A tribute to the greatest

[RockyMarcianofan00]

I don't give a **** what his W/L record looks like, because I know that "complete bums" don't defeat a few of the best Heavyweights of their day, win the most prestigious title in all of sports, or get enshrinement in both the IBHOF and WBHOF.

Braddock was the World's Heavyweight Championship for a time, and even though he may not be considered amongst the very best of that most prestigious group, there's still only been about 40 to 45 men who can lay claim to such an accomplishment. And I'll tell you straight up, Butterfly, there's not one single or "complete bum" in that group no matter who you care to name (whether it be Hart, Willard, Braddock, Carnera, Spinks, Johansson...whoever)...Not even ****ing close to one!

i agree

[Da Iceman]

i didn't mean actually ten times harder, i just meant alot harder, that's all. i'm pretty sure james freaking braddock a complete bum wouldn't last long with foreman, so from that i would say foreman punches harder than baer.

sometimes you are just dumb.

[Kid Achilles]

I would like to revise that statement you made Rock.

Butterfly, sometimes, once in awhile, you aren't dumb.

[Da Iceman]

lol,owned.

[Kid Achilles]

amen yogi, but when u compare hw champions its pretty obvious sum were way better than others...my least favs. r carnera and willard, but this is sorta like how sum ppl say ali cant punch...if he couldnt u think hed get as far as he did in boxing?? i think not.

its just the standards have gone up over the years what ppl would call great

.

I disagree with that. I think the standards for greatness have gone down, and matchmakers are more careful than ever in matching their young, unbeaten fighters with good opposition. The only reason the old timers seemed to have so many losses on their records as opposed to today's guys was because they were fighting much more frequently.

[smasher]

The only reason the old timers seemed to have so many losses on their records as opposed to today's guys was because they were fighting much more frequently.

...and also the reason they had so many wins on their records...

[RockyMarcianofan00]

I disagree with that. I think the standards for greatness have gone down, and matchmakers are more careful than ever in matching their young, unbeaten fighters with good opposition. The only reason the old timers seemed to have so many losses on their records as opposed to today's guys was because they were fighting much more frequently.

eh standards go up and down its just a few things i think about
1)we just got over a good time in boxing history 60/70/80's so the 90's and 00's aren't gunna seem as good

2)boxing really isn't near as popular as it was, from the 20's to like the 60's it was really either boxing or baseball

3)rules have gotten so stict that if you hit somebody to hard the fights called

[SuzieQ49]

butterfly you are a complete bias ignorant moron sometimes



* ali was pissing blood for days after the chuvalo fight

[SuzieQ49]

When I return Peter Marciano's email. I think im going to send him aal the stuff butterfly's posted about his brother so he can call some brockton goons to beat the ever loving **** outta butterfly. all i need is butterfly's address.

[Da Iceman]

When I return Peter Marciano's email. I think im going to send him aal the stuff butterfly's posted about his brother so he can call some brockton goons to beat the ever loving **** outta butterfly. all i need is butterfly's address.

that old fool know he cant use a computer.