the ring. That would make him a fairly gifted fighter (and a threat to anyone in the division). I haven't seen nearly enough from him to assume that.

i dont think the danny garcia that fought lucas matthysse exists. imo, danny is getting long in the tooth as is lucas. both of those fighter are no longer capable of the fight they had four years ago.

kavaliuskus and garcia are not going to fight anyways so no need to duscuss it. better to talk about a garcia/ortiz or alexander fight because thats who danny is going to fight next

maybe even a herrera rematch because the garcia camp can try and sell the puerto rican/mexican angle again and it being unsettled business

 

[Seano]

Yeah when people do it to Garcia you can't fathom how they feel that way but when you do the same thing on a way harsher level to Lomanchenko it's totally fine.

You'll defend Garcia versus EVERYONE because you say that's what fighters do but you'll shit on Loma against Rigo/Walters/Russel until you're blue in the face.

Lomachenko is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Thanks.

You have guys calling him the best ever, p4p greatest. For what? His resume is weaker than Garcia's. Lomachenko lost to a journeyman but for some reason gets rewarded with all time great status. Garcia takes a couple of tuneups and he's a joke.

Really, thanks for pointing out that example. I hadn't even thought of it, obvious as it is.

 

[Seano]

Settle down Seano, I never said Lamont beat him, just that many ppl, not me, but there were others who thought Lamont deserved the nod or at least a draw. It was very close. Don't put words in my mouth.

I'd like to see some legit arguments. It doesn't really matter if people had a different score. He won. I thought Garcia won that fight so where does that get us? Uh-huh and nuh-uh?

 

[The Can Opener]

Lomachenko is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Thanks.

You have guys calling him the best ever, p4p greatest. For what? His resume is weaker than Garcia's. Lomachenko lost to a journeyman but for some reason gets rewarded with all time great status. Garcia takes a couple of tuneups and he's a joke.

Really, thanks for pointing out that example. I hadn't even thought of it, obvious as it is.

Ok I'll play.

You say Loma has a weaker resume but he has been fighting as a professional for only 5 years compared to Danny who has been fighting for 11 years. Obviously the guy with more than twice as much time as a pro should have a better resume but look at the numbers.

Loma has 11 professional fights total. His opponents combined records are 308 wins against 27 losses.

Danny Garcia in his first 11 fights fought opponents with a total of 15 wins and 30 losses.

Yet you still shit all over Loma just because you feel like it.

The moral of the story is people are gonna dislike whoever they want just like you do. Sometimes they have legit reasons like Danny avoiding every top fighter he can for the last 5 years besides Thuirman and sometimes just like you they don't have legit reasons but it's boxing. Everyone picks favorites and picks people to root against. The thing is most of us admit it while you skew facts and twist everything you can to try and prove your opinion is better than someone else's. It's not.

 

[Seano]

Ok I'll play.

You say Loma has a weaker resume but he has been fighting as a professional for only 5 years compared to Danny who has been fighting for 11 years. Obviously the guy with more than twice as much time as a pro should have a better resume but look at the numbers.

Loma has 11 professional fights total. His opponents combined records are 308 wins against 27 losses.

Danny Garcia in his first 11 fights fought opponents with a total of 15 wins and 30 losses.

Yet you still shit all over Loma just because you feel like it.

The moral of the story is people are gonna dislike whoever they want just like you do. Sometimes they have legit reasons like Danny avoiding every top fighter he can for the last 5 years besides Thuirman and sometimes just like you they don't have legit reasons but it's boxing. Everyone picks favorites and picks people to root against. The thing is most of us admit it while you skew facts and twist everything you can to try and prove your opinion is better than someone else's. It's not.

Matthysse, Khan, Peterson and a loss to Thurman > Than losing to Salido and beating Nicholas Walters and Rigondeaux.

Lomachenko fights a what 38 year old bantam weight moving up 2 weight classes, whoa what a legend. Garcia fights the best in both weight classes and gets shit for a couple of tuneups.

As I said before, Garcia's fights at 147 are typical of fights good fighters take when they move up. A couple of gatekeepers to test the water, an old champ or two and then an elite guy. Thats exactly what he's done. Hearns, Duran, Leonard, - they all took soft fights here and there. Not every opponent was Marvin Hagler. Robinson is literally celebrated because he fought 75 or so of those guys.

