View Full Version : List: Top 10 Greatest Black Heavyweights of All Time


Magnifico
08-05-2010, 07:58 AM
List your Top 10 Greatest Black Heavyweights.

My Top 10 of All Time

Muhammad Ali
Joe Louis
Jack Johnson
Sonny Liston
George Foreman
Larry Holmes
Harry Wills
Lennox Lewis
Mike Tyson
Evander Holyfield

KlownvonnomaD
08-05-2010, 08:21 AM
Surely it would be the same list as the as the top 10 Greatest Heavyweights of all time.

Magnifico
08-05-2010, 08:24 AM
Surely it would be the same list as the as the top 10 Greatest Heavyweights of all time.
:lol1: Very true brother.

Black heavyweights have dominated deep and talented divisions throughout history.

Jack Dempsey might be the highest ranked White Heavyweight and he ducked the Great Harry Wills.

KlownvonnomaD
08-05-2010, 08:28 AM
In all seriousness tho I think Dempsey and Marciano are the only two white heavies you could consider as being all time greats.
Maybe Vitali at a push.

KlownvonnomaD
08-05-2010, 08:38 AM
Joe Lewis
Muhammad Ali
Jack Johnson
George Foreman
Lennox Lewis
Jersey Joe Walcott
Joe Fraizer
Larry Holmes
Sonny Liston
Mike Tyson

Magnifico
08-05-2010, 08:40 AM
In all seriousness tho I think Dempsey and Marciano are the only two white heavies you could consider as being all time greats.
Maybe Vitali at a push.
Marciano's best wins:

Joe louis
Jersey Joe Walcott
Ezzard Charles
Archie Moore

Pitiful to say the least. All faded and old Champs.

That resume does not cut it for a top 10 spot.

frankenfrank
08-05-2010, 09:00 AM
1. George Foreman
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Lennox Lewis
4. Mike Tyson
5. Larry Holmes
6. Oliver McCall
7. Evander Holyfield
8. Joe Louis
9. Joe Frazier
10. Chris Byrd


11. Riddick Bowe
12. Tony Tucker
13. Sam Peter
14. James Smith
15. James Douglas
16. Michael Spinks
17. Lamon Brewster
18. Sam Langford
19. Sony Liston
20. Frank Bruno


But I doubt if these men can qualify as neither is/was pure black .

Magnifico
08-05-2010, 09:02 AM
1. George Foreman
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Lennox Lewis
4. Mike Tyson
5. Larry Holmes
6. Oliver McCall
7. Evander Holyfield
8. Joe Louis
9. Joe Frazier
10. Chris Byrd


11. Riddick Bowe
12. Tony Tucker
13. Sam Peter
14. James Smith
15. James Douglas
16. Michael Spinks
17. Lamon Brewster
18. Sam Langford
19. Sony Liston
20. Frank Bruno


But I doubt if these men can qualify as neither is/was pure black .
Very much doubt it. Most are race-mixed but they are still majority black.

frankenfrank
08-05-2010, 09:36 AM
Surely it would be the same list as the as the top 10 Greatest Heavyweights of all time.

:lol1: Very true brother.

Black heavyweights have dominated deep and talented divisions throughout history.

Jack Dempsey might be the highest ranked White Heavyweight and he ducked the Great Harry Wills.
I have the Klitschko brothers in my top 10 as well as Tua who is not black.

And Jack Johnson ducked Sam Langford and some others I think , he is overrated for publicity/popularity reasons , but Langford achieved more than him even at HW , Langford avoided no one except of Jeffries probably. But Langford was a man far from HW who fought at HW just because he was so good and avoided , he was even further from a HW by the time Jeffries was the champ. So I do not accuse him of ducking anyone.

Magnifico
08-05-2010, 09:45 AM
I have the Klitschko brothers in my top 10 as well as Tua who is not black.

And Jack Johnson ducked Sam Langford and some others I think , he is overrated for publicity/popularity reasons , but Langford achieved more than him even at HW , Langford avoided no one except of Jeffries probably. But Langford was a man far from HW who fought a HW just because he was so good and avoided , he was even further from at HW by the time Jeffries was the champ. So I do not accuse him of ducking anyone.
Sam Langford is a true ATG.

Obama
08-05-2010, 02:12 PM
There's this thread stickied called "Top 10 Heavies from best to worst"

I see no difference.

Joeyzagz
08-05-2010, 02:24 PM
An All-Black ATG list is the only way Liston makes my top 10.

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Lennox Lewis
4. George Foreman
5. Mike Tyson
6. Larry Holmes
7. Jack Johnson
8. Evander Holyfield
9. Sam Langford
10. Sonny Liston

JAB5239
08-05-2010, 04:20 PM
1. George Foreman
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Lennox Lewis
4. Mike Tyson
5. Larry Holmes
6. Oliver McCall
7. Evander Holyfield
8. Joe Louis
9. Joe Frazier
10. Chris Byrd


11. Riddick Bowe
12. Tony Tucker
13. Sam Peter
14. James Smith
15. James Douglas
16. Michael Spinks
17. Lamon Brewster
18. Sam Langford
19. Sony Liston
20. Frank Bruno


But I doubt if these men can qualify as neither is/was pure black .

Would love to hear your reasoning on how Foreman can rank ahead of Louis, Ali and Holmes.

frankenfrank
08-05-2010, 04:59 PM
Would love to hear your reasoning on how Foreman can rank ahead of Louis, Ali and Holmes.
ahead of Ali ? read my top 30 and above SHW all time thread again.
I gave 2 reasons there .
Louis ? Foreman's opposition was much fiercer than Louis' , I think you are of the same opinion . Foreman dominated his opposition at least as decisively as Louis did his weaker Opposition.
Holmes is the most problematic to excuse against , and may have a claim for being ducked by Foreman , but since Ali is above Holmes even in my list , and Foreman is clearly above Ali , no doubt , then sure he is above Holmes , just look for instance at their mutual opponents : Norton and Cooney and see how each one did against them , remember that Foreman and Holmes are of the same age ! Ali is a common opponent but a bad example for 2 reasons :
against Holmes he had Parkinson , against Foreman he enjoyed a personally built by demand ring and even weather (which I blame much less).
I don't really expect you to understand this , but at least those who read in order to learn may find an answer and a hidden (which I revealed) truth here.
But only if taken in the context of my other posts in my threads .

