The buildup to this fight is unbelievable and hilarious. Paulie Malignaggi is still talking and everything he's saying is still entertaining to me. Jeff Mayweather was interviewed and said Conor's boxing looked like trash in his sparring clip with Malignaggi where some said it was a knockdown and others said it was a push down.
I wish we had fights like this more often. It makes everything else in boxing and MMA to an extent look boring.
I think Paulie Malignaggi is going to make more money thanks to this fight where he isn't even fighting at than he did in his entire boxing career. He has got tons of exposure and he has landed a good job in Showtime as a commentator. Now imagine if Conor McGregor and Paulie Malignaggi did an actual fight. It wouldn't be as huge as Floyd vs Conor but it would easily make more money than anyone he could ever fight at the UFC. And McGregor has his own promotions company now so he could do it. |
|
|
|
The question has been already answered a year ago. Just use the search and you will find it faster than the writing of the post takes. Here is the thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1596208.0Quote: "Community gatherd 1337 BTC (including JINN assets) for 999 999 999 so called "old iotas"
so 1 old IOTA is 2 779 531 new IOTA or 2.78 mIOTA
mIOTA was in ICO 40.65 satoshi.
gIOTA was in ICO 40647 satoshi or 0.00040647 BTC
"The search function on this forum is fucked. According to that thread, IOTA had (again) a very scammy launch, similar to ETH, possibly worse. It's sad how much marketing plays a role in the success of a cryptocurrency. IOTA spent a lot on marketing, now they are everywhere and got people hyped. Meanwhile a cool project like Byteball is staying under the radar. Hopefully eventually it gets more attention, so far I benefit from it staying under the radar since the distribution is still happening, but as far as I know Byteball tech is better than what IOTA got to offer, and the distribution (even if far from ideal) is not a scam (compared to IOTA). |
|
|
|
Segwit is locked in and it will activate on August 23 or thereabouts. Then according to the proponents of Segwit2x there will be a hard fork to 2mb blocks. They say it will happen on November but some are saying that its an optimistic time line.
If it could happen, maybe next year.
ok...I see....I gotta admit I kinda feel that we need 2MB blocks as a mix of on chain and off chain solutions, BCH has shown that a 8MB block is feasible....if nothing else.... BCash, aka Bitcoin Cash, aka Bitcoin ABC, has only shown the irony of how the market is not supporting big blocks, while their blockchain is mining blocks smaller than the 1MB blockchain. How dumb was that? Clearly nobody is supporting big blocks with real money. It would suck that the NYC goons go thought with the hardfork again on November. Thats 3 fucking Bitcoins listed on coinmarketcap, and they will cause a price crash. They will have to run for cover because the hate will be real. The people that want big blocks already has BCash, what's the point of a rushed hardfork in 3 months? They got a ton of hashrate (in theory) so we'll see what's up. |
|
|
|
IOTA is listed here with an initial price of $0.0 which is nonsense:  I thought Ethereum was still the number #1 performer but IOTA is now #1, but it says $0.0 ICO price so that has confused me. IOTA also shows #1 against BTC, Stratis #2, ETH #3. |
|
|
|
Im no casual when it comes to boxing, I casually watch MMA. I never said Conor has no chance, he has a certain chance... I don't believe comparing boxing to MMA is like pretending that a pro-basketball player has a chance against the boxing world champion. Both sports obviously share a lot more stuff than other sports. Conor can do it, he has that 1 on 10 chance, but Conor fanboys are annoying. Also, you got to realize that Paulie is out of shape, and that that was 9 seconds vs a complete 12 round session. |
|
|
|
A nice trend line on the logarithmic chart to keep track off  It seems to be working. I see a lot of people using the linear chart with Bitcoin, I think it's pointless at this point. To understand what's going on you need the logarithmic chart, otherwise you are going to think we are on a constant bubble. People have been looking at the linear chart since $1800 and saying it's too pumped because when you look at the all time graph in the linear view, it gives you a ridiculous green candle. Gotta look at this thing in log mode from now on. A Hundred thousand dollars? Aint that too much to achieve in 6 and a half years ? I am not saying that Its impossible for bitcoin not reaching or surpassing such a huge