I read the same thing. That can now be considered dead in the water. In fact, I'll be quite surprised if Clinton fights again. His heart just didn't look in it last night.
:: I may have been wrong... Again, though, I was very surprised to see Woods fight like that last night. He fought a remarkably stupid fight- coming forward in simple, straight lines without actually throwing any punches as he came in or when he got in. Early on it looked like he had froze, while later on it just looked like he was completely disheartened/disinterested. Credit should be given to Tarver, though. I for one couldn't envisage him fighting at that level at 39 and after the Hopkins fight. He completely outclassed Woods from start to finish.
:: How are they not facts? Am I lying? And RJ - I've already said Tarver is a very good, skilled fighter, and deserves a shit load of respect for taking Jones out, and being the first man to really beat him. He's annoying, but somehow I don't really hate him. It's just that barring the Jones victory, compared to other top fighters of his generation, his resume is very average.
He said 4 of the best fighters. To me thats B-Hops, Roy, G Johnson and Harding. Tarver is 0-1 w/ nard. 2-1 w/ Roy. 1-1 w/ Johnson and 1-1 w/ Harding.
If you think Johnson beat him, cool. You're entitled to think that. I don't. Either time. The fact is, that it was simply three peoples opinions that gave Johnson that win; none of which were my own. A fact is a knockout. A decision? Thats nothing more than a few guys putting out an opinion.
Really, it was a really good fight but I'm surprised there wasn't more discussion on the decision. I had it 5-3 Dawson after 8 and Glencoffe sweeping the last 4 rounds fairly easily. I like Dawson, he's a local guy but Glencoffe just outworked him and blocked a lot more of Dawsons shots then he got credit for. Glencoffe also had the most dominant rounds and landed the most punishing shots in the fight. I'd feel robbed if I were him to.