GJC
08-05-2010, 05:09 PM
Holmes is the most problematic to excuse against , and may have a claim for being ducked by Foreman

Holmes had less than 10 fights when Foreman lost the title


Foreman is clearly above Ali

Because he lost at prime to a 7 years past prime Ali?

against Foreman he enjoyed a personally built by demand ring and even weather (which I blame much less).

The ropes are an urban myth and whether or not he had the demand of ring size over the champion you could have fought that fight in a telephone booth.
You do have a point with the weather though as Ali did spend the night in the shaded part of the ring as per his demands.

Joeyzagz
08-05-2010, 05:43 PM
But I doubt if these men can qualify as neither is/was pure black .

Thats a useless statement and totally off topic. Its like saying the Klitschkos and all the guys with dark eyes arent pure white. Hitler even killed thousands of Ukrainians for not being pure enough.

Top 10 possibly, Partially mixed of African descent wouldnt even fit in the title and its just a general pain in the ass to split straws like that.

frankenfrank
08-05-2010, 06:39 PM
Holmes had less than 10 fights when Foreman lost the title

And what about when Foreman made his comeback ?
I am not the one who raised this claim BTW , it was someone more knowledgeable than I about that time , in one of my ducks threads .


Because he lost at prime to a 7 years past prime Ali?

This is an urban myth , Ali was in no way 7 years past prime , and here , get a quote of myself :
Actually there are 2 reasons to why Foreman over Ali :
(1) Dundee fetched the ropes to be loose and Ali used it to the max.
Foreman never got a rematch.
(2) Performance against common opponents .
While Norton , Frazier and Chuvalo shortened Ali's career and health , Foreman
ended matters quick with all of them.
With Lyle it can be argued who did better : Foreman whom finished him quicker
but was knocked down twice against , or Ali whom just stopped him late.
With Young both went through distance fights , but Ali did better by not going
down and winning the (very close) decision instead of losing the decision.
But all in is very clear who was the better man against mutual opponents.
Not to mention what any version of Foreman would have done to any version
of Leon Spinks , but this is a hypothetical (altbeit clear) argument .

Feels so good quoting myself as an answer , better even than a copy paste.



The ropes are an urban myth and whether or not he had the demand of ring size over the champion you could have fought that fight in a telephone booth.
You do have a point with the weather though as Ali did spend the night in the shaded part of the ring as per his demands.
Actually the weather thing I like less as an excuse , but you raised another point here which I did not know which further supports my stance on that fight , I also made a thread about the Ali-Foreman fight circumstances , as far as I remember boxingboy mentioned the ring was actually made according to Foreman's demands with a little fix : the ropes were a much larger rings' ropes which made them so much tighter , suiting Ali's rope-a-dope which could not have worked otherwise and therefore effecting the outcome the way they did ..
here is a link to that thread :
http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=390246

please argue about that subject in its appropriate thread , which surprisingly exists .

GJC
08-05-2010, 08:09 PM
And what about when Foreman made his comeback ?
I am not the one who raised this claim BTW , it was someone more knowledgeable than I about that time , in one of my ducks threads .



Holmes came back in January 88 to fight Tyson and looked terrible, he then didn't fight again until April 91. At that point Foreman was challenging Holyfield and had beaten Cooney. They were pretty much moving in different orbits from 91 onwards and a match between them would have had the relevance of McEnroe playing Borg in 2010.



This is an urban myth , Ali was in no way 7 years past prime , and here , get a quote of myself :

If you want to run a poll on when Ali was prime I'd bet good money that 90% will say 1967. OK back to you who was most prime in 1974 between Ali and Foreman? I have an advantage over you in that I remember clearly the fight and am not looking back knowing the result. Ali was given very very little chance.



Actually the weather thing I like less as an excuse , but you raised another point here which I did not know which further supports my stance on that fight

My mistake then :)



the ropes were a much larger rings' ropes which made them so much tighter , suiting Ali's rope-a-dope which could not have worked otherwise and therefore effecting the outcome the way they did ..


Best to let Angelo Dundee kill the loosening of the ropes myth stone dead

http://www.********boxing.com/news.php?p=23000&more=1

I said to myself they’re going to ask me about the ropes in Zaire. (laughs) And I’m going to tell you, I tightened those stinking ropes at four o’clock in the afternoon but the fight wasn’t until 4am the next day. And you know what happened—the heat stretched the ropes. They were brand new hemp ropes. I didn’t want those ropes to be loose.

Ali didn't plan to do rope a dope he saw that there was no way he could dance away from Foremanfor 15 rounds given how good Foreman was at cutting off the ring and the conditions, Ali adapted like great fighters do.
That said Foreman hit Ali with good enough blows to end the fight but Ali took them, Ali beat Foreman up mentally that's why he won the fight.
Tight ropes, small ring, mild conditions, whatever, Ali would have found a way to win that fight.

1SILVA
08-05-2010, 09:54 PM
List your Top 10 Greatest Black Heavyweights.

My Top 10 of All Time

Muhammad Ali
Joe Louis
Jack Johnson
Sonny Liston
George Foreman
Larry Holmes
Harry Wills
Lennox Lewis
Mike Tyson
Evander Holyfield


Owen Beck
Bruce Seldon
Jesse Ferguson
Maurice Harris
Derrick Jefferson
Herbie Hide
Oliver McCall
Alex Stewart
Leroy Jones
Larry Donald

blaze778
08-05-2010, 10:02 PM
List your Top 10 Greatest Black Heavyweights.

My Top 10 of All Time

Muhammad Ali
Joe Louis
Jack Johnson
Sonny Liston
George Foreman
Larry Holmes
Harry Wills
Lennox Lewis
Mike Tyson
Evander Holyfield


What's the point of a Greatest Black Heavyweights? Besides Jack Dempsey (possibly Marciano), the top 10 greatest heavyweights are all black anyways.

Did you want to make this list just to omit 2 white guys?

blaze778
08-05-2010, 10:31 PM
Owen Beck
Bruce Seldon
Jesse Ferguson
Maurice Harris
Derrick Jefferson
Herbie Hide
Oliver McCall
Alex Stewart
Leroy Jones
Larry Donald

Would Bert Cooper and Michael Dokes qualify for your list as well.