amount,it definitely can but what i am saying is that sometimes when you have too much of expectations ,it leads to greediness and if it goes your way then it would hard for any person to face something when that thing will be opposite of his expectations ,so just keep your fingers crossed and even i wish that bitcoin should reach 100,000$ by 2024. I don't know if it's too soon or not, that is just an idea that someone proposed, and I wish it to be true because I would be set then. I would just continue focusing on getting more BTC meanwhile. It is definitely not impossible. Exponential growth can make these kind of gains possible. Look at adoption graphs for disruptive technologies such as the internet itself and you will see the graph looks insane, it went from nothing to everything in no time. Same goes for telephone, cars etc. So I will keep hustling and hodling BTC, and I will continue looking at any interesting alt that I see worth my BTC. |
|
|
|
A nice trend line on the logarithmic chart to keep track off It seems to be working. I see a lot of people using the linear chart with Bitcoin, I think it's pointless at this point. To understand what's going on you need the logarithmic chart, otherwise you are going to think we are on a constant bubble. People have been looking at the linear chart since $1800 and saying it's too pumped because when you look at the all time graph in the linear view, it gives you a ridiculous green candle. Gotta look at this thing in log mode from now on. |
|
|
|
The gambler in me wants to bet for a Conor win but I know the sensible bet here is to be for Floyd. I might take the propbet in nitrogesports.eu, Floyd Mayweather by Decision or Technical Decision - +200.
Is it a good bet or not?
I feel the same. I want to bet on McGregor just in case the miracle happens and you get massive rewards, but betting on Mayweather winning has worked for 21 years, I don't see why it would once again. I think Mc Gregor will win the fight. He is stronger and more vicious fighter. I personally will bet on him The NOTORIOUS.
He isn't stronger, mma fighters hit nowhere near as hard as boxers in the same weight division. McGregor will barely land a shot in this fight also. I think Conor will touch him, he may even cut him, but that is far from an actual big shoot. Boxing casuals don't know how the scoring system works. Sometimes it looks like the shoot was landed, but skilled boxers like Mayweather lean back suppressing the force of the punch. This happens so fast that sometimes it looks like he got hit. |
|
|
|
What I don't get is, if segwit is such a flaw, how come all these programmers are saying it's perfectly fine, risking their reputation for life? I mean everyone in Core is wrong? Andreas A is wrong?, why are they gambling with their reputation? because I don't believe no one of these guys has realized the supposed flaws that have been commented about segwit for a while.
I am asking myself exactly the same question. I'Ve googled for Segwit and stealing transaction and didn' find a lot of matches. Why is there not more discussion about it? The idea is that the transactions made under the segwit format would become an eventual prize pot for hackers to steal (well, in this case it would be miners), so we would be under a DAO-type disaster but instead of ETH stuck in some exploitable smart contract, it would be the BTC in all the segwit addresses (that is what I understand as a non-coder) My question is: If Peter Wuille, Gmaxwell, Luke Dash Jr, Adam Back, Eric Lombrozo, TheBlueMatt, and the list goes on and on, of people that have either contributed or publicly supported segwit, either don't know that this can happen or know that it will happen and ignore it, it seems like they are all a bunch of kamikazes ready to ruin their reputation pretty much for life. The question is obviously: Why? And I don't believe for a second none of them are aware of the potential disaster described by anonymint, so why are they ignoring it? Maybe they consider it only a theoretical risk that can never happen in practice? It just seems strange to me, that all of them are willing to gamble with their reputation, hoping that nothing goes wrong. Quite interesting logic here, but I wonder about 2 points as well 1. Same question hold why most of the hashpower do (did) not support what these big and influencing core list strongly support and offer ? Reputation is much more risky to hashpower (hardware, bitcoin, long-term) investment than to coding business. 