Modern ATG's will never be accepted

[them_apples]

You're right, a single mediocre performance by RJJ at heavyweight against one of the worst champs ever (I guess you missed a prime Ruiz lasting 19 seconds versus Tua) MUST mean he could beat arguably THE best heavyweight of all time. You're a genius.

what the hell was that load of bunk? did I piss you off lol?

[Jim Jeffries]

what the hell was that load of bunk? did I piss you off lol?

Not at all, RJJ was an extremely good middleweight and super middleweight, and if you were comparing him and Ali as fighters okay. Just seemed like you were implying that RJJ would have beaten a prime Ali.

[ROSS CALIFORNIA]

Please explain how that 'proves' my opinions are baised? Because I won't stand by and watch you two make completely asinine statements? If it proves my biasness then please elaborate.

Because you defend passed champions with a passion. Even if the comparisons are obviously in favor of a current fighter over an old time fighter, you still chose to defend the old time fighter no matter how ridiculous you sound. LOL

[them_apples]

Because you defend passed champions with a passion. Even if the comparisons are obviously in favor of a current fighter over an old time fighter, you still chose to defend the old time fighter no matter how ridiculous you sound. LOL

couldn't have said it better, that's exactly what a lot of people like to do. the comparisons aren't even the slightest bit close, yet somehow the older fighter comes out on top.

[Jim Jeffries]

Because you defend passed champions with a passion. Even if the comparisons are obviously in favor of a current fighter over an old time fighter, you still chose to defend the old time fighter no matter how ridiculous you sound. LOL

Rediculous is how you sound claiming Tyson is the greatest ever. Even more rediculous are your excuses for his first losses.

[ROSS CALIFORNIA]

Rediculous is how you sound claiming Tyson is the greatest ever. Even more rediculous are your excuses for his first losses.

I never claimed he was the greatest ever. Those aren't excuses, they're evaluations of the circumstances that lead to his decline in boxing skills and desire. When you grow up you'll understand this stuff.

[Hawkins]

Because you defend passed champions with a passion. Even if the comparisons are obviously in favor of a current fighter over an old time fighter, you still chose to defend the old time fighter no matter how ridiculous you sound. LOL

Ridiculous I sound? At least I put a detailed account out there of what I think will happen and why. Besides, the only 'greats I have defended with a passion' is Marciano because guys like you, them_apples and metalinmybrain give him zero credit and totally discount any positive.

Marciano is not even one of my top 10 favorites, but I give him his due. Besides, I want you to find one statement on this forum where I degrade any fighter...modern or past...like you guys do Marciano. However you can't, because I don't revert to that childish type of behavior to prove a point.

I have made a couple of analogies as to how I see a Tyson/Marciano contest or Tyson/Ali or any number of things. And you would read you would see I give each side a fair representation of my opinion of how it would play it.

Unlike you clowns I try to see both sides of the coin instead the obscured POV of one side.

[Burning Desire]

I have my reasons:

1: Older fighter's had more fights due to lack of health standards and money.

2: If a newer fighter walks though his competition, they call them bums..the ones that he avoids become bigger names, he beats them and they are usually his only big names. sad

3: New fighters are always down rated it doesn't matter how great the performance they give.


I've been arguing with a lot of people lately some with good points some with bad, but I find it foolish when we are doing comparisons with newer vs older fighter's. The times have changed so much the only way we can go about it is if you calculate the advancements given during the time (Hawkins idea).

but anyways, for example:

Roy Jones Jr vs Ali: performance wise Jones is faster, never tires and has one punch KO power. Still Ali is often picked and his competition is said to be better, yet there is no way of proving this, only pure Bias.

Tyson vs Marciano : Tyson is bigger, faster, more aggressive and has sent 240 lbs opponents flying across the ring, yet the comparison is still being made between him and Marciano.

Klitchko vs Foreman : I'm not a fan of klitchko, but if I look at this realistically he hits very hard, he's huge and he's got average skills. Foreman hits hard too but he's very sloppy. People still pick Foreman even with a 30-40 lbs weight disadvantage.

Those are just a few, what does it take for people to even give later fighter's a chance? There seems to be no backing other than Bias. You can't prove that competition was better or worse, because all big name fighter's end up fighting #1 competition sooner or later.

Only looking at number's is a fools way out, in that case John L. Sullivan is better than Larry Holmes, when all you need is one look at them fighting you know who the victor would be.

peace

Except for Tyson vs Marciano you have got to be kidding me Ali vs Jones your comparing the greatest Heavyweight of all time to one of the greatest Supermiddleweights of all time Ali wins by TKO.

And Klitschko quit against Byrd for crying out loud and couldn't even beat a slow plodding Lewis on Lewis's worse night and you think he would beat a monster puncher like Foreman ?? plus Klitschko is too robotic and holds his left hand too low he would get hit far too much and would be stopped.

[them_apples]

Rediculous is how you sound claiming Tyson is the greatest ever. Even more rediculous are your excuses for his first losses.

He never claimed that, quote him.

[ROSS CALIFORNIA]

Ridiculous I sound? At least I put a detailed account out there of what I think will happen and why. Besides, the only 'greats I have defended with a passion' is Marciano because guys like you, them_apples and metalinmybrain give him zero credit and totally discount any positive.

Marciano is not even one of my top 10 favorites, but I give him his due. Besides, I want you to find one statement on this forum where I degrade any fighter...modern or past...like you guys do Marciano. However you can't, because I don't revert to that childish type of behavior to prove a point.

I have made a couple of analogies as to how I see a Tyson/Marciano contest or Tyson/Ali or any number of things. And you would read you would see I give each side a fair representation of my opinion of how it would play it.

Unlike you clowns I try to see both sides of the coin instead the obscured POV of one side.

I never degraded Marciano, I just put things into perspective. Sometimes a coin is one sided, like when comparing Tyson and Marciano in a toe to toe battle.

Ridiculous I sound? At least I put a detailed account out there of what I think will happen and why

Those accounts are often ridiculous. The point your making here is like saying "at least I sound ridiculous". LOL