Some people should not be allowed to Tweet

So, I been doing the Twitter stuff for the forum these last few months, and my oh my do you read some funny Tweets. By and large the guys we follow (which are all boxers,pundits, trainers etc) are as you would expect. Al Bernstein in learned and polite. Paulie is mad, in a good way, Jane Couch insane, but funny.

But Adrian Broner. Man, he is an idiot. Tweets are normally incomprehensible, takes pictures of himself on the toilet. Man really is a child.

Floyd Mayweather Senior has an account. I don't know if it is a spoof because the Tweets I read were so pathetic (about him banging women and just random rubbish) I actually unfollowed him.

Like I say, I enjoy the insight and it's great being able to talk to fighters and trainers. But one or two of them are insane. Ha.

Anyone else follow Twitter?

I should point out I really enjoy Twitterverse, I appreciate this is a bit moany. Who do you guys enjoy?

I do that Floyd Snr account is fake. It was set up by some sad git after the 24/7 episode with Floyd Jnr and Snr arguing.

Broner is a young guy let him enjoy himself. If he wants the world to see him on the throne then good on him. If he's not your cup of tea don't follow him.

SugarRayRussell (PBK) wrote:I do that Floyd Snr account is fake. It was set up by some sad git after the 24/7 episode with Floyd Jnr and Snr arguing.

Broner is a young guy let him enjoy himself. If he wants the world to see him on the throne then good on him. If he's not your cup of tea don't follow him.

Haha, fair enough.

One day Broner will feel like a fool for his tweets. He probably thinks they are only being seen by his friends, birk. Great fighter though.

SugarRayRussell (PBK) wrote:I do that Floyd Snr account is fake. It was set up by some sad git after the 24/7 episode with Floyd Jnr and Snr arguing.

Broner is a young guy let him enjoy himself. If he wants the world to see him on the throne then good on him. If he's not your cup of tea don't follow him.

Exactly. The kid is 22, probably have various women hoping to get a jab from him and he's rolling in moolah. Good luck to the kid. As long as he does the business in the boxing ring he can tweet what he wants.

i tryed tweeter for this exact reason, to follow boxers, but i couldnt tell who was real and who wasnt so gave it up as a bad job.

Does anyone else not hate that news, relations between fighters, and first hand information are dictated by a site where you "tweet?" Twitter makes me sick to the stomach, but its the place to be to find things out now sadly...

No I'm with you Sean, Broner is a complete knob, and he isn't as good as he thinks he is,

Cheers Rodders

Rodney wrote:No I'm with you Sean, Broner is a complete knob, and he isn't as good as he thinks he is,

Cheers Rodders

Here here! The man is ridiculous

Totally agree Sean, cringeworthy, but the young kids might enjoy him, we're getting old pal

Cheers

Rodders

Broner and Ward will be duking it out for P4P #1 within the next 18 months - 2 years. The kid is exceptional.

azania wrote:Broner and Ward will be duking it out for P4P #1 within the next 18 months - 2 years. The kid is exceptional.

So how come you are not criticising him for lining up junk defences like Sykes and Escobedo when he is a world champion and should be fighting the best in his division?

I don't follow the smaller guys as closely as I should. I couldn't tell you who the good fighters are in that division. I know the exciting Ricky Burns moved up and avoided him though.

azania wrote:I don't follow the smaller guys as closely as I should. I couldn't tell you who the good fighters are in that division. I know the exciting Ricky Burns moved up and avoided him though.

Then its a pretty bold prediction to say he will be pound for pound 1 in a few years with Ward! I just dont see why if you are going to continually criticise Canelo for his opposition that Broner isnt going to get the same treatment.

I actually think the opposition for both of them thus far has been acceptable, but if Canelo gets criticised then Broner should get the same.

Burns did and justified it by beating up an old man in Katsidis. Don't question me people bought it.

There is not much at the weight for Broner to fight. Uchiyama and Ao look like good fighters but they are Japanese and they will stay in Japan where they make good money.

Uchiyama can bang a bit Ao doesn't have the power to keep Broner off he's a bit like Eloy Perez who Broner walked through. Uchiyama would be interesting I would fancy Broner but he can bang and can box. He has a very good jab. The WBO aren't recognised in Japan so they don't even recognise Broner as a champ.

The 2 Japanese fighters have no interest in fighting each other neither will go near Broner.

I dont thing its that bold a statement. From whatI've seen of him he looks special. Huge for his weight and I see him moving to LW after is next fight and winning a belt there.

