soul_survivor

Joe Louis was a better man, and he was a better role model. why? Because Ali refused to travel 3000 miles to kill innocent women and children?

lol bradley has turned me into a fan but i still cant get over this and neither will he, unless he fights khan.

So what you're saying is that I should only like a fighter when he's at the top of his game? No, I'm saying you should only like a fighter who actually fights which is...you know, his job.

Mikey ain't been relevant in years. Pick this thread up when he gets a world class win.

So Maidana won 5 of the last 7 on the 2 of 3 judges cards. 4 of the last 6 on the other card. With one 10-8 round in the 10th for a brutal beating. You tell me who won the fight. The guy with the most points

Easy one this, Tyson much faster, hits just as hard if not harder, much better overall boxing skill. Liston's advantage would be his jab but Tyson would swarm all around it, likely stopping him late.

I'd say it's either Mike Tyson or Lennox Lewis. wait, you've included Vitali and Wlad and not Holyfield? LOL Holyfield is the best, Lewis may be a close second though.

Here's a good one. Ali divorced his first wife after he converted to Moslemism. Why.....?? Because she wouldn't wear a dress down to her ankles and walk 3 paces behind him. As well as being almost illiterate he was also nuts. Iremember it was such a BIG romance, and well written about, an idyllic couple etc.etc...... Ali had already converted to Islam when he married for the first time. The rest is just as much bs as your first paragraph.

Not sure if I've posted on this but SRL of course!! Having said that, Manny's resume is deeper and his career has more longevity. Quality > Quantity though

Both were great victories, and probably Floyd and Pac's best wins respectively. Personally, I think Floyd's win over Chico (RIP) is more impressive. As great of a win as Pac had against Barrera in their first fight Marco had already been through countless wars and was probably no longer in his prime, but Pac still KO Barrera and he gets full credit for that. However, Mayweather fought a young, undefeated, and prime Corrales. At the time of the fight both guys were on the p4p list. Furthermore, Floyd put on one of the best boxing exhibitions I've ever seen. Floyd proceeded to knock Corrales down 5 TIMES and got the KO in the tenth round. Who thought a much smaller Mayweather would KO the power punching Corrales? That performance is without a doubt one of the best boxing performances I've ever seen, that's the stuff legends are made of. Thoughts? The fact that Mayweather/Corrales even has 113 votes says it all. The level of imbeciles/ethnic supporters is too damn high.

There is separation now from the Klitschko era to 2022...where we still do not have a single definitive heavyweight (Fury was a drug cheat who gave up his belts, AJ v Wilder never happened, Fury v AJ never happened and Fury v Usyk is not happening) so that tells us something. Wlad and Vitali brought stability in terms of who we can regard as top heavyweights so that's something which is missed but when comparing to fighters from the 70s, particularly the best which were Ali, Foreman and Frazier, neither Klit can hold a candle. Vitali of course had a terrific chin while Wlad was the complete opposite. Both guys had limited ability and were aided with their immense size and reach but that wouldnt work against any of the three in their prime. Wlad would probbaly be stopped along the way by likes of Shavers or even Lyle, let alone challenge for a title. Vitali could probably hug and jab his way to a few wins, I think he'd be too big and strong for Frazier but Foremany ends up cutting him and Ali outpoints him. I think Shavers would probably end up with a win too. Neither man is a great in the 70s.

AJ lost many of those fights. What if Fury had fought and lost to the people AJ lost to? would that make him any better or worse than Joshua? And... Fury was, according to Usyk, a much harder fight for him. Lets say Usyk had destroyed Fury. Then perhaps an argument could be made that Fury winning over Wilder may have been due to Wilder's lacking more than Fury's ability... But Fury fought well against Usyk. Fury also beat a younger Klitsko and put on a master class... Essentially people want to credit Joshua for a few more wins and forget some significant losses he had... they also neglect to pay attention to mutual opponents of the two fighters. Chisora was a tougher fight for Usyk than Joshua! I'm not sure the point here making here. You said he lost some of those fights lol but fighters lose. He also beat Ruiz handily in the rematch, unified against Parker and beat Wlad for the WBA. While also betaing way better opponents in his run. Fury only had 3 world class opponents in the division at best...thats Wlad, Usyk and Wilder or Whyte. Then you say Fury beat chisora as if it means something while AJ sparked out a much better version of Whyte. I honestly don't get the Fury love from largely an American base, maybe it's because you only saw him vs Wilder.

Fury's greatest win is Wlad in the worst heavyweight fight of all time. Since then his only so called world level win is Wilder and that guy is one of the worst champions ever. So what do we actually know of Fury's level? Nothing.

Another expert weighs in. You don't have to be an expert to state facts. During Fury's time as WBC champion and later so called lineal, the other champions in the division were: Martin AJ Parker Ruiz AJ again Usyk Wilder AJ has fought everyone bar Wilder on that list...Fury fought only Wilder over a period of something like 3 years, then finally fought Usyk when there was no one else left. Fury hasn't even unified belts before. So maybe I am an expert compared to you. Thanks for coming.

