Keyboard VagabondJake Paul's wiki page describes him as a professional boxer instead of exhibitionist.
submitted by
edited
I hear his long-term plan includes racing Usain Bolt when heâs 75 and Paul is 64.
Tyson was definitely fixed.
In what way? You mean the way Paul didnât completely massacre him in round 1 even though he couldâve? Thatâs how exhibitions work. Paul was showing restraint because they wanted to put on a show. Tyson had zero chance of winning that fight so Paul carried him for a few rounds. That isnât a âfixedâ fight. âFixedâ means the outcome was agreed upon before the fight, but that isnât what happened.
đ
You mightâve seen one too many movies if you think Tyson was going to win that fight. Vegas odds were Paul +249 to Tyson -190.
âI do not like Jake Paul and therefore Jake Paul could not have won the fight legitimatelyâ isnât evidence that the fight was fixed. Paul was fighting a man 31 years his senior and several inches shorter. Itâs not rocket science. Everyone (including me) wanted Tyson to knock Paul out, but this isnât Hollywood.
You keep telling yourself that.
Tyson barely threw a punch.
Kid yourself all you want, but donât try and contaminate the rest of the world with your nonsense.
Tyson reportedly interested in Turki Alalshikhâs offer, never got a reply from Jake Paul.
Tyson barely threw a punch because heâs ancient and knew Paul could counterpunch much faster than Tyson could react. Tyson knew he was fighting an uphill battle and chose to be very conservative with his approach. Which was a smart idea. He didnât want to get knocked out like Tyron Woodley did.
Do you actually follow combat sports at all, or do you only show up when a YouTuber is on the fight card? If the latter, I could understand why you might think the way you do. If you actually follow combat sports or have any understanding of how they work, itâs obvious that the fight didnât need to be fixed. Thereâs a reason 58-year-old boxers donât fight 27-year-old boxers. Itâs boring and one-sided.
Again, âI do not like Jake Paulâ is not actual evidence that the fight was fixed. Please feel free to provide any actual evidence you might have supporting your position, though.
đ đ đ¤Ą
Youâre only saving grace is that you obviously donât know what youâre talking about.
And yet you refuted no part of my argument and did nothing to lend credence to your own đ¤
The ignorant party here is you. But by all means continue laboring under the delusion that you understand boxing because you watched the highlights of one YouTuber fighting a geriatric in an exhibition.
What or why would I refute anything you say?
Itâs obvious that you donât really understand boxing, itâs level of corruption and how that exhibition was played out.
You have already staggered with attempts to put words in my mouth/text twice that I didnât mention anything even close to.
I have no interest in going any further with somebody showing and *starting* with those traits.
As I said, you continue thinking what you like, but donât contaminate other peopleâs thoughts with your nonsense.
Professional boxing is corrupt in many, many ways. I never said otherwise.
That said, boxing being corrupt isnât the reason that Tyson lost to Paul. Tyson lost to Paul because Tyson was 58 years old. Again, not rocket science. This was an exhibition. The corruption you speak of is more prevalent in the actual professional circuit, not fights between youtubers and influencers.
And perhaps take your own advice about not âcontaminating other peopleâs thoughtsâ with your unsubstantiated nonsense. Tyson took the fight because the purse was enormous even if he lost, just like everyone who agrees to fight Paul. No one who actually watches boxing was surprised when Paul won.
Again.
For the final time.
You.
Donât.
Understand.
What.
You.
Are.
Talking.
About.
Thatâs a good thing.
You can learn later on.
đ đ đ¤Ą