I have never said anything bad about Canelo himself other than I reckon he has a dodgy chin. I've praised him for his boxing but don't buy into the hype. Wh is there at SFW for Broner to fight anyway?

No one read the post above. It's popular to say he fights no ones but there is no one worth fighting. I think he's a future P4P star and so does Floyd Mayweather.

azania wrote:I dont thing its that bold a statement. From whatI've seen of him he looks special. Huge for his weight and I see him moving to LW after is next fight and winning a belt there.

I have never said anything bad about Canelo himself other than I reckon he has a dodgy chin. I've praised him for his boxing but don't buy into the hype. Wh is there at SFW for Broner to fight anyway?

Well if you say you dont follow the lower weights, and that you are not sure who he should be fighting then to me it is pretty bold to say Broner will be duking it out with Ward for number 1 spot in a few years. Im not saying your neccessarily wrong but if you dont follow the weights then I dont know why you would be so confident?

You have also been very vocal in your criticisms of Alvarez and his opposition. Almost anytime he is mentioned you generally have something negative to say about him. You justify it by saying as a world champion Alvarez should be fighting the top guys in the division - Cotto, Mayweather etc. Which is fine, but Broner is also a world champion so by your own argument then lining up defences against guys like Sykes - which fell through or his next opponent Escobedo are eqaully worthy of the criticisms you make against Alvarez. To the point where I suspect its down to just not liking Alvarez but liking Broner due to his flashy persona.

I actually agree with you that Broner is a good prospect, I am just highlighting that he is in a similar boat to Canelo and yet you seem to have different rules for each. I think given the stage they are at in their careers the opposition so far for both of them has been decent.

azania wrote:I dont thing its that bold a statement. From whatI've seen of him he looks special. Huge for his weight and I see him moving to LW after is next fight and winning a belt there.

I have never said anything bad about Canelo himself other than I reckon he has a dodgy chin. I've praised him for his boxing but don't buy into the hype. Wh is there at SFW for Broner to fight anyway?

You have said plenty about canelo's level of opposition in the past and all of which was negative, even when he agreed to fight Williams. Broners level of oppostition has been worse to date.

I agree that Broner has a very bright future. My dream fight for him would be vs salido. Salido is a world class fighter and only gets beat by other world class fighters. Broner struggled with de Leon, salido is better bigger and fresher. He will put broner under real pressure and will let us see where he stands atm

I've seen him fight and he is awesome. Tremendous punch variety and punch power. Great defense and offensive.

I have been vocal in my criticism of Alvarez's opposition. I always tamper my comments with praise for him as a boxer. Read the threads again. My one criticism is that I believe he is chinny.

Broner is a better all round fighter than Saul from what I've seen.

To be honest I have hardly seen Sykes fight and were that to have been a world title fight, it would be more laughable that Saul defending against Mosely. Still doesn;t escape my opinion that Broney will be P4P #1 or 2 within 2 years. Saul will not be the best in his division. Lara will be.

WHU_Champo_League_in_7Yrs wrote:

azania wrote:I dont thing its that bold a statement. From whatI've seen of him he looks special. Huge for his weight and I see him moving to LW after is next fight and winning a belt there.

I have never said anything bad about Canelo himself other than I reckon he has a dodgy chin. I've praised him for his boxing but don't buy into the hype. Wh is there at SFW for Broner to fight anyway?

You have said plenty about canelo's level of opposition in the past and all of which was negative, even when he agreed to fight Williams. Broners level of oppostition has been worse to date.

I agree that Broner has a very bright future. My dream fight for him would be vs salido. Salido is a world class fighter and only gets beat by other world class fighters. Broner struggled with de Leon, salido is better bigger and fresher. He will put broner under real pressure and will let us see where he stands atm

Yes I have been critical of his opposition. When SSM was mooted as an opponent for Khan the knives were sharpened. Then the following week, he was good for Saul. SSM was shot against Floyd, let alone Manny. He was a walking corpse for Saul. But that doesn't mean I don't rate him as I do. He will be very good. The second best in his division behind Lara.

azania wrote:I've seen him fight and he is awesome. Tremendous punch variety and punch power. Great defense and offensive.

I have been vocal in my criticism of Alvarez's opposition. I always tamper my comments with praise for him as a boxer. Read the threads again. My one criticism is that I believe he is chinny.

Broner is a better all round fighter than Saul from what I've seen.

