The Fearless predictor returns !!!!!!

BJS ko 10 Eubank

Quigg ko 2 No mark

McDonnell w12 No mark

Joshua ko 1 Sprott

Cleverley ko 11 Bellew

Fury W12 Chisora

Wlad ko6 Pulev

Khan ko 8 Alexander

Degale ko 7 Periban....................

Get in touch with your bookmaker.....The fearless Predictor's balls are never wrong....

I'll go with BJS pts.. He looks beatable BJS but hard to make a solid argument for Eubank as he really is an unknown quantity but he looked poor against Dave's mate Bradley Pryce.

Quigg and Mcdonnell I'll not predict as haven't the foggiest who they are fighting.

Joshua v Sprott: I'll go a round longer than you Truss and say 2

Cleverly Ko 5 Bellew: Cleverly not a big puncher but got a feeling Bellew going to get cleaned out.

Fury PTS Chisora: 118-110 something like that

Wlad PTS Pulev: Don't know a great deal about Pulev but he looks ok for todays standard. Estimating between 950-1000 clinches in that one.

Alexander KO 11 Khan: Many making Khan a heavy favourite but I'm not sure why on form, I'm not fooled by Collazo result, think Alexander has better form and only has been beaten when roughed up.

Degale PTS Periban: Degale just a little too busy and good for Periban

Pacman PTS Algeri: The size difference in this one looks ridiculous , Algeri looks decent but Pacman still a premier fighter.

Korobov KO6 Lee: Lee gets caught flush far too often these days.

Andrade PTS Charlo: Cagey affair but Andrade looks a little more talented.

Cheers, Rodders

I think Algieri's eye is shot Roddy........Be closed by round six...........I remember that Paul Hoko having terrible problems after Villasana...and his eye/eyes was no worse than Algieri's...

Korobov I'll agree with you there..

Clev ko 5 is a bold one..............and Alexander can't see that Mate..Lack of power will hurt him..

Good stuff..

BJS points

Quigg to knockout a flyweight

McDonnell to ko some random bloke

Joshua in 2 (will carry his new mate a round)

Cleverly close points decision

Khan to win on points (possibly be a robbery)

Fury tko Chisora in round 9 (bold but I think one of them will fall and am going Chisora to get stopped)

Pacman to win by stoppage 5th round

couldn't be bothered to do the rest

Eubank Jr KO 1 (first minute)

Quigg KO 4

Mc D - UD

Joshua - First punch of the fight KO

Bellew - KO 4

Chisora - KO 5

Wlad - UD so boring I watch repeats of X Factor

Alexander - KO 5

Degale - Snoozefest UD

Eubanks will ko Saunders early say R2 or 3.

Joshua will be taken a couple of rounds say 4th round stoppage

Fury will beat Chis via decision

Khan v Alexander??? hard 1 to call. Alexander CAN ko Khan no doubt and Khan has problems with Black fighters but Khan's new approach might be enough for a 12 round points win.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Eubanks will ko Saunders early say R2 or 3.

Joshua will be taken a couple of rounds say 4th round stoppage

Fury will beat Chis via decision

Khan v Alexander??? hard 1 to call. Alexander CAN ko Khan no doubt and Khan has problems with Black fighters but Khan's new approach might be enough for a 12 round points win.

What the F*CK does that mean...and what colour is Zab Judah again?

And if Sprott is still standing after three rounds, Joshua wants taking out back and shooting.

Eubank SD (no idea though - as said, the kid's an unknown quantity so he could get blown out, just think he might be decent)

Quigg KO2 (know nothing about who he's fighting but, it's Quigg, so he'll be pony)

McDonnell UD (meh)

Joshua KO1 (even quicker than Ali could)

Bellew KO9 (think Kov cracked Clev's chin and Bellew will find it at some point)

Chisora KO7 (they're both 'improved' but Chis was so poor in the first one and Fury's sloppier and more open than a wh...'s c...)

Wlad KO10 (the usual, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Pulev either win or at least give him a real test)

Khan UD (pit-pat-jib-jab wide pts win unless he gets pancacked)

DeGale UD (think will be at least half-competitive, but DeGale too skillful... and annoying)

Groves KO2 (a keep-warm fight, but this guy's been stopped before unlike, ReBrasse who had an unusually robust face)

Manny UD (think Algeri's too big for Pacman to stop him)

Wait a minute, Khan struggles with black fighters?

First of all it's a fairly disgraceful bit of racial stereotyping but second of all it has foundations based on anything.

Can I also ask what that means OneTwo, seems a ridiculous thing to type/say. And even worse to try and use it as a reason?????????????????????????