JAB5239
08-06-2010, 04:26 AM
ahead of Ali ? read my top 30 and above SHW all time thread again.
I gave 2 reasons there .
Louis ? Foreman's opposition was much fiercer than Louis' , I think you are of the same opinion . Foreman dominated his opposition at least as decisively as Louis did his weaker Opposition.
Holmes is the most problematic to excuse against , and may have a claim for being ducked by Foreman , but since Ali is above Holmes even in my list , and Foreman is clearly above Ali , no doubt , then sure he is above Holmes , just look for instance at their mutual opponents : Norton and Cooney and see how each one did against them , remember that Foreman and Holmes are of the same age ! Ali is a common opponent but a bad example for 2 reasons :
against Holmes he had Parkinson , against Foreman he enjoyed a personally built by demand ring and even weather (which I blame much less).
I don't really expect you to understand this , but at least those who read in order to learn may find an answer and a hidden (which I revealed) truth here.
But only if taken in the context of my other posts in my threads .

Your logic is so warped it's not even worth debating with you. Im not sure whether to laugh or feel sorry for you. :dunno:

frankenfrank
08-06-2010, 01:14 PM
Holmes came back in January 88 to fight Tyson and looked terrible, he then didn't fight again until April 91. At that point Foreman was challenging Holyfield and had beaten Cooney. They were pretty much moving in different orbits from 91 onwards and a match between them would have had the relevance of McEnroe playing Borg in 2010.


what does it mean , and a fight between 2 men the same age whom even had common opponents in Norton , Ali , Cooney , Holyfield and maybe more
would have always been somewhat relevant at least , and since they both were champions it could have even add to the demand.
Of course it could have been better if it was in the early 80s , late 70s.


If you want to run a poll on when Ali was prime I'd bet good money that 90% will say 1967. OK back to you who was most prime in 1974 between Ali and Foreman? I have an advantage over you in that I remember clearly the fight and am not looking back knowing the result. Ali was given very very little chance.

Justice is not decided by polls .
The young Ali would have been crushed by Foreman , Foreman was no Sonny Liston .


My mistake then :)

Telling the truth when you are bias and agenda motivated can sometimes be a mistake , be alert next time.


Best to let Angelo Dundee kill the loosening of the ropes myth stone dead

http://www.********boxing.com/news.php?p=23000&more=1

I said to myself they’re going to ask me about the ropes in Zaire. (laughs) And I’m going to tell you, I tightened those stinking ropes at four o’clock in the afternoon but the fight wasn’t until 4am the next day. And you know what happened—the heat stretched the ropes. They were brand new hemp ropes. I didn’t want those ropes to be loose.

Keep believing/quoting the old liar , you are the same.
I read that crap , such a low lie can not work on me , treat it like it came from gawd himself .
Even when his brain is dying the few brain cells that are left are maintaining the evil of old.


Ali didn't plan to do rope a dope he saw that there was no way he could dance away from Foremanfor 15 rounds given how good Foreman was at cutting off the ring and the conditions, Ali adapted like great fighters do.
That said Foreman hit Ali with good enough blows to end the fight but Ali took them, Ali beat Foreman up mentally that's why he won the fight.
Tight ropes, small ring, mild conditions, whatever, Ali would have found a way to win that fight.
:flush0:
what a load of crap
It was the only way Ali could have survived Foreman , keep your alternative parallel reality for the rest of the :buttlick: like the one who wants 2b a mod.
I am interested in the truth alone .
Ali adapted like Hopkins adapted , and like Margachito , Chito Trinidad and Luis Resto adapted , the thread by The Magicman was closed because it told the truth and he was banned 4 it .
The likes of you will climb the walls to say Ali would have accommodated without arms and legs , how cum he didn't accommodate against Holmes then ? he even had his arms and legs , now the 1974 Ali , whom you claim was 7 years removed from his prime , nonetheless , shot to death , could have accommodated even without the ropes , no wonder you worship him so much then.

GJC
08-06-2010, 02:50 PM
what does it mean , and a fight between 2 men the same age whom even had common opponents in Norton , Ali , Cooney , Holyfield and maybe more
would have always been somewhat relevant at least , and since they both were champions it could have even add to the demand.
Of course it could have been better if it was in the early 80s , late 70s.



Archie Moore and SRR had opponents in common and would have been a good fight but not too relevant in 1980. You want to see old men competing with each other past their best watch golf legends.

Justice is not decided by polls .
The young Ali would have been crushed by Foreman , Foreman was no Sonny Liston .

ok everyone else is wrong but you :)
Of course a younger ALi who would have found it easier to stay out of range would have lost lol


Keep believing/quoting the old liar , you are the same.
I read that crap , such a low lie can not work on me , treat it like it came from gawd himself .
Even when his brain is dying the few brain cells that are left are maintaining the evil of old.

Of course Dundee is wrong he was only there.


The likes of you will climb the walls to say Ali would have accommodated without arms and legs , how cum he didn't accommodate against Holmes then ? he even had his arms and legs , now the 1974 Ali , whom you claim was 7 years removed from his prime , nonetheless , shot to death , could have accommodated even without the ropes , no wonder you worship him so much then.

Against Holmes he had Parkinsons, quite hard to adapt to that.

I know you like Foreman because he was a few years ago so you can show you can appreciate older fighters and of course he was BIG

frankenfrank
08-06-2010, 07:02 PM
Archie Moore and SRR had opponents in common and would have been a good fight but not too relevant in 1980. You want to see old men competing with each other past their best watch golf legends.

Archie Moore and SRR were not active fighters during the late 80s , and the entire 90s , not to mention Foreman could have came back earlier or not retire even , if he wanted Holmes.

ok everyone else is wrong but you :)
Of course a younger ALi who would have found it easier to stay out of range would have lost lol

How can one win a fight when remaining out of range of an opponent at least as rangy as one's ?


Of course Dundee is wrong he was only there.

So it makes him tell the truth ? he just tries to cover his own crap , but he can't because it smells through the ages , fact he anticipated that question even at his age. Fact he was asked about it , why do you think that was ?


Against Holmes he had Parkinsons, quite hard to adapt to that.

Don't say that , Ali could accommodate to everything , ropes or no ropes , Parkinosns or no Parkinsons , boxing or muay-thai


I know you like Foreman because he was a few years ago so you can show you can appreciate older fighters and of course he was BIG
What a brilliant observation , are you the son of the grandchild of Sherlock Holmes ? just like you knew I would have called SRR a bum and that I am a Klitschko fan .


I already gave 2 reasons 2 why I rank Foreman above Ali , nothing was taken from either , nor did anyone even doubt the other reason : dominance over common opponents.