To be honest I have hardly seen Sykes fight and were that to have been a world title fight, it would be more laughable that Saul defending against Mosely. Still doesn;t escape my opinion that Broney will be P4P #1 or 2 within 2 years. Saul will not be the best in his division. Lara will be.

Nobody is going to give Lara the opportunity to be the best in his division. He is going to be avoided like the bubonic plague, and the excuses the others in his division make will be dreadful.

azania wrote:

WHU_Champo_League_in_7Yrs wrote:

azania wrote:I dont thing its that bold a statement. From whatI've seen of him he looks special. Huge for his weight and I see him moving to LW after is next fight and winning a belt there.

I have never said anything bad about Canelo himself other than I reckon he has a dodgy chin. I've praised him for his boxing but don't buy into the hype. Wh is there at SFW for Broner to fight anyway?

You have said plenty about canelo's level of opposition in the past and all of which was negative, even when he agreed to fight Williams. Broners level of oppostition has been worse to date.

I agree that Broner has a very bright future. My dream fight for him would be vs salido. Salido is a world class fighter and only gets beat by other world class fighters. Broner struggled with de Leon, salido is better bigger and fresher. He will put broner under real pressure and will let us see where he stands atm

Yes I have been critical of his opposition. When SSM was mooted as an opponent for Khan the knives were sharpened. Then the following week, he was good for Saul. SSM was shot against Floyd, let alone Manny. He was a walking corpse for Saul. But that doesn't mean I don't rate him as I do. He will be very good. The second best in his division behind Lara.

No-one said that Mosley is a good fight for Saul, you just think that.

Everyone said in the build up that its a gimme to sell tickets and make Alvarez a name in the states. No-one wanted Saul to fight Mosley but tere was nothing we could do about that.

Don't act like its just the Mosley fight you've been critical of. When Canelo-Williams was announced you said williams was shot and "shouldnt be for a world title fight". Williams would have been head and shoulders above anything broner has come against. Once again it shows how biased you are against Canelo

Yep, I thought Williams was past his best and was there as an opponent designed to pad Saul's record with named fighters who are beatable.

People on here said it was (SSM) a good fight for Saul.

azania wrote:Yep, I thought Williams was past his best and was there as an opponent designed to pad Saul's record with named fighters who are beatable.

People on here said it was (SSM) a good fight for Saul.

Very few people actually said that Mosley was a good fight for Canelo. But you bring it up so often (along with the Khan comparison) that you make it seem like everyone was praising the fight when most people saw it for what it was. Had it been a headliner, I think even more people would have been critical. But it was a sideshow fight on an undercard.

Williams would have a been good fight for Canelo to take. Only you seem to think he was shot and the concensus with most people was that while Williams might not be up there with Cotto/Mayweather he was a solidly ranked guy with a proven level of pedigree and somke good wins to his name.

If Williams is a bad choice of opponent what do you make of Broners next defence?

People on here did. My point about Saul is that he was gifted the belt. Had that happened to JCC, his first defense was a gimme against Rhodes. His second defense was no better if not worse. Williams was chosen because he is beatable and a name. Yet he is touted as a world champion. Yes he is talented and good, but dont pi$$ on me and tell me its raining.

If Broner's next fight is against Sykes, then that's a joke. Doesn;t take away from his talent and potential. As a world title fight, it's an insult to the belt.

azania wrote:Yep, I thought Williams was past his best and was there as an opponent designed to pad Saul's record with named fighters who are beatable.

People on here said it was (SSM) a good fight for Saul.

You said it yourself that Lara is probably the guy in the division, then why then is Williams shot because he lost to him. Williams has shown he is a sucker for the southpaw straight left. He came off a heavy KO and did alright against a dangerous opponent.

You started the manny isn't slipping thread based on JMM being a great fighter who has an awful style for pacquiao. Why is Williams slipping after losing to a very good fighter in Lara when he has struggled with that style with Martinez

Williams has been in too many wars and has been off the pace visibly. Dangerous but beatable opponent.

azania wrote:Williams has been in too many wars and has been off the pace visibly. Dangerous but beatable opponent.