2. What chances have core to stay in power for as long as possible and do side chain coding business on 2nd layers, where a stupid block size increase solves a lot and makes this business redundant? - They just try to win where there is nothing really, but they have the historic track record allowing this to some degree. So I conclude the SW will still be delayed (attacked), no matter with or w/o the 2x by most hashpower - to get core to the final thing: Change PoW. This will be the ultimate alt CoreCoin to get rid of them. Miners reputation is way less relevant for their financial future than coders. A miner can fuck around with their signaling intention to manipulate the price and make some money. At the end of the day, people are still going to accept their hashrate on their coins because hashrate is hashrate. As far as their mining-gear sales, it's not clear to me it would have an impact. Bitmain has fucked around to the max and they still are the monopoly in sales. I want to see what happens once intel, nvidia and AMD join the mining game along other bigger actors. But what I mean is, Bitmain seems to be still doing ok ASIC sales wise. Now if a coder fucks up at the scale of the theoretical segwit disaster... his career is over. Who is going to hire you if you will be remembered for such a fail? Well you may still get some jobs, but as far as street creed as a coder goes, that would be a fatal mistake, specially in bitcoin. Any big mistake in bitcoin will cost a lot to the coder involved in the fuckup. This is why I don't understand why all these people are willing to gamble with their hard earned reputation across years, taking the risk to become a DAO-developer tier joke. I mean who is going to buy a project made by the DAO guys now? lol So that's what I don't get at all. And these people are all rich as fuck already, so im ruling out money. Therefore, why are they doing it? OK - I hear you. I've been working with many devs in industry for several years and I know devs are getting in love with pure code, functions and features - but just for sake of being code heroes. They lose contact to the earth and to economics totally and do lot of code work overtime just for own nerdy pleasure - I did escape. I know it is really needed to split tasks - things are getting way too complex and (protocol !!) code is only needed to ensure minimum requirements to enable easy client dev. All other stuff has to be done in the different clients and their very needs. Scaling comes mostly for free, if you keep code clean and easy (put it concurrent!) and get other hardware tech for free on top (get Moore !!). Economics is the chooser. I do not see we are even close to.. But you are saying that EVERYONE involved in segwit, either coding it or promoting it, have lost their mind and are promoting it because they are nerds that value the code above everything else? If you are implying that blocksize increases are the solution, according to data gathered on full nodes performance, it isnt:  I mean anything higher than 2MB is just nuts in practice. The exponential growth would be too much. And what does 2MB solve really? it's just nothing in the big picture. The cons outweighs the pros. Fee market will prevail unless you want only corporations and rich people to run nodes (and assuming these rich people care about staying on a decentralized network, they would need non-rich people to run nodes too because they are the bulk of the population that would allow a widespread network, otherwise it's not really decentralized). The paradox is that, if there is no further scaling, there will be less and less incentive to run full nodes since less and less people will be able to to make transactions. But most non-rich people would understand by then that BTC is mostly to hold and not to constantly move it, and I think some scaling would eventually be allowed. Anonymint often quotes the Trilema guy, and I was once reading his blog and I think even him considered an eventual blocksize increase if the hardfork meet certain requirements (I think this is what I understood unless he was trolling, but it seemed a serious blog entry, I dont have the time to find it now just look around). But that is a very different thing from pretending to hardfork in 3 months for example. The fees are still low and the fees will need to go way higher for any of that to get a serious consideration. |
|
|
|
What I don't get is, if segwit is such a flaw, how come all these programmers are saying it's perfectly fine, risking their reputation for life? I mean everyone in Core is wrong? Andreas A is wrong?, why are they gambling with their reputation? because I don't believe no one of these guys has realized the supposed flaws that have been commented about segwit for a while.