GJC
08-06-2010, 07:52 PM
Archie Moore and SRR were not active fighters during the late 80s , and the entire 90s , not to mention Foreman could have came back earlier or not retire even , if he wanted Holmes.


Cudda wudda shudda, he retired and come back when he wanted to, end of.


How can one win a fight when remaining out of range of an opponent at least as rangy as one's ?

It's called speed and ability.

So it makes him tell the truth ? he just tries to cover his own crap , but he can't because it smells through the ages , fact he anticipated that question even at his age. Fact he was asked about it , why do you think that was ?

He anticipated the question as he had been asked in so many times. Same as the ripped glove in the first Copper fight. You know the one that gave Ali an hour and a halfs recovery time :)

Don't say that , Ali could accommodate to everything , ropes or no ropes , Parkinosns or no Parkinsons , boxing or muay-thai

Stupid comment, so I guess on your theory Ali ducked making a come back and fighting Holmes or maybe Tyson?

What a brilliant observation , are you the son of the grandchild of Sherlock Holmes ? just like you knew I would have called SRR a bum and that I am a Klitschko fan .

All I know is you have like many new boxing fans an obsession with weight and size.

I already gave 2 reasons 2 why I rank Foreman above Ali , nothing was taken from either , nor did anyone even doubt the other reason : dominance over common opponents.
Dominance over common opponents = triangle theory. Only thing with this match up is it isn't theoretical they fought Foreman lost.

frankenfrank
08-06-2010, 08:35 PM
Cudda wudda shudda, he retired and come back when he wanted to, end of.

And even then he had an entire decade to fight Holmes .

It's called speed and ability.

Foreman's handspeed was more than Ali's footspeed

He anticipated the question as he had been asked in so many times. Same as the ripped glove in the first Copper fight. You know the one that gave Ali an hour and a halfs recovery time :)

And why do you think he was asked about it so many times Sherlock ?

Stupid comment, so I guess on your theory Ali ducked making a come back and fighting Holmes or maybe Tyson?

Ali didn't duck making a comeback and fighting Holmes because he fought him.
Between him and Tyson there are 24 years , so I never blamed him for ducking Tyson. But you should blame it on him because he could have accommodated to everything , couldn't he ?

All I know is you have like many new boxing fans an obsession with weight and size.

Weight and size matter , I also have an obsession with age and other stats.

Dominance over common opponents = triangle theory. Only thing with this match up is it isn't theoretical they fought Foreman lost.

Lost because ?
Many of those things are in my thread on that topic , the thing I didn't know , you told me in this thread.

GJC
08-06-2010, 09:42 PM
And even then he had an entire decade to fight Holmes .

Again to what purpose? Fighters fight to advance their careers and to make money. When Holmes was active Foreman was retired and when Foreman came back Holmes was not in the mix.
Just because they are the same age is totally irrelevant, Benetiz was finished at 25 but by your theory any fighter roughly the same age as him, say McCallum, ducked him.


Foreman's handspeed was more than Ali's footspeed

Don't agree, Ali's handspeed was quicker than Foreman's too.


And why do you think he was asked about it so many times Sherlock ?

Lot of idiots around, same people that think that Ali got a 10 minute break in the Cooper fight. Urban myth.


Ali didn't duck making a comeback and fighting Holmes because he fought him.
Between him and Tyson there are 24 years , so I never blamed him for ducking Tyson. But you should blame it on him because he could have accommodated to everything , couldn't he ?

Not everything but throughout his career he problem solved like great fighters do. That is the key to boxing solving the problem the other fighter poses.


Weight and size matter , I also have an obsession with age and other stats.

Think you are following the wrong sport to be honest, I think American Football will hold more interest for you. Lots of stats and big guys too, you'll love it.


Lost because ?
Many of those things are in my thread on that topic , the thing I didn't know , you told me in this thread.

He lost because he fought a stupid fight and allowed Ali to get into his head. Couple that with the fact that Ali fought brilliantly off the ropes and had the greater accuracy and you have it. The problems that Foreman posed, Ali solved, the problems that Ali posed, Foreman didn't.

frankenfrank
08-07-2010, 05:11 AM
Again to what purpose? Fighters fight to advance their careers and to make money. When Holmes was active Foreman was retired and when Foreman came back Holmes was not in the mix.

Was Muhammad Qawi in the mix when Foreman came back ?
Was Gerry Cooney in the mix even when Foreman came back ?
Don't you think there was money in such a fight : Foreman vs. Holmes ?

Just because they are the same age is totally irrelevant, Benetiz was finished at 25 but by your theory any fighter roughly the same age as him, say McCallum, ducked him.

off topic : maybe it is an indication to how overrated Benitez is , since when great deffensive wizards are spent at 25 ? Tyson , Holyfield , Frazier , Pacquiao , Barrera , Morales , Marquez were all quite fresh at that age , yet none is considered as great defensively as Benitez.
Hell , Nigel Benn and Julian Jackson were fresh at that age + 2.

Don't agree, Ali's handspeed was quicker than Foreman's too.

I compared footspeed to handspeed , not a genius comparison , but you still got it wrong.

Lot of idiots around, same people that think that Ali got a 10 minute break in the Cooper fight. Urban myth.

I watched the fight 3 times at least , Ali used the ropes , he could do it only because they were so loose , even boxingboy claimed the ropes were loose not because of the heat (Dundee's blatant lie) but because they simply did not fit the ring.


Not everything but throughout his career he problem solved like great fighters do. That is the key to boxing solving the problem the other fighter poses.

I wonder to what extent did he solve the problems posed by Norton and the smallish suspect chinned Frazier.

Think you are following the wrong sport to be honest, I think American Football will hold more interest for you. Lots of stats and big guys too, you'll love it.


He lost because he fought a stupid fight and allowed Ali to get into his head. Couple that with the fact that Ali fought brilliantly off the ropes and had the greater accuracy and you have it. The problems that Foreman posed, Ali solved, the problems that Ali posed, Foreman didn't.
The problems Margarito posed , Cotto did not solve , the problems Trinidad posed , David Reid did not solve , The problems Luis Resto posed , Billy Collins Jr. did not solve.
And somewhat differently , the problems Holmes and Berbick posed , Ali did not solve.