I think your attempt at proving my inconsistency backfired miserably here. I'm not claiming Garcia is the best ever. I like the kid but I don't get into nonsense hype like that. A lot of people here do. Lomachenko is already gaining legendary status for cherry picking soft title holders.

 

[BluntTrauma21]

I'd like to see some legit arguments. It doesn't really matter if people had a different score. He won. I thought Garcia won that fight so where does that get us? Uh-huh and nuh-uh?

I already said what I had to say in that /rant post I had. I think it's pretty accurate and all encompassing. If you have an issue with what I posted please tell me and I'll see if I can be more clear as to why I think Danny's criticism is more than fair. It's not like he's actively looking for big fights but getting ducked. Since he beat Matthysse, he's fought Lamont and Thurman for his only legit comp in the past 4.5 years. That is a bit pathetic, imo.

 

[The Can Opener]

Matthysse, Khan, Peterson and a loss to Thurman > Than losing to Salido and beating Nicholas Walters and Rigondeaux.

Lomachenko fights a what 38 year old bantam weight moving up 2 weight classes, whoa what a legend. Garcia fights the best in both weight classes and gets shit for a couple of tuneups.

As I said before, Garcia's fights at 147 are typical of fights good fighters take when they move up. A couple of gatekeepers to test the water, an old champ or two and then an elite guy. Thats exactly what he's done. Hearns, Duran, Leonard, - they all took soft fights here and there. Not every opponent was Marvin Hagler. Robinson is literally celebrated because he fought 75 or so of those guys.

I think your attempt at proving my inconsistency backfired miserably here. I'm not claiming Garcia is the best ever. I like the kid but I don't get into nonsense hype like that. A lot of people here do. Lomachenko is already gaining legendary status for cherry picking soft title holders.

You aren't stupid.

You do understand that Danny Garcia can have a great resume and still spend the majority of 5 years fighting the easiest opponents he possibly can. And that after losing to Thurman he took more than a full year off because Thurman was hurt and Garcia didn't want to fight anyone else in the meantime. And that a bloated Rios was a joke of a fight for a guy that just fought for multiple belts.

You also understand that reasonable people don't consider Loma the best ever. Or think he's some god of boxing. You just take the lamest opinion some idiot spouts and paint EVERYONE with it to try and make your shitty arguments stick. It doesn't work. Loma is a great boxer but he has 11 fights in divisions where even the top opponents aren't the most well known guys.

Obviously Garcia has a better resume. He's been fighting more than twice as long.

Obviously if you compare their first 11 fights Loma fighting guys with 308 wins and 27 losses shits all over Garcia fighting guys with 15 wins and 30 losses.

 

[quincy k]

Matthysse, Khan, Peterson and a loss to Thurman > Than losing to Salido and beating Nicholas Walters and Rigondeaux.

Lomachenko fights a what 38 year old bantam weight moving up 2 weight classes, whoa what a legend. Garcia fights the best in both weight classes and gets shit for a couple of tuneups.

As I said before, Garcia's fights at 147 are typical of fights good fighters take when they move up. A couple of gatekeepers to test the water, an old champ or two and then an elite guy. Thats exactly what he's done. Hearns, Duran, Leonard, - they all took soft fights here and there. Not every opponent was Marvin Hagler. Robinson is literally celebrated because he fought 75 or so of those guys.

I think your attempt at proving my inconsistency backfired miserably here. I'm not claiming Garcia is the best ever. I like the kid but I don't get into nonsense hype like that. A lot of people here do. Lomachenko is already gaining legendary status for cherry picking soft title holders.

garcia couldve fought porter, brook instead of malignaggi and before kell was ruined by golovkin, bradley or pacquioa.

and your gatekeeper theory is hypocritical when it comes to loma. vasyl moved to 130 and immediately fought for the wbo belt that was held by the guy that defeated the only fighter to beat him. then was finally able to get a fight with walters who was the 126 champ.

no cherries for loma.

 

[quincy k]

take out thurman and danny garcias resume is not much different than erislandry laras the last four years. dont know how much better 147 peterson is than 154 vanes, in fact, i would probably take martisirosyan