I am asking myself exactly the same question. I'Ve googled for Segwit and stealing transaction and didn' find a lot of matches. Why is there not more discussion about it? The idea is that the transactions made under the segwit format would become an eventual prize pot for hackers to steal (well, in this case it would be miners), so we would be under a DAO-type disaster but instead of ETH stuck in some exploitable smart contract, it would be the BTC in all the segwit addresses (that is what I understand as a non-coder) My question is: If Peter Wuille, Gmaxwell, Luke Dash Jr, Adam Back, Eric Lombrozo, TheBlueMatt, and the list goes on and on, of people that have either contributed or publicly supported segwit, either don't know that this can happen or know that it will happen and ignore it, it seems like they are all a bunch of kamikazes ready to ruin their reputation pretty much for life. The question is obviously: Why? And I don't believe for a second none of them are aware of the potential disaster described by anonymint, so why are they ignoring it? Maybe they consider it only a theoretical risk that can never happen in practice? It just seems strange to me, that all of them are willing to gamble with their reputation, hoping that nothing goes wrong. Quite interesting logic here, but I wonder about 2 points as well 1. Same question hold why most of the hashpower do (did) not support what these big and influencing core list strongly support and offer ? Reputation is much more risky to hashpower (hardware, bitcoin, long-term) investment than to coding business. 2. What chances have core to stay in power for as long as possible and do side chain coding business on 2nd layers, where a stupid block size increase solves a lot and makes this business redundant? - They just try to win where there is nothing really, but they have the historic track record allowing this to some degree. So I conclude the SW will still be delayed (attacked), no matter with or w/o the 2x by most hashpower - to get core to the final thing: Change PoW. This will be the ultimate alt CoreCoin to get rid of them. Miners reputation is way less relevant for their financial future than coders. A miner can fuck around with their signaling intention to manipulate the price and make some money. At the end of the day, people are still going to accept their hashrate on their coins because hashrate is hashrate. As far as their mining-gear sales, it's not clear to me it would have an impact. Bitmain has fucked around to the max and they still are the monopoly in sales. I want to see what happens once intel, nvidia and AMD join the mining game along other bigger actors. But what I mean is, Bitmain seems to be still doing ok ASIC sales wise. Now if a coder fucks up at the scale of the theoretical segwit disaster... his career is over. Who is going to hire you if you will be remembered for such a fail? Well you may still get some jobs, but as far as street creed as a coder goes, that would be a fatal mistake, specially in bitcoin. Any big mistake in bitcoin will cost a lot to the coder involved in the fuckup. This is why I don't understand why all these people are willing to gamble with their hard earned reputation across years, taking the risk to become a DAO-developer tier joke. I mean who is going to buy a project made by the DAO guys now? lol So that's what I don't get at all. And these people are all rich as fuck already, so im ruling out money. Therefore, why are they doing it? |
|
|
|
I've been using coinbase and cex.io recently. They have too much of a fee in my opinion. Anyone use gdax, or what does everyone use?
I don't do any trading at all when it comes to fiat, so I stick to what I know, that's Poloniex. I've had my Polo account for a while, I never had any problems withdrawing money or depositing it. They don't ask you for any dumb verification process where they ask you for your personal details like on Bittrex. Poloniex is good for some alt speculation, but the coins get there way too late. I will try getting on Bittrex, unfortunately I don't see any other exchange but Bittrex that has rarer coins with good volume. The rest of exchange have tiny volume. |
|
|
|
What I don't get is, if segwit is such a flaw, how come all these programmers are saying it's perfectly fine, risking their reputation for life? I mean everyone in Core is wrong? Andreas A is wrong?, why are they gambling with their reputation? because I don't believe no one of these guys has realized the supposed flaws that have been commented about segwit for a while.
I am asking myself exactly the same question. I'Ve googled for Segwit and stealing transaction and didn' find a lot of matches. Why is there not more discussion about it? The idea is that the transactions made under the segwit format would become an eventual prize pot for hackers to steal (well, in this case it would be miners), so we would be under a DAO-type disaster but instead of ETH stuck in some exploitable smart contract, it would be the BTC in all the segwit addresses (that is what I understand as a non-coder) My question is: If Peter Wuille, Gmaxwell, Luke Dash Jr, Adam Back, Eric Lombrozo, TheBlueMatt, and the list goes on and on, of people that have either contributed or publicly supported segwit, either don't know that this can happen or know that it will happen and ignore it, it seems like they are all a bunch of kamikazes ready to ruin their reputation pretty much for life. The question is obviously: Why? And I don't believe for a second none of them are aware of the potential disaster described by anonymint, so why are they ignoring it? Maybe they consider it only a theoretical risk that can never happen in practice? It just seems strange to me, that all of them are willing to gamble with their reputation, hoping that nothing goes wrong. |
|
|
|
|
Mayweather claims he is coming for him because he wants to make up for the Pacquiao fights which did not entertain boxing casuals. Honestly I doubt he will go aggressive against him. He may test him out for a couple of rounds, and if he feels that Conor is getting outboxed, he may try and go for the KO, but he isn't going to risk a lucky punch by going brawler stlye against Conor. He is just selling the fight, and im sure he may try to find a KO, but if it doesn't happen, a 12 round decision is better than forcing a KO. If the opportunity presents itself he will go for it Hatton style, just gotta find the right angle and leverage. After a couple of rounds of getting hit and tired, a KO is possible even if Conor is the bigger man.
|
|
|
|
Hello,
I've just started reading more about Bitcoin and would like to ask couple of details about the mining process. As far as I understand, mining is basically:
1. Trying (guessing) to find a hash, which would fit as an answer to Bitcoin network for the current block. Each block needs a different answer and it varies all the time depending on how easy or hard it is to find that answer for miners.