That fight's outcomes are irrelevant , fact is Foreman never got a rematch , and Ali had plenty of 2 and above fight series throughout his career :
Norton , Frazier , Liston , Patterson , Chuvalo , Quarry.
Yet no time for Foreman , Ali knew the answer you fail to acknowledge .

GJC
08-07-2010, 11:34 AM
Was Muhammad Qawi in the mix when Foreman came back ?
Was Gerry Cooney in the mix even when Foreman came back ?
Don't you think there was money in such a fight : Foreman vs. Holmes ?

Completely ignoring timelines etc.
OK they were the same age and both had a name so as long as there are idiots around lets make the fight. Foreman completely ducked the old overweight Holmes and fought fighters 20 years younger.
Fact is I think negotiations for this fight fell through a couple of times due to money and who got what.


off topic : maybe it is an indication to how overrated Benitez is , since when great deffensive wizards are spent at 25 ? Tyson , Holyfield , Frazier , Pacquiao , Barrera , Morales , Marquez were all quite fresh at that age , yet none is considered as great defensively as Benitez.
Hell , Nigel Benn and Julian Jackson were fresh at that age + 2.

Benetiz wasn't overated just not as big as you like them, also just goes to show that stats don't always work. Offtopic it shows you know little


I compared footspeed to handspeed , not a genius comparison , but you still got it wrong.

Yes I know you did, I replied don't agree then went on to say Ali's handspeed was greater too. If you read carefully you will learn.


I watched the fight 3 times at least , Ali used the ropes , he could do it only because they were so loose , even boxingboy claimed the ropes were loose not because of the heat (Dundee's blatant lie) but because they simply did not fit the ring.

Wow 3 times!!! Just watch the bits where Ali leaned so far back Foreman couldn't reach him? Good highlights wasn't they? Try watching the whole fight, there was more to the fight than that. As for Dundee lying, you were there in Zaire you saw him loosening the ropes?

I wonder to what extent did he solve the problems posed by Norton and the smallish suspect chinned Frazier.



The problems Margarito posed , Cotto did not solve , the problems Trinidad posed , David Reid did not solve , The problems Luis Resto posed , Billy Collins Jr. did not solve.
And somewhat differently , the problems Holmes and Berbick posed , Ali did not solve.


Struggling now? Stop trying to make points you can't.


That fight's outcomes are irrelevant , fact is Foreman never got a rematch , and Ali had plenty of 2 and above fight series throughout his career :
Norton , Frazier , Liston , Patterson , Chuvalo , Quarry.
Yet no time for Foreman , Ali knew the answer you fail to acknowledge .

After Ali won the title back he generally mixed one hard defence with one easier defence, maybe the timing wasn't right, who knows?
You're certain Foreman would win the rematch?
I and everyone else were certain he'd win the first fight too!

BennyST
08-07-2010, 11:47 AM
List your Top 10 Greatest Black Heavyweights.

My Top 10 of All Time

Muhammad Ali
Joe Louis
Jack Johnson
Sonny Liston
George Foreman
Larry Holmes
Harry Wills
Lennox Lewis
Mike Tyson
Evander Holyfield


Damn racist!

frankenfrank
08-07-2010, 02:28 PM
Completely ignoring timelines etc.
OK they were the same age and both had a name so as long as there are idiots around lets make the fight. Foreman completely ducked the old overweight Holmes and fought fighters 20 years younger.
Fact is I think negotiations for this fight fell through a couple of times due to money and who got what.

And who is to blame for the negotiations' failure ?

Benetiz wasn't overated just not as big as you like them, also just goes to show that stats don't always work. Offtopic it shows you know little

What does size have to do with what you quoted here ?
I gave examples of men both bigger and smaller than him whom are less considered defensive wizards but were all far from spent at age 25 , yes , even Tyson despite what many people will always claim.
Those people will claim he was spent at 22 and 5 months.

Yes I know you did, I replied don't agree then went on to say Ali's handspeed was greater too. If you read carefully you will learn.

Ali could run/skip/turn faster than George's punches , said GJC.


Wow 3 times!!! Just watch the bits where Ali leaned so far back Foreman couldn't reach him? Good highlights wasn't they? Try watching the whole fight, there was more to the fight than that. As for Dundee lying, you were there in Zaire you saw him loosening the ropes?

When I say I watched a fight I mean I watched the entire fight.
The part you described here is the critical part , where with different ropes , Ali would have been hit full force and would have had to absorb that full force.


Struggling now? Stop trying to make points you can't.

You try to make ludicrous point by claiming Ali could have accommodated , Ali won because of a cheat , simple fact , but not for u and most of the rest .


After Ali won the title back he generally mixed one hard defence with one easier defence, maybe the timing wasn't right, who knows?
You're certain Foreman would win the rematch?
I and everyone else were certain he'd win the first fight too!
And you were all right , Foreman would have won without of the cheat.
But since then you are wrong.

GJC
08-07-2010, 03:09 PM
And who is to blame for the negotiations' failure ?

What does size have to do with what you quoted here ?
I gave examples of men both bigger and smaller than him whom are less considered defensive wizards but were all far from spent at age 25 , yes , even Tyson despite what many people will always claim.
Those people will claim he was spent at 22 and 5 months.

Ali could run/skip/turn faster than George's punches , said GJC.


When I say I watched a fight I mean I watched the entire fight.
The part you described here is the critical part , where with different ropes , Ali would have been hit full force and would have had to absorb that full force.


You try to make ludicrous point by claiming Ali could have accommodated , Ali won because of a cheat , simple fact , but not for u and most of the rest .


And you were all right , Foreman would have won without of the cheat.
But since then you are wrong.

ok to wrap this up quickly, what cheat? Who cheated?
The ropes were loose Ali took advantage of them, it was humid, Ali took advantage of it, it's called adapting.
As for Foreman knocking out Ali if the ropes were tighter, based on what?
Ali took enough of Foreman's blows without a problem so guessing that one of the blows that Ali avoided by using the ropes is pure speculation based on zero proof.
I know this is frustrating because Ali's victory proves that he would not break sweat beating the BIG fighters of today but it is what it is.

frankenfrank
08-08-2010, 08:47 AM
ok to wrap this up quickly, what cheat? Who cheated?

Lets put the analogy in its place :
[Ali , Dundee] ~ [Resto,Panama Lewis] ~ [Margarito,Javier Capetillo] ~
[Felix Trinidad , Felix Trinidad Sr.] ~ [Pryor , Panama Lewis ]
Ali benefited from Dundee's cheat and his claim to being innocent and unaware is even more glaring than Trinidad's , Margarito's , Resto's and Pryor's claims to being unaware.
Not to mention other heroic stories surrounding Ali's career like the Liston fights and the Henry Cooper fight (which you mentioned) and his dirty style.