Not to be confrontational or disrespectful, sir. However; a fan who says something like "The so called lineal" is disqualified from being a knowledgeable boxing fan, let alone an "expert". In dealing with facts; counting "sanctioning body" belts as true accolades tips your hand. This is a condition unique to heavyweights because the true lineal championship is empirical at the Alpha weight class. There is no belt there that holds any real meaning. In recent times, Ali, L. Spinks, Holmes, M. Spinks, Tyson, Douglas, Holyfield, Bowe, Moorer, Foreman, Briggs, Lewis, Rahman, W. Klitschko, Fury and Usyk each has taken a turn holding the one, real Heavyweight Championship of the World. The most historically significant crown in all of sports. During the same recent timeframe, Ken Norton, John Tate, Mike Weaver, Michael Dokes, Gerrie Coetzee, Tim Witherspoon, Monte Masters, Pinklon Thomas, Greg Page, Tony Tubbs, Trevor Berbick, Bonecrusher Smith, Tony Tucker, Francisco Damiani, Ray Mercer, Mike Bernardo, Bert Cooper, Adilson Rodrigues, Jimmy Thunder, Tommy Morrison, Michael Bentt, Herbie Hide, Oliver McCall, Bruce Seldon, Frank Bruno, Henry Akinwande, Aussie Joe Bugner, Vitali Klitschko, Chris Byrd, Frans Botha, John Ruiz, Roy Jones, Corrie Sanders, Lamon Brewster, Nicolai Valuev, Siarhei Liakhovich, Oleg Maskaev, Ruslan Chagaev, Sultan Ibragimov, Samuel Peter, David Haye, Alexander Povetkin, Bermine Stiverne, Deontay Wilder, Charles Martin, Lucas Brown, Anthony Joshua, Joseph Parker, Mahmoud (Manuel) Charr, Andy Ruiz Jr., Trevor Bryan, Shawn Laughery, Daniel Dubois and Kubrat Pulev were NEVER the Heavyweight Champion of the World. They simply never won that singular title. They were merely contenders, (and some, not even quite that), and sanctioning body Belt Holders; which is something VERY different; and this is something people knowledgeable about boxing fully understand, without any confusion. See this as an opportunity to learn something. Smart people don't ever waste those.​ The opportunity for you to learn is that Fury had retired but still somehow managed to be labelled lineal. Not to mention it was potentially a shadow ban from UKAD. Anywya, label him lineal if you like, bottom line is AJ fought and beat better opponents. Thanks for coming to class kiddo.

Historically, Americans have respected UK fighters who go to America and win fights more, and AJ only had one night in america which was a bad one so that's why. Yeah I know but it's just nonsense yet again. It's been about 20 years since the world's best Heavyweights have been European.

Pacquiao has the best resume of any fighter post the 1980s, so obviously he gets the win here, although Whitaker has one of the best single wins ever.

It was so obvious what he was saying. People are just operating under the assumption that all Mayweather fans are Broner fans and assumed he was trying to say those two losses are arguable. They thought they saw an opportunity to be rip on a Fl0mo and look cool. it wasn't obvious, it was terrible grammer. Stop jumping on dans dick

This moron is talking about grammar and he can't even spell grammar :lol1: :dunce: oops typo, sue me ***** now get yourself back to whatever hole you crawl out of prick

fighting granados will get him to the top!

5 years into the decade. Arguable loss's; Quintero De Leon Malignaggi Maidana Porter Best wins; DeMarco Malignaggi Eloy Perez? Escobedo? Rees? how were those arguable losses? pretty wide in everyone's opinion. This thread makes me laugh every time, I said after the DeMarco fight Broner isn't up to much, even though he won that quite comfortably he never showed any true sparkle against a mediocre and very passive opponent. Then came the Malignaggi debacle.

Obviously the Porter and Madiana loss's weren't arguable. I'm adding all the fights he's possibly lost. With Maidana and Porter being obvious ones. He's ARGUABLY lost to everyone on that list. use better grammar next time. fool

Lol what a thread I said after the pdl fight and then more vehemently after the Malignaggi fight, broner rjust isn't tht good. People hyping him were the same ones hyping the likes of spence, thurman et Al, guys who have actually done less than broner. Oh the irony.

i have said i was wrong several times in this thread..not sure what more ya'll want... yeah but theres no reason to bring up 4 titles, as you know they were all bs. The guy couldn't even dominate 135 which was lackluster at the time. Just let it go man

You are all as dumb as ****, Larry always knows what he's saying, no matter how many times Broner loses and gets embarrassed, he WILL BE FIGHTER OF THE DECADE!

you just sh1tted on Broners titles..but praise GGG daily Nope. Doesn't happen.

yall mention GGG's titles all the damn time...WHO DID HE BEAT FOR THEM? What has ggg got to do with your stupid prediction? Stop making straw men and own up to your own stupidity. Or are you going to ignore me again? Lol

Broner has 00000000 top level wins LOOL This drug addicted fiend larry the fool always calls out Khan and yet Khan has 5x as many top level wins. Drug fiend needs to go to rehab.

no he was just a hype job that was never very good to begin with, fought alot of midgets from lower weight classes picking up vacant titles and the first real fight he got exposed. he got a gift agaisnt PAULIE FFS He was never that good. When idiots on Sky were trying to promote him as the next Mayweather, I watched his fights and thought "what the hell? the guy is too slow for the shoulder roll defence"...he arguably got a gift early on and then received too much hype after beating Demarco. By the time he faced Paulie, it was plain to see he was a pretty average fighter.

The thread that keeps on giving