Perhaps ONOTWO's using a black keyboard. I struggle with those, too.

You've got to be utterly desperate for some kind of reaction to type something like that Onetwo. Here it is, you're dumb.

Told you he was a c*nt!

Bredis Prescott - BLACK
Lamont Peterson - BLACK

Apart from Garcia Khan has beaten the rest quite easily. Its got nothing to do with color I could say that a certain fighter has problems facing Mexicans its a style of fighting. Geez you guys and your PC attitude to everything get off your high horses and stop making this thread about race. Its just a fact that Khan has struggled in the past.

Also Khan is trained by a black trainer

OneTwo is a poster who categorises fighters by the colour of their skin; he has done it before, so not really a surprise that he continues with his racial outlook.

Duty281 wrote:OneTwo is a poster who categorises fighters by the colour of their skin; he has done it before, so not really a surprise that he continues with his racial outlook.

When have I done this????????????????????

supply some evidence or admit you are lying.........again.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

Duty281 wrote:OneTwo is a poster who categorises fighters by the colour of their skin; he has done it before, so not really a surprise that he continues with his racial outlook.

When have I done this????????????????????

supply some evidence or admit you are lying.........again.

On a (now) removed thread some months ago when you asked about the differences between white and black fighters.

I am sure Rowley would remember as I believe he removed it.

Maybe he meant "slick black fighters"? For.whatever reason, this is an expected part of boxing lexicon.

Duty281 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

Duty281 wrote:OneTwo is a poster who categorises fighters by the colour of their skin; he has done it before, so not really a surprise that he continues with his racial outlook.

When have I done this????????????????????

supply some evidence or admit you are lying.........again.

On a (now) removed thread some months ago when you asked about the differences between white and black fighters.

I am sure Rowley would remember as I believe he removed it.

Nonsense

How handy that its been ''removed''

Can't remember the thread but are you sure the thread was binned on the grounds that the OP was being offensive or was it that some tw*nk decided to see it as offensive and wrote something insulting????? and thereby had the thread banned???????

kingraf wrote:Maybe he meant "slick black fighters"? For.whatever reason, this is an expected part of boxing lexicon.

That IS what I meant raf but its no more insulting then saying teek tough Mexican.

No racial inclination what so ever.

I am black myself.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

kingraf wrote:Maybe he meant "slick black fighters"? For.whatever reason, this is an expected part of boxing lexicon.

That IS what I meant raf but its no more insulting then saying teek tough Mexican.

No racial inclination what so ever.

I am black myself.

Well there you are then: categorising fighters by the colour of their skin, a perfect example.

And I never said it were insulting.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

kingraf wrote:Maybe he meant "slick black fighters"? For.whatever reason, this is an expected part of boxing lexicon.

That IS what I meant raf but its no more insulting then saying teek tough Mexican.

No racial inclination what so ever.

I am black myself.

So if Khan loses to Mayweather it is because he's slick, black, better than Khan or a combination of all three?

What if he loses to Kell Brook, is it because Kell is slick and black or because Khan is suddenly shyte?

However, Khan did get dropped by both Michael Gomez and Willie Limond who are as white as white can be so maybe you should amend that statement to "Khan struggles with black fighters..and white fighters...and given he lost to Garcia and was shaken up by Maidana...fighters of various shades...so just fighters basically!!"

Duty281 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

kingraf wrote:Maybe he meant "slick black fighters"? For.whatever reason, this is an expected part of boxing lexicon.

That IS what I meant raf but its no more insulting then saying teek tough Mexican.

No racial inclination what so ever.

I am black myself.

Well there you are then: categorising fighters by the colour of their skin, a perfect example.

And I never said it were insulting.

F*cking hell DUTY, how Yorkshire do you sound?

I personally think we are living in too sensitive times...

Whilst Khan doesn't have a problem with black fighters.. it's not for some to decide what the rest of us should find offensive...

I find that offensive in itself !!

Now let's move on..

DAVE667 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

kingraf wrote:Maybe he meant "slick black fighters"? For.whatever reason, this is an expected part of boxing lexicon.

That IS what I meant raf but its no more insulting then saying teek tough Mexican.

No racial inclination what so ever.

I am black myself.

So if Khan loses to Mayweather it is because he's slick, black, better than Khan or a combination of all three?

What if he loses to Kell Brook, is it because Kell is slick and black or because Khan is suddenly shyte?

However, Khan did get dropped by both Michael Gomez and Willie Limond who are as white as white can be so maybe you should amend that statement to "Khan struggles with black fighters..and white fighters...and given he lost to Garcia and was shaken up by Maidana...fighters of various shades...so just fighters basically!!"