The ropes were loose Ali took advantage of them, it was humid, Ali took advantage of it, it's called adapting.

So it means you are also a huge Hopkins fan too , correct me if I'm wrong.

As for Foreman knocking out Ali if the ropes were tighter, based on what?
Ali took enough of Foreman's blows without a problem so guessing that one of the blows that Ali avoided by using the ropes is pure speculation based on zero proof.

The loose ropes allowed Ali to od 2 things :
(1) avoid some of the punches by leaning back quickly
(2) absorb the punches he did not manage to avoid much easier as he move back with the ropes , preventing a knockdown and absorbing a critical part of the punches' energy.

I know this is frustrating because Ali's victory proves that he would not break sweat beating the BIG fighters of today but it is what it is.
Not at all , because Foreman's tiny size and range advantages over Ali were no where near the Klitschko brothers' (again , especially Vitali) advantages over Ali which would have enabled them to beat him in his own game.
The Klitschkos are no Bob Foster , you know ? same for Lewis and Bowe.

GJC
08-08-2010, 09:09 AM
Lets put the analogy in its place :
<Ali , Dundee> ~ <Resto,Panama Lewis> ~ <Margarito,Javier Capetillo> ~
<Felix Trinidad , Felix Trinidad Sr.> ~ <Pryor , Panama Lewis >
Ali benefited from Dundee's cheat and his claim to being innocent and unaware is even more glaring than Trinidad's , Margarito's , Resto's and Pryor's claims to being unaware.
Not to mention other heroic stories surrounding Ali's career like the Liston fights and the Henry Cooper fight (which you mentioned) and his dirty style.


We are getting to it now :) The Klits are the greatest right so lets we need to chip away at Ali?
Ah so it was Dundee cheating was it? And your proof is.........?
Yes I did mention the Cooper fight because i'd love to hear from you how long the delay due to the torn glove was? 15 minutes, while Dundee went to a sports shop to get a new one?


So it means you are also a huge Hopkins fan too , correct me if I'm wrong.

Wrong, as usual

The loose ropes allowed Ali to od 2 things :
(1) avoid some of the punches by leaning back quickly
(2) absorb the punches he did not manage to avoid much easier as he move back with the ropes , preventing a knockdown and absorbing a critical part of the punches' energy.

1) When you say some you mean a few
2) Given that Ali didn't hit the canvas and never looked like doing so you believe that the damage of Foreman's punches doesn't effect on impact? OK so you know nothing about boxing or physics

Not at all , because Foreman's tiny size and range advantages over Ali were no where near the Klitschko brothers' (again , especially Vitali) advantages over Ali which would have enabled them to beat him in his own game.
The Klitschkos are no Bob Foster , you know ? same for Lewis and Bowe.
So Foreman's 2 inch reach advantage over Ali wouldn't be as much of an advantage as Wlad's 1 inch or Vitali having the same reach? Boxing, physics and now maths.

But I forgot weight! Yes the Klits would win the weigh in i'll give you that.

So physically Foreman would have been a better fighter in his come back than in the 70s being 30 or 40 lbs heavier?

frankenfrank
08-08-2010, 11:07 AM
We are getting to it now :) The Klits are the greatest right so lets we need to chip away at Ali?
Ah so it was Dundee cheating was it? And your proof is.........?
Yes I did mention the Cooper fight because i'd love to hear from you how long the delay due to the torn glove was? 15 minutes, while Dundee went to a sports shop to get a new one?

Sorry I did not note the brackets problems in here , please read again my last post , I edited the part with the brackets.


Wrong, as usual

But Hopkins has great " accommodating " skills. He "upset" Trinidad , Pavlik and some may say Calzaghe 2 (I will not b dragged into that discussion , I watched that fight and it was really close , I did not claim anything about it here except that it was close and I wrote : "some may say")


1) When you say some you mean a few
2) Given that Ali didn't hit the canvas and never looked like doing so you believe that the damage of Foreman's punches doesn't effect on impact? OK so you know nothing about boxing or physics

Ali admitted himself he was out on his feet but Foreman did not know that , and this is after avoiding some of those punches and absorbing the rest much better due to the ropes not disturbing his move backwards along with the punches which reduces from the energy absorbed.

So Foreman's 2 inch reach advantage over Ali wouldn't be as much of an advantage as Wlad's 1 inch or Vitali having the same reach? Boxing, physics and now maths.

Now u r boxrecing , **** that **** , Foreman's , Ali's and Liston's effective reach is lesser than each Klischko's


But I forgot weight! Yes the Klits would win the weigh in i'll give you that.

So physically Foreman would have been a better fighter in his come back than in the 70s being 30 or 40 lbs heavier?

Wrong again , as usual .

GJC
08-08-2010, 11:54 AM
Sorry I did not note the brackets problems in here , please read again my last post , I edited the part with the brackets.


I didn't miss your point, my answer stays the same.



But Hopkins has great " accommodating " skills. He "upset" Trinidad , Pavlik and some may say Calzaghe 2 (I will not b dragged into that discussion , I watched that fight and it was really close , I did not claim anything about it here except that it was close and I wrote : "some may say")

I had the fight for Calzaghe myself but as you say that's a different discussion.
Hopkins is good at nullyfying opponents for sure, I'm not a fan as I find him a dull fighter and I don't care much for his personality. But he is effective and it is the fault of his opponents if they can't figure out how to beat him.


Ali admitted himself he was out on his feet but Foreman did not know that , and this is after avoiding some of those punches and absorbing the rest much better due to the ropes not disturbing his move backwards along with the punches which reduces from the energy absorbed.

Forgetting the fighting on the ropes Foreman landed more than enough cleanly on Ali to knock him out/down, but Ali never looked in any danger. Ali was also winning the fight he didn't simply win it because Foreman gassed.