2. Verifying transcations, made by other bitcoin users at the moment (while this block is being solved) and writing the transcation data to the block.
Of course, there are other things involved into mining, as providing security, writing the data of a previous block, however I basically talk about the Reward part, how miners are earning cash. In the first case, whenever a block is solved (which can be done only by one person at the time), the miner gets a reward, which currently is 12 BTC. There are pools, who are looking for correct hash together and then splitting the profits afterwards. So, in this case, the hash speed is the most crutial part, which is needed to look for the correct hash to solve the current block.
However, I would like to know more about the second part. Miners also earn money by verifying transactions, right? How is it done? Since everyone is looking for the correct hash, at the same time and for the same block, does every miner at the same time (while guessing the needed hash) are getting different transaction data from somewhere and write them into a block and then the block is finished by a person, who finds a needed hash, or it is done somehow else? So, my main question is: What determines how fast a miner can verify a transaction or how many of them? In the first case, hash speed is most important (since you have to guess as much hashes as possible to solve the block), what would be equal for it here? How a person finds a transaction which needs to be verified and why only he receives that transaction fee?
Please correct me if I'm wrong in any of the parts, since I'm absolutely new in the crypto world.
Thanks
The chances of finding a block depend on hashrate only afaik... it's simple. The more hashrate you have, the higher chances of finding a block. Miners just process blocks which contains the transactions. They get the fees and the freshly created bitcoins depending on where we are in terms of inflation rate (right now the 12 BTC that you mentioned-its 12.5 BTC exactly btw-, which afaik gets split across the mining pool, same as fees)  I don't know what you mean with "verifying transactions". You may mean validate transactions? that's what full nodes do. You run a full node and depending on what full node you are using it may consider as valid or not a certain block, which is why "The Powers That Be" want to push the huge blocks agenda, because then people can't run their full nodes and decide what is or isn't a valid block themselves. There are a lot of youtube videos that may explain this better than me. |
|
|
|
A short clip of Conor McGregor sparring Paulie Malignaggi has been released. The clip is from their 2nd sparring session where they went 12 rounds. Its the same sparring session where the pic of Paulie on the ground was posted from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcHVsZGyZOwCan't say for certain whether the knockdown is legit. Conor lands a monster left hand which seems to rock Malignaggi before he falls. well if we will look back with Conor's fight we can say that its possible that he can manage to knock his sparring partner out and if chances will allow him and Mayweather will be reckless i think one big solid punch from Conor will decide this match just in case but knowing how Mayweather style it will be very difficult. But have on mind Malignaggi hasn't done anything in a long time, he came out straight from the plane without previous warmup and that was the first session. He said the last 5 rounds he dominated Conor. And he said the second session was much better. I would like to see the entire footage. Sure he did catch him good on there, but that's just one round. If you show someone the round 2 of Mosley vs Mayweather without showing the rest of the fight, you would think Mosley was superior, but Mayweather schooled him for the rest of the fight. Also it's just sparring, you can be the champion of your gym but thats very different to being the champion under the lights. Plus Connor looks awkward in the video. His fighting stance looks very amatuerish. How can he then win over Floyd's superior boxing skills and defense? The more I see the video, the more I'm leaning towards Mayweather. He is just touching Malignaggi in the video and his weapon is his left hand only. Of course Floyd doesn't like southpaw but he can sure adjust as the round goes by. Malignaggi is also smaller, and he's far from Mayweather's skill. He was out of shape and warming up. And still, Malignaggi went 12 rounds, and I believe Malignaggi when he claims he dominated the last rounds. Maybe they should make another fight and give Malignaggi a big pay day. He's a cool guy, he's got good fight IQ and he overcame his physical limitations to become a 2 time world champion. Anyway in the recent footage, Floyd is looking sharp, and he looks younger than Conor at age 40. Conor conditioning doesn't look as good. But I think he will not have any problem going 12 rounds. You can't count Conor out, if he gets that lucky punch it could be dangerous. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAQNUvLzJ5cConor has some awkward angles but we will see how that works under the lights. Floyd talking shit while working out for 2 hours. Good conditioning, snappy punches, awesome reflexes in the 2 end bag... he's looking sharp. |
|
|
|
Last thing I heard is, he is recovering from the meds and he is feeling better and able to work on Bitnet now, let's see what he has to offer. Big things take time so we'll have to wait. This article is well worth reading!! The next few months are when fortunes will be lost, and made ... wise decisions need good information! If there is really a crash due the problems described there, then where would you put your bitcoins at? because in theory there wouldn't be any crypto that would be safe since the confidence would be lost in crypto altogether. Im hoping nothing goes wrong now that BTC is about to hit $4000+ I wouldn't like to go fiat, it just sucks. The whole process is a mess. What I don't get is, if segwit is such a flaw, how come all these programmers are saying it's perfectly fine, risking their reputation for life? I mean everyone in Core is wrong? Andreas A is wrong?, why are they gambling with their reputation? because I don't believe no one of these guys has realized the supposed flaws that have been commented about segwit for a while. |
|
|
|
|
You have to understand some basic game theory to see how if the government uses the ace of spades then he doesn't have any other cards to keep bluffing, and that's all governments do.