Pacquiao has had 20 more fights, is 2 or 3 years older and has been in as many wars and has been knocked officially more times than Williams. Stop being a hypocrite and admit that Williams in hindsight deserved to be a world title fight and a good one at that

FYI, broner may have been more impressive than Alvarez to date but remember he almost got beat by de Leon who has been wiped out at featherweight by te ether fighters he's fought and had NO resume at 130lbs. At least Canelo won a shut out vs Hatton

Paq has been winning. Williams had not. Big difference. I haven't said that Broner is a belt holder like Saul. I have said that his potential fight with Sykes for a world belt is a joke. Williams did not deserve a crack at a world belt. I said at the time it was a good fight but not world title material. A contender fight yes.

azania wrote:Paq has been winning. Williams had not. Big difference. I haven't said that Broner is a belt holder like Saul. I have said that his potential fight with Sykes for a world belt is a joke. Williams did not deserve a crack at a world belt. I said at the time it was a good fight but not world title material. A contender fight yes.

Um williams has been winning, Lara might have been robbed but so was Marquez. Williams lost once to martinez, a fighter too dangerous for cotto, mayweather etc so he had to move up, no shame in that. The fact he beat Martinez I the first place (although very close) is better than manny's wins since or even surpassing cotto.

There is no logic to suggest why he isn't world title material

Im going to have to disagree with you on this one azania with regards Williams and Mosley.

The overwhelming majority of people not just on this site but others aswell seemed to see Mosley/Alvarez for exactly the kind of fight it was. I saw very few comments saying it was a good fight and I think you are just using a small minority to try and say there were people saying it was a good fight. There may have been one or two but overall not many at all. Having scanned back over a couple of threads regarding the fight my position on that hasnt changed.

With Williams, he was coming off a decent if unspectacular win over Ishida and other than Lara, Cotto and Mayweather I dont think there was really anyone else noticeably more qualified for a shot. I include Molina and Kirkland in that. Dont agree Williams was visibly shot and I dont even think he was all that big a name or a draw in any event. Especially for Canelo who could generate support fighting almost anyone. Williams reputation has actually been traditionally of a guy that was low reward/high risk rather than vice versa.

But the original basis for my point was simply just that you have been so overwhelmingly critical of Canelo that it seems inconsistent to not be for Broner. It has the effect of seemingly like you just dont like Canelo but like Broner based on personality reasons, and thus they are subjected to different levels of consistency.

WHU_Champo_League_in_7Yrs wrote:

azania wrote:Paq has been winning. Williams had not. Big difference. I haven't said that Broner is a belt holder like Saul. I have said that his potential fight with Sykes for a world belt is a joke. Williams did not deserve a crack at a world belt. I said at the time it was a good fight but not world title material. A contender fight yes.

Um williams has been winning, Lara might have been robbed but so was Marquez. Williams lost once to martinez, a fighter too dangerous for cotto, mayweather etc so he had to move up, no shame in that. The fact he beat Martinez I the first place (although very close) is better than manny's wins since or even surpassing cotto.

There is no logic to suggest why he isn't world title material

Oh I agree that Matquez was robbed. As I said ion that thread, he has Paq's number. Williams has been slipping and shipping too many punches and he was on the way down hence he was pitched against Saul. I don't think anyone coming off a loss (robbery) is world title material.

manos de piedra wrote:Im going to have to disagree with you on this one azania with regards Williams and Mosley.

The overwhelming majority of people not just on this site but others aswell seemed to see Mosley/Alvarez for exactly the kind of fight it was. I saw very few comments saying it was a good fight and I think you are just using a small minority to try and say there were people saying it was a good fight. There may have been one or two but overall not many at all. Having scanned back over a couple of threads regarding the fight my position on that hasnt changed.

With Williams, he was coming off a decent if unspectacular win over Ishida and other than Lara, Cotto and Mayweather I dont think there was really anyone else noticeably more qualified for a shot. I include Molina and Kirkland in that. Dont agree Williams was visibly shot and I dont even think he was all that big a name or a draw in any event. Especially for Canelo who could generate support fighting almost anyone. Williams reputation has actually been traditionally of a guy that was low reward/high risk rather than vice versa.

But the original basis for my point was simply just that you have been so overwhelmingly critical of Canelo that it seems inconsistent to not be for Broner. It has the effect of seemingly like you just dont like Canelo but like Broner based on personality reasons, and thus they are subjected to different levels of consistency.

Can you tell me where I have been critical of Saul and praising Broner? What I have done is to be critical of their level of opponents yet praising their boxing skill. I did say that Broner will be contesting the p4P standings with Ward and Saul will be contesting the #1 at LMW with Lara.

"Once again they put Alvarez up against another fighter on the way down. What a joke champion they're making this kid to be.." (Re his fight with Williams).

Canelo is a world champion. He is supposed to be fighting the best. For me its that simple.

