Is Wlad Greater Than These Heavyweights?

[Spartacus Sully]

Proof that jones could have had anything in his pockets? Look at the damn pictures. You can see he has his cell on him. What are you talking about. He could have had anything on. He walked up to the scale in street clothes and shoes because his weight didnt matter and he wanted it a bit inflated for psychological reasons similar to why 6'10 basketball players list themselves at 7'0

by repeatedly stating that jones cheated just so he could fight a heavier guy your only re-enforcing that they dont allow non heavies to fight heavies anymore because they were tired of in shape fast light heavies knocking them out...im sure if he could have gotten up to the new cruiser weight limit legit he might have challenged wlad or vit and would have beat em too.

and the blown up light heavy was comparing to charles and marciano not louis so the 185 ish of them compared to the 190 of haye sooo? hes a blown up cruiser weight then?

[NChristo]

Sorry guys, I know I shouldn't be doing this but Im just having a little fun.

No need to apologize lol, it's a bit off topic but it's a debate at least, nothing wrong with this.

You seem to be handling it fine, just leaving you to it.

[mrboxer]

It's a bit off topic but it's a debate at least, nothing wrong with this.

You seem to be handling it fine, just leaving you to it.

you seem very mesmerized with this debate

[Die Antwoord]

by repeatedly stating that jones cheated just so he could fight a heavier guy your only re-enforcing that they dont allow non heavies to fight heavies anymore because they were tired of in shape fast light heavies knocking them out...im sure if he could have gotten up to the new cruiser weight limit legit he might have challenged wlad or vit and would have beat em too.

and the blown up light heavy was comparing to charles and marciano not louis so the 185 ish of them compared to the 190 of haye sooo? hes a blown up cruiser weight then?

My point wasnt that Jones cheated my point was there no rule on it. Jones was a freak, no other fighter before him was as athletic as him. No other fighter was like Jones. And Jones beat a guy who by your definition is a blown up cruiser fighting at heavy. Jones also didnt hurt Ruiz, he picked a featherfist slow clincher and outquicked him. Ruiz rarely beat anyone of any consequence convincingly. Jones never challenged a big heavy, a Lewis or Klitschko or Briggs or Grant or anyone like that. He found a guy with a belt he could beat and ended his prime by going for it.

[JAB5239]

Wait wait wait? Did you just use triangle theory? Are you opening this up to triangle theory? We can use triangle theory all day big boy. Especially when you use the "arguably". He arguably beat=he lost. did you know joe Louis lost to Schmeling after he had taken a year away from the sport and Schmeling in his prime lost to Gipsy Daniels who Louis never fought. Gypsy Daniels lost some 40 times or so, one of them coming to the great Len johnson less than a month before he KO 1'ed Max Schmeling. Len Johnson also was ducked by Louis. The same year he beat Gypsy Danies he lost to Jack Hood...also ducked by joe Louis. Who that same year drew Jimmy Jones...a very powerful welterweight out of Youngstown Ohio, who joe louis also didnt fight. And that same year Jimmy Jones lost 5 welterweight fights.

Triangle theory doesnt work and its a joke. The Klitschkos didnt fight Ruiz because of which belt he held and who his management was, as simple as that. Same reason they havent fought Valuev or quite a few of his opponents. They dont deal with Don King. They arent scared of Ruiz. Wow, you are seriously trolling, triangle theory, trying to say the Klitschko's were ducking ruiz, saying guys "arguably won." Hardcore trollin.

You must be really really slow. What triangle theory did I use? I merely pointed out that Ruiz couldn't have ****** nearly as bad as you claimed if he beat Holyfield who arguably beat Lewis who definitely beat Vitaly. I never said Ruiz would have beat either of the Klits. But if it was such an easy fight why not take it and unify another belt? Ruiz was publicly calling both of them out for awhile. You seem to think its ok for the K bros to not want to deal on Kings terms, but why do I have the feeling your train of thought is the exact opposite concerning David Haye and his not wanting to deal on the Klits terms? You're an embarrassment to boxing fans everywhere!

[JAB5239]

And who are you talking to? Are you schitzo or something? No one else has posted in this thread in hours because theyre all your homeboys on here and know you have no argument.

Yeah I know, me and you are the only two reading this thread, right?

Again if Jones couldnt fight unless he was over 190 why was he allowed wearing street clothes and shoes at the weigh in? Answer that?

"Cite" the rule that says a fighter HAS to strip down at a weigh in. Post a link, I'll be waiting.