Once governments say "bitcoin is banned", that's the end on their part, they can't no longer keep FUDding. Bitcoin's price would take a big crash, but it would survive, and eventually would recover. At this point, the government can no longer create FUD, so the price can freely grow.
And this is why they will not go full-ban on bitcoin, they will just keep FUDding here and there.
|
|
|
|
A short clip of Conor McGregor sparring Paulie Malignaggi has been released. The clip is from their 2nd sparring session where they went 12 rounds. Its the same sparring session where the pic of Paulie on the ground was posted from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcHVsZGyZOwCan't say for certain whether the knockdown is legit. Conor lands a monster left hand which seems to rock Malignaggi before he falls. well if we will look back with Conor's fight we can say that its possible that he can manage to knock his sparring partner out and if chances will allow him and Mayweather will be reckless i think one big solid punch from Conor will decide this match just in case but knowing how Mayweather style it will be very difficult. But have on mind Malignaggi hasn't done anything in a long time, he came out straight from the plane without previous warmup and that was the first session. He said the last 5 rounds he dominated Conor. And he said the second session was much better. I would like to see the entire footage. Sure he did catch him good on there, but that's just one round. If you show someone the round 2 of Mosley vs Mayweather without showing the rest of the fight, you would think Mosley was superior, but Mayweather schooled him for the rest of the fight. Also it's just sparring, you can be the champion of your gym but thats very different to being the champion under the lights. |
|
|
|
A short clip of Conor McGregor sparring Paulie Malignaggi has been released. The clip is from their 2nd sparring session where they went 12 rounds. Its the same sparring session where the pic of Paulie on the ground was posted from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcHVsZGyZOwCan't say for certain whether the knockdown is legit. Conor lands a monster left hand which seems to rock Malignaggi before he falls. He seems to land a big left, but he makes a lot of wide angle slow punches, those could be exploited by Mayweather easily. He looks like he got rocked by that left punch and then he was a bit wobbly and after some finishing touches he fell to the floor. Maybe we will have a fight after all. The footage is shit tho, you can't really tell what's happening. |
|
|
|
Sick of all these MMA fans saying boxing is on a decline. Please do your homework before making remarks that are well off the mark. 80,000 fans watched Froch and Groves in Wembley. 90,000 watched AJ v Vlad in Wembley.
As for PPV buys, Mayweather v Pacquiao got 4.6 million buys. McGregor v Diaz got 1.6 million buys. So MMA's biggest fight ever is dwarfed by boxings.
Boxing has got loads of top money makers when it comes to PPV. MMA has only one in McGregor, and yes only because he's got a big mouth. So when he retires which will be on 26th august, MMA can go back to being a minority sport.
And don't forget Canelo vs Golovkin on September, it will be an huge success too. Not to mention, Lomachenko is going to become an huge PPV attraction in the following years. I can already see Gervonta Davis vs Loma being an epic clash. On other news, McGregor is live doing his media workout: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2U89wDcVGYMayweather did his media workout and he is looking sharp and his stamina is great. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