I have been very critical of Alvarez's defences because the opposition has always been sub par. Yet he gets excused due to his age. If you're good enough, you're old enough. Simple. The kid's supposedly a world champ. He should be fighting the best not padding his record against sub standard opposition because they have a name value attached to them..

I have no time for so called world champs padding their records and learning their trade. Once you are world champ, you fight the best regardless of age..

All of these comments are actually just off one single thread. There are many more I can assure you. Its just that with comments like these I find it surprising that when Broner announces defences against Gary Sykes or Vinny Escobedo that you dont vent the same kind of anger.

manos de piedra wrote:"Once again they put Alvarez up against another fighter on the way down. What a joke champion they're making this kid to be.." (Re his fight with Williams).

Canelo is a world champion. He is supposed to be fighting the best. For me its that simple.

I have been very critical of Alvarez's defences because the opposition has always been sub par. Yet he gets excused due to his age. If you're good enough, you're old enough. Simple. The kid's supposedly a world champ. He should be fighting the best not padding his record against sub standard opposition because they have a name value attached to them..

I have no time for so called world champs padding their records and learning their trade. Once you are world champ, you fight the best regardless of age..

All of these comments are actually just off one single thread. There are many more I can assure you. Its just that with comments like these I find it surprising that when Broner announces defences against Gary Sykes or Vinny Escobedo that you dont vent the same kind of anger.

As you can see from your first quite, it is a criticism of those backing Saul and not the boxer. Other one was critical of his defenses and not the boxer. Other is critical of his record being padded and not the boxer. SSM was a padding win and Williams imo was set up to be another.

On this thread I called the Sykes fight a joke. I have never heard of Escobedo or pay much attention to the smaller guys.

You obviously missed the parts where I was full of praise for Saul in those threads. He is a good fighter and will prove himself to be the second best in his division. Broner will be P4P #1 or 2.

azania wrote:

WHU_Champo_League_in_7Yrs wrote:

azania wrote:Paq has been winning. Williams had not. Big difference. I haven't said that Broner is a belt holder like Saul. I have said that his potential fight with Sykes for a world belt is a joke. Williams did not deserve a crack at a world belt. I said at the time it was a good fight but not world title material. A contender fight yes.

Um williams has been winning, Lara might have been robbed but so was Marquez. Williams lost once to martinez, a fighter too dangerous for cotto, mayweather etc so he had to move up, no shame in that. The fact he beat Martinez I the first place (although very close) is better than manny's wins since or even surpassing cotto.

There is no logic to suggest why he isn't world title material

Oh I agree that Matquez was robbed. As I said ion that thread, he has Paq's number. Williams has been slipping and shipping too many punches and he was on the way down hence he was pitched against Saul. I don't think anyone coming off a loss (robbery) is world title material.

He beat ishida comfortably last time out, the guy who wiped out Kirkland and did pretty well vs a huge middleweight in Pirog.

Ishida caught Kirkland cold and finished him off. He was an opponent who forgot to read the script and got put back immediately. Doesn't mean much. The WIlliams fight is a good fight, but not world title material. A good crossroads scrap.

You have also frequently refferred to him being chinny, having poor footwork, having little head movement, questioned his power at the top level and have described him as an accident waiting to happen as soon as he steps up.

And in any event, my issue was not regarding his actual ability, but the reason you are so continuosly vocal about his opposition and career. Are we to expect the same criticisms then of Broner anytime he is mentioned?

Were it only the odd time you did it to Alvarez it wouldnt really surprise me much. But almost anytime the guy is mentioned on here you come out all guns blazing on him.

manos de piedra wrote:You have also frequently refferred to him being chinny, having poor footwork, having little head movement, questioned his power at the top level and have described him as an accident waiting to happen as soon as he steps up.

And in any event, my issue was not regarding his actual ability, but the reason you are so continuosly vocal about his opposition and career. Are we to expect the same criticisms then of Broner anytime he is mentioned?

Were it only the odd time you did it to Alvarez it wouldnt really surprise me much. But almost anytime the guy is mentioned on here you come out all guns blazing on him.

I don't recall me questioning his footwork. I have said he was chinny and stand by it. And when someone clocks his chin with authority I believe he will go.

If Broner is havin his record padded by jokers like Sykes then yes I will be vocal. As I did with Saul, I will balance my criticisms of is opponents with questions about is ability.