[Die Antwoord]

"Cite" the rule that says a fighter HAS to strip down at a weigh in. Post a link, I'll be waiting.

Ill cite the rule that a fighter has to strip down when you cite where heavyweights have to weigh more than cruisers. Also if there were minimum weights why wouldnt they make people strip down, so you could wear whatever you want to get that weight. ie. minimum weights are pointless and dont exist.

I never said there was a rule that jones had to strip down, in fact my argument, if youre following is that there is no rule because there is no minimum, because being smaller is a disadvantage in boxing. If it isnt, then put it in the books, PBF is the greatest of all time. If size doesnt matter, Floyd Mayweather is so much better than anyone else, his resume rips them to pieces.

[Die Antwoord]

You must be really really slow. What triangle theory did I use? I merely pointed out that Ruiz couldn't have ****** nearly as bad as you claimed if he beat Holyfield who arguably beat Lewis who definitely beat Vitaly. I never said Ruiz would have beat either of the Klits. But if it was such an easy fight why not take it and unify another belt? Ruiz was publicly calling both of them out for awhile. You seem to think its ok for the K bros to not want to deal on Kings terms, but why do I have the feeling your train of thought is the exact opposite concerning David Haye and his not wanting to deal on the Klits terms? You're an embarrassment to boxing fans everywhere!

Yeah im not going to use triangle theory...as you go right into a line of 4 generational triangle theory, or say guys arguably won, but Muhammad Ali arguably lost 2 other times to Ken Norton, arguably lost to Jones and Cooper, arguably lost to Shavers and Young. The arguably lost thing is hilarious. Holyfield lost, so Ruiz wasnt that bad because he beat a 40 year old fairly shot Holyfield. And saying Ruiz wasnt bad because he beat holy who "arguably beat" lewis, who beat Vitali is the definition of triangle theory.

Again many at ringside thought that Doug Jones beat Ali.(although 1 judge astonishingly had Jones only win 1 round....) Ali refused to rematch Jones ever. A year before that jones was beat more soundly (if you say he beat Ali) by Harold Johnson, Who in the same year was beat by Willie Pastrano. Therefore Willie Pastrano who Ali never fought, was on Ali's level. This is your logic.

I mean not to mention that Holyfield was 37 fighting Lewis and 39 fighting Ruiz when he lost. Or the fact that Holyfield has won 6 fights since that fight and only 3 against guys under the age of 35. So Ruiz beat a shot Holyfield.....and Jones beat Ruiz...so somehow that means Louis could beat Klitschko. First of all triangle theory is proven wrong pretty much every weekend in boxing. But thats not even triangle theory, thats triangle theory with a giant leap of faith.

Also saying Vitali definitely lost to louis is hilarious since he was up on the cards and almost everyone there knew if Vitali was a little more experienced he could ahve finished Lewis and if it wasnt for the cut the fight would have continued. A glancing blow cost Vitali that fight, big deal. Ali lost to Norton and Frazier the first time he fought them.

Vitali is a highly calculating adaptive fighter. He wasnt given time to prep, but like a man went into the ring and fought the best fighter in the world with 10 days notice, didnt complain just fought and took and dished out some of the biggest punches ever seen in the ring.

[SonnyboyReturns]

Klit isn't retired yet, though by the current state of the heavyweight division, it won't matter.

[GJC]

Also saying Vitali definitely lost to louis is hilarious since he was up on the cards and almost everyone there knew if Vitali was a little more experienced he could ahve finished Lewis and if it wasnt for the cut the fight would have continued. A glancing blow cost Vitali that fight, big deal.

Glancing blow = Cutting blow. How many times do we have to read that Vitali was winning 4 rounds to 2, remember that Lewis won the last 2? Fighters can win the 1st eleven out of twelve it means diddly squat, last man standing counts.
As for Vitali being a little more experienced, he was 32 wasn't he? How many fights had he had, 30, 40?

Vitali is a highly calculating adaptive fighter. He wasnt given time to prep, but like a man went into the ring and fought the best fighter in the world with 10 days notice, didnt complain just fought and took and dished out some of the biggest punches ever seen in the ring.

And the old only given 10 days to prepare excuse? Want to try the butt excuse thats always a grin too! Dished out some of the biggest punches ever seen in the ring and has this KO% that every Klit fan ****s on about but didn't spark Lewis, yet McCall and Rahman whose KO % is far lower did? Makes you think doesn't it?