Ok amended as requested.

DAVE667 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

kingraf wrote:Maybe he meant "slick black fighters"? For.whatever reason, this is an expected part of boxing lexicon.

That IS what I meant raf but its no more insulting then saying teek tough Mexican.

No racial inclination what so ever.

I am black myself.

Well there you are then: categorising fighters by the colour of their skin, a perfect example.

And I never said it were insulting.

F*cking hell DUTY, how Yorkshire do you sound?

That were wasted on thee, lad.

I'm offended by you telling us to move on...it's our right as black people (slick or otherwise) white people (fat and stupid or otherwise) and all different colours (tall, short, smelly, imbued with a crippling sense of ennui or otherwise) to take offense irrespective of what's been said.

ONETWO struggles with not saying stupid things

Duty281 wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

kingraf wrote:Maybe he meant "slick black fighters"? For.whatever reason, this is an expected part of boxing lexicon.

That IS what I meant raf but its no more insulting then saying teek tough Mexican.

No racial inclination what so ever.

I am black myself.

Well there you are then: categorising fighters by the colour of their skin, a perfect example.

And I never said it were insulting.

F*cking hell DUTY, how Yorkshire do you sound?

That were wasted on thee, lad.

Waste not, want not!

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

kingraf wrote:Maybe he meant "slick black fighters"? For.whatever reason, this is an expected part of boxing lexicon.

That IS what I meant raf but its no more insulting then saying teek tough Mexican.

No racial inclination what so ever.

I am black myself.

So if Khan loses to Mayweather it is because he's slick, black, better than Khan or a combination of all three?

What if he loses to Kell Brook, is it because Kell is slick and black or because Khan is suddenly shyte?

However, Khan did get dropped by both Michael Gomez and Willie Limond who are as white as white can be so maybe you should amend that statement to "Khan struggles with black fighters..and white fighters...and given he lost to Garcia and was shaken up by Maidana...fighters of various shades...so just fighters basically!!"

Ok amended as requested.

You should have left it...My article and I haven't a problem with it..

You want to think Khan struggles with black fighters then say it.....you want to say you think white fighters can't fight say it....

Bollox to what anyone else thinks..

Fuss over nothing..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

kingraf wrote:Maybe he meant "slick black fighters"? For.whatever reason, this is an expected part of boxing lexicon.

That IS what I meant raf but its no more insulting then saying teek tough Mexican.

No racial inclination what so ever.

I am black myself.

So if Khan loses to Mayweather it is because he's slick, black, better than Khan or a combination of all three?

What if he loses to Kell Brook, is it because Kell is slick and black or because Khan is suddenly shyte?

However, Khan did get dropped by both Michael Gomez and Willie Limond who are as white as white can be so maybe you should amend that statement to "Khan struggles with black fighters..and white fighters...and given he lost to Garcia and was shaken up by Maidana...fighters of various shades...so just fighters basically!!"

Ok amended as requested.

You should have left it...My article and I haven't a problem with it..

You want to think Khan struggles with black fighters then say it.....you want to say you think white fighters can't fight say it....

Bollox to what anyone else thinks..

Fuss over nothing..

Trust ONETRUSS and TRUSS to be united in their love of writing sh!t to get a reaction then getting all indignant when people pick them up on it.

Victim culture...is it a black thing an American thing or just you two being, well.....yourselves?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I personally think we are living in too sensitive times...

Whilst Khan doesn't have a problem with black fighters.. it's not for some to decide what the rest of us should find offensive...

I find that offensive in itself !!

Now let's move on..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I personally think we are living in too sensitive times...

Whilst Khan doesn't have a problem with black fighters.. it's not for some to decide what the rest of us should find offensive...

I find that offensive in itself !!

Now let's move on..

It is not offensive, merely strange that a black person would racially stereotype other black people.

Wait a second neither Peterson or Prescott could be described as being slick so your get out clause doesn't work ONETWO.

What part of lets move on do you not understand Duty???

It was a misunderstanding. I don't critic DAVE when he insults TRUSS, Stef and myself with derogatory remarks time and time again I just let it go.

Back on topic.

I have a feeling that Sprot can take Joshua into unknown territory. I don't see him winning but he can take AJ out of his comfort zone. He is a seasoned pro and has nothing to gain except putting in a decent shift.

DAVE667 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

kingraf wrote:Maybe he meant "slick black fighters"? For.whatever reason, this is an expected part of boxing lexicon.

That IS what I meant raf but its no more insulting then saying teek tough Mexican.

No racial inclination what so ever.

I am black myself.