Saul is hypes to the max by GBP. Probalby wanting to sell im as this ginger haired mexican baby faced killer. He's a belt holder. Fight the best. When I hear them say he's not ready for X or Y, then I question why he's a so called world champ. It cheapens an already cheap belt more. At least Broner has the micky mouse belt in the WBO.

azania wrote:Ishida caught Kirkland cold and finished him off. He was an opponent who forgot to read the script and got put back immediately. Doesn't mean much. The WIlliams fight is a good fight, but not world title material. A good crossroads scrap.

I was pointing out that he wasn't getting a title fight on the back of a robbery. Ishida inst anything special but at least he can get the W. You can't criticise Williams for dominating him. Your argument has no substance, your clutching at straws that aren't there

I'm not criticising Williams for dominating him. I'm saying that Williams didn';t do enough to earn a title shot. It would have been a good fight anyway, but not a world title fight. We're talking about the supposed best in the division and these 2 were not.

Why does/did Lara deserve the shot?

According to you he drew a fight with a fighter who is nothing special then beat a 'shot' fighter. In your opinion he shouldnt deserve a shot right

Molina beat cintron and that's it, he drew vs Lara and lost to Kirkland, he doesn't deserve the shot either and doesn't have a fanbase

Kirkland got iced by ishida and if Angulo was smarter he wouldnt have gassed. He was losing to Molina before he won controversially and is injured.

We can pick holes in every opposition in every world title fight. Did froch deserve a shot after coming off a loss to ward?

Let's exclude cotto and mayweather also as they are the ones who will make the fight not Canelo. They have more influence than he does. They will choose him, it's not up to him to choose them, that's not how it works.

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:You have also frequently refferred to him being chinny, having poor footwork, having little head movement, questioned his power at the top level and have described him as an accident waiting to happen as soon as he steps up.

And in any event, my issue was not regarding his actual ability, but the reason you are so continuosly vocal about his opposition and career. Are we to expect the same criticisms then of Broner anytime he is mentioned?

Were it only the odd time you did it to Alvarez it wouldnt really surprise me much. But almost anytime the guy is mentioned on here you come out all guns blazing on him.

I don't recall me questioning his footwork. I have said he was chinny and stand by it. And when someone clocks his chin with authority I believe he will go.

If Broner is havin his record padded by jokers like Sykes then yes I will be vocal. As I did with Saul, I will balance my criticisms of is opponents with questions about is ability.

Saul is hypes to the max by GBP. Probalby wanting to sell im as this ginger haired mexican baby faced killer. He's a belt holder. Fight the best. When I hear them say he's not ready for X or Y, then I question why he's a so called world champ. It cheapens an already cheap belt more. At least Broner has the micky mouse belt in the WBO.

Relatively few of the title holders fight the best of a continual basis these days which is why I dont understand what it is about Alvarez in particular that bothers you. I selected Broner as an example because he is a fighter you rate and like and is in a similar position as Alvarez.

The only positive I read before the Mosley fight was that it was a test of his power, were he to have knocked him out that would be a fairly big statement regardless of him being shot to pieces, being the first man to stop the iron chinned Sugar Shane Mosley would have put him on the radar of Mayweather and Cotto.

There wasn't anything wrong with the Williams fight outside of Cotto and Mayweather he's just as good as anyone else at the weight with a proven pedigree at elite level, you could really nitpick and mention Lara but you then have a list of one who deserve a shot more than him.

Broner does look good but I tend to reserve judgement on fighters until they step up a level and that includes Alvarez, Juanma Lopez taught us a valuable lesson that looking impressive beating decent opposition doesn't mean you can do it against top level opposition.

Very early days yet for Broner and Alvarez but they have a long way to go before they are at the level of Andre Ward who has proven pedigree, he's undoubtably the top man in a very competitive division not the best of the rest like Alvarez or ruling over nobody like Broner.

It's slightly impossible for Alvarez to fight the best when they are far bigger names than him in Cotto and Mayweather, he has zero say in those fights happening although I do see him fighting Cotto soon in a huge Puerto Rico vs Mexico money spinner.

There are occasions when fighting the best isn't as simple as you make out, before he fought Mayweather a fight with Cotto was a near impossibility because the ructions between GBP and Top Rank, in the meantime he fought his mandatory against Rhodes, a joke against Mosley then had a very credible fight with Williams lined up before the awful accident.

i followed broner for a while but his tweets are utter nonsense.

Isn't Escobedo the number one contender? In which case he has to fight him or risk being stripped.

BoxingFan88 wrote:Isn't Escobedo the number one contender? In which case he has to fight him or risk being stripped.

The money maker hardly gets stripped unless its to make way for another money maker.