Now u r boxrecing , **** that **** , Foreman's , Ali's and Liston's effective reach is lesser than each Klischko's

OK lets hear your take on effective reach. I know the whole concept that a good fighter from the past isn't going to freeze against Klitschko's because they are sooooo big escapes you but you'll surely agree that Foreman and Ali were of sufficient size that the Klitschko's size wouldn't be a massive advantage.
Let's take Shannon Briggs, 13 years ago a 48 yo Foreman beat Briggs (watch the fight, it was an awful decision) The next fight Briggs gave Lewis a couple of scares. Now the Vitali fans are already building Briggs up as a live body and when Vitali wins it will again affirm to them that Vitali is the greatest!
Wlad has some massive weaknesses which he has papered over but they are still there it's just that the standard of opposition cannot exploit them, better fighters would.
You have a weak era, but you're young and it will improve, when it does you will look back and realise how weak this era is.

Wrong again , as usual .
You are but as long as you read my posts and watch fights instead of weigh ins and boxingrec you'll improve :)

frankenfrank
08-08-2010, 01:30 PM
I didn't miss your point, my answer stays the same.


I had the fight for Calzaghe myself but as you say that's a different discussion.
Hopkins is good at nullyfying opponents for sure, I'm not a fan as I find him a dull fighter and I don't care much for his personality. But he is effective and it is the fault of his opponents if they can't figure out how to beat him.

The key 2 nullifying head leads is elbow leads and counters .
But Hopkins has more support (promotion company , popularity , followers , etc) than most of his opponents which is why he can get away with blatant fouls and his opponents can't.
It is none of their fault.
He was dull but so were Ali and Holmes .


Forgetting the fighting on the ropes Foreman landed more than enough cleanly on Ali to knock him out/down, but Ali never looked in any danger. Ali was also winning the fight he didn't simply win it because Foreman gassed.

Foreman would have worn him out had his punches had their usual effect.
Foreman would have ended his career then , maybe Ali would have launched a failed comeback of a 1-3 fights but would not have won any more against elite opponents .
Fact is Ali never rematched Foreman. No version of Ali could withstand Foreman's punches under fair circumstances.

OK lets hear your take on effective reach.

The length of the arm from the shoulder to the end of the closed fist is what should be taken as "reach".

Effective reach is composed of 2 parts and depends on the opponent :
(1) defensive effective reach : the distance the opponent has to move his punch in order to reach one's head.
(2) offensive reach : swap one with opponent and use the same definition.

Therefore height effects effective reach more than you thought.


I know the whole concept that a good fighter from the past isn't going to freeze against Klitschko's because they are sooooo big escapes you but you'll surely agree that Foreman and Ali were of sufficient size that the Klitschko's size wouldn't be a massive advantage.

Considering Ali's strategy each Klitschko would have had a massive advantage indeed.

Considering Foreman was a tad bit bigger than Ali and was more aggressive ,
he is one of the few I give a realistic chance at stopping the Klitschkos in his prime.

Let's take Shannon Briggs, 13 years ago a 48 yo Foreman beat Briggs (watch the fight, it was an awful decision) The next fight Briggs gave Lewis a couple of scares. Now the Vitali fans are already building Briggs up as a live body and when Vitali wins it will again affirm to them that Vitali is the greatest!

Shannon Briggs is a corpse of a not so good fighter.
A win over him at this point of time will mean ****.
Pity this fight was signed.
I thought the same about Barrett-Tua but Barrett surprised me and I respect him more since then.


Wlad has some massive weaknesses which he has papered over but they are still there it's just that the standard of opposition cannot exploit them, better fighters would.

Only a few could.

You have a weak era, but you're young and it will improve, when it does you will look back and realise how weak this era is.

This era is weak but not as you try to make it 2 seem , simply the Klitschkos make it seem that week.

You are but as long as you read my posts and watch fights instead of weigh ins and boxingrec you'll improve :)
I watched about 200 fights to this point.
I read many posters' posts.
You will b surprised 2 know that some of the best posters reckon that the Klitschkos and Lewis could beat Ali in his own game.
I would not have discounted Bowe but it would not have been exactly his (Ali's) game .

frankenfrank
08-08-2010, 01:58 PM
Ezzard Charles was actually close to the same age as Marciano. Walcott was 38, but still looked very good in the first fight with Rocky (like Vitali Klitschko today at age 39 is still very good).

Archie Moore was still very good too. Was Moore younger when he fought Cassius Clay seven years later?

He was banned , he can't answer .
But instead of him I can say Moore was dead against Ali , and Walcott's (9 years older than Marciano) next fight (against Marciano also) was his last.
And some may say that while Charles was 2 years older than Marciano (still older) the tear and wear on him was even bigger at that point as he started his career at a younger age.

Joeyzagz
08-08-2010, 03:32 PM
I respect Frankenfrank more than 80% of the posters here because at least Frank is consistent with his own criteria. I may not agree with Vitali being #1 overall but Frank's criteria are based on certain rules, and he follows those rules throughout his list.

Most people in the history section have a shifting criteria that mysteriously change to exclude certain fighters, and its really childish to be honest.

Calilloyd
08-08-2010, 07:11 PM
[QUOTE=frankenfrank;8979281]1. George Foreman
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Lennox Lewis
4. Mike Tyson
5. Larry Holmes
6. Oliver McCall
7. Evander Holyfield
8. Joe Louis
9. Joe Frazier
10. Chris Byrd




11. Riddick Bowe

12. Tony Tucker
13. Sam Peter
14. James Smith
15. James Douglas
16. Michael Spinks
17. Lamon Brewster
18. Sam Langford
19. Sony Liston
20. Frank Bruno














You can't be taken seriously when you rate fighters like Brewster and Peter over
Johnson and Sonny Liston.
And Tua top ten all time? That's just sill

frankenfrank
08-08-2010, 09:01 PM
1. George Foreman
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Lennox Lewis
4. Mike Tyson
5. Larry Holmes
6. Oliver McCall
7. Evander Holyfield
8. Joe Louis
9. Joe Frazier
10. Chris Byrd




11. Riddick Bowe

12. Tony Tucker
13. Sam Peter
14. James Smith
15. James Douglas
16. Michael Spinks
17. Lamon Brewster
18. Sam Langford
19. Sony Liston
20. Frank Bruno





You can't be taken seriously when you rate fighters like Brewster and Peter over
Johnson and Sonny Liston.


Sam Peter is only 30 and look at who he fought already :
Vitali Klitschko
Wladimir Klitschko
Jameel McCline
Eddie Chambers
James Toney (*2)
Oleg Maskaev
Yanqui Diaz
Nagy Aguilera
Robert Hawkins
Julius Long
Jeremy Williams
Charles Shufford

and was stopped only once , held title already .