So if Khan loses to Mayweather it is because he's slick, black, better than Khan or a combination of all three?

What if he loses to Kell Brook, is it because Kell is slick and black or because Khan is suddenly shyte?

However, Khan did get dropped by both Michael Gomez and Willie Limond who are as white as white can be so maybe you should amend that statement to "Khan struggles with black fighters..and white fighters...and given he lost to Garcia and was shaken up by Maidana...fighters of various shades...so just fighters basically!!"

Ok amended as requested.

You should have left it...My article and I haven't a problem with it..

You want to think Khan struggles with black fighters then say it.....you want to say you think white fighters can't fight say it....

Bollox to what anyone else thinks..

Fuss over nothing..

Trust ONETRUSS and TRUSS to be united in their love of writing sh!t to get a reaction then getting all indignant when people pick them up on it.

Victim culture...is it a black thing an American thing or just you two being, well.....yourselves?

Mate........Not indignant......Just can't be bothered with this triviality..

"White Men can't jump"...........Who cares !!

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:What part of lets move on do you not understand Duty???

It was a misunderstanding. I don't critic DAVE when he insults TRUSS, Stef and myself with derogatory remarks time and time again I just let it go.
Back on topic.

I have a feeling that Sprot can take Joshua into unknown territory. I don't see him winning but he can take AJ out of his comfort zone. He is a seasoned pro and has nothing to gain except putting in a decent shift.

When you say "let it go", do you mean, "Offer to come up to Bradford and beat me up" or "Whinge like a little **** claiming that I'm picking on you because you're black even though I myself am half black"?

Do explain...or don't, I'm sure we'll all have "misunderstood" you anyway.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

kingraf wrote:Maybe he meant "slick black fighters"? For.whatever reason, this is an expected part of boxing lexicon.

That IS what I meant raf but its no more insulting then saying teek tough Mexican.

No racial inclination what so ever.

I am black myself.

So if Khan loses to Mayweather it is because he's slick, black, better than Khan or a combination of all three?

What if he loses to Kell Brook, is it because Kell is slick and black or because Khan is suddenly shyte?

However, Khan did get dropped by both Michael Gomez and Willie Limond who are as white as white can be so maybe you should amend that statement to "Khan struggles with black fighters..and white fighters...and given he lost to Garcia and was shaken up by Maidana...fighters of various shades...so just fighters basically!!"

Ok amended as requested.

You should have left it...My article and I haven't a problem with it..

You want to think Khan struggles with black fighters then say it.....you want to say you think white fighters can't fight say it....

Bollox to what anyone else thinks..

Fuss over nothing..

Trust ONETRUSS and TRUSS to be united in their love of writing sh!t to get a reaction then getting all indignant when people pick them up on it.

Victim culture...is it a black thing an American thing or just you two being, well.....yourselves?

Mate........Not indignant......Just can't be bothered with this triviality..

"White Men can't jump"...........Who cares !!

Olympic Long Jump Gold medalist Greg Rutherford?

They really can't. Although I believe Strongy can dunk a basketball...

kingraf wrote:They really can't. Although I believe Strongy can dunk a basketball...

That's because like that lad said in "The Commitments" the Irish are like the blacks of the World or something...(dreadful film)

I've jumped your girlfriend a few times kingy..

and like she says...White men can't jump

Playing the 'political correctness gone mad' card because you've been called up on your stupidity? Hilarious. I bet you're one of those 'can't call it Christmas anymore, can you?' Types.

Nobody is offended by your comments, you just sound stupid and are being correctly called out on it.

Mhmm, she's told about her dark period where she hung around creepy old men... Didn't speak too highly of you. Something about shrinkage.

kingraf wrote:Mhmm, she's told about her dark period where she hung .

She was well hung...

What I like in the privacy of my own room is my business!

Dave ur on top form 2nite. Commitments is a great wee show

kingraf wrote:What I like in the privacy of my own room is my business!

and so it should be.............Hope Jo has ironed my Batman suit..

Dipper Brown wrote:Playing the 'political correctness gone mad' card because you've been called up on your stupidity? Hilarious. I bet you're one of those 'can't call it Christmas anymore, can you?' Types.

Nobody is offended by your comments, you just sound stupid and are being correctly called out on it.

What are you banging on about?

Hope that ain't directed at me or TRUSS.

Don't like what I say? fine but don't tell me what to say or think.

kingraf wrote:What I like in the privacy of my own room is my business!

Wish Duty would think the same way

world would be a better place.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

kingraf wrote:What I like in the privacy of my own room is my business!

Wish Duty would think the same way

world would be a better place.

I appreciate you ONETWO.....