I can see why u think Liston can b ranked above Brewster , my reasoning there will not b as strong , but :
What is Liston's best win ? Lightheavyweight Floyd Patterson
Brewster's ? a reigning and defending Wladimir Klitschko

Liston's other "quality" wins ? Cleveland Williams *2 , Zora Folley and a decision over Eddie Machen whom was stopped by Ingemar Jhonson.

Lame. Poor . Weak.

Brewster's other quality wins ?
Golota , Krasniqi , a decision over Meehan (even) , even a stoppage over Cleveland Woods (was not picked because of his name although it turned out lookin good) and Luis Monaco (a still prime Luis Monaco) are worth more than 2 stoppages over Cleveland Williams. plus a KO of Danny Batchelder a stoppage over Nate Jones (avenged an amateurs loss) and a decision over Michael Sprott , an experienced boxer.

But I might somehow tolerate (sometimes) ranking Liston above Brewster.
But not above Peter , never.


Regarding Johnson he ducked Sam Langford , an overweight MW at most , more true an overweight WW or LMW , although the P4P GOAT .

Others here will probably be able 2 tell u more about who he ducked.

And he was KOd by Choynski , a MW , what a joke for a HW champion.

Ruiz is rightfully considered a weak champion because he lost decisions to roided Roy and James , and was KOd by monster Tua , but aren't Johnson's achievements even weaker than these ?


And Tua top ten all time? That's just sill

Look at who Tua beat and how , look at who Liston beat and how.
Tua beat dangerous HW contenders , Liston either beat fighters that would have been bums or journeymen at most in every other era than his own.
I won't even answer u rigorously about this one.

Calilloyd
08-08-2010, 09:58 PM
[QUOTE=frankenfrank;9002588]Sam Peter is only 30 and look at who he fought already :
Vitali Klitschko
Wladimir Klitschko
Jameel McCline
Eddie Chambers
James Toney (*2)
Oleg Maskaev
Yanqui Diaz
Nagy Aguilera
Robert Hawkins
Julius Long
Jeremy Williams
Charles Shufford

and was stopped only once , held title already .

I can see why u think Liston can b ranked above Brewster , my reasoning there will not b as strong , but :
What is Liston's best win ? Lightheavyweight Floyd Patterson
Brewster's ? a reigning and defending Wladimir Klitschko

Liston's other "quality" wins ? Cleveland Williams *2 , Zora Folley and a decision over Eddie Machen whom was stopped by Ingemar Jhonson.

Lame. Poor . Weak.

Brewster's other quality wins ?
Golota , Krasniqi , a decision over Meehan (even) , even a stoppage over Cleveland Woods (was not picked because of his name although it turned out lookin good) and Luis Monaco (a still prime Luis Monaco) are worth more than 2 stoppages over Cleveland Williams. plus a KO of Danny Batchelder a stoppage over Nate Jones (avenged an amateurs loss) and a decision over Michael Sprott , an experienced boxer.

But I might somehow tolerate (sometimes) ranking Liston above Brewster.
But not above Peter , never.


Regarding Johnson he ducked Sam Langford , an overweight MW at most , more true an overweight WW or LMW , although the P4P GOAT .

Others here will probably be able 2 tell u more about who he ducked.

And he was KOd by Choynski , a MW , what a joke for a HW champion.

Ruiz is rightfully considered a weak champion because he lost decisions to roided Roy and James , and was KOd by monster Tua , but aren't Johnson's achievements even weaker than these ?



Look at who Tua beat and how , look at who Liston beat and how.
Tua beat dangerous HW contenders , Liston either beat fighters that would have been









One of the worst post I've ever read here. Either you're extremely ignorant or your trolling. I hope it's the latter for your sake. I won't waste anymore time here.

Ziggy Stardust
08-09-2010, 08:31 PM
Sam Peter is only 30 and look at who he fought already :
Vitali Klitschko
Wladimir Klitschko
Jameel McCline
Eddie Chambers
James Toney (*2)
Oleg Maskaev
Yanqui Diaz
Nagy Aguilera
Robert Hawkins
Julius Long
Jeremy Williams
Charles Shufford

and was stopped only once , held title already .

I can see why u think Liston can b ranked above Brewster , my reasoning there will not b as strong , but :
What is Liston's best win ? Lightheavyweight Floyd Patterson
Brewster's ? a reigning and defending Wladimir Klitschko

Liston's other "quality" wins ? Cleveland Williams *2 , Zora Folley and a decision over Eddie Machen whom was stopped by Ingemar Jhonson.

Lame. Poor . Weak.

Brewster's other quality wins ?
Golota , Krasniqi , a decision over Meehan (even) , even a stoppage over Cleveland Woods (was not picked because of his name although it turned out lookin good) and Luis Monaco (a still prime Luis Monaco) are worth more than 2 stoppages over Cleveland Williams. plus a KO of Danny Batchelder a stoppage over Nate Jones (avenged an amateurs loss) and a decision over Michael Sprott , an experienced boxer.

But I might somehow tolerate (sometimes) ranking Liston above Brewster.
But not above Peter , never.


Regarding Johnson he ducked Sam Langford , an overweight MW at most , more true an overweight WW or LMW , although the P4P GOAT .

Others here will probably be able 2 tell u more about who he ducked.

And he was KOd by Choynski , a MW , what a joke for a HW champion.

Ruiz is rightfully considered a weak champion because he lost decisions to roided Roy and James , and was KOd by monster Tua , but aren't Johnson's achievements even weaker than these ?


Look at who Tua beat and how , look at who Liston beat and how.
Tua beat dangerous HW contenders , Liston either beat fighters that would have been bums or journeymen at most in every other era than his own.
I won't even answer u rigorously about this one.

In perusing the posts from this thread I'm left with one question: Is it even REMOTELY possible for you to make a post that ISN'T retarded? :rolleyes9:

Poet

Vadrigar.
08-12-2010, 03:41 PM
One of the worst post I've ever read here. Either you're extremely ignorant or your trolling. I hope it's the latter for your sake. I won't waste anymore time here.

Just ignore this retarded troll. If you want a good laugh take a look at his p4p list.

Sam Donald
08-12-2010, 03:42 PM
Just ignore this retarded troll. If you want a good laugh take a look at his p4p list.

haha cosign.....

Vadrigar.
08-12-2010, 03:43 PM
haha cosign.....

have you seen it? :lol1:

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=405523