How many fighters of the last 15-20 years can be considered ATG's/legends

[billeau2]

Wow just wow. This chap is either drunk, or needs a drug test.

Elroy had a brain injury as a kid. Not wanting to insult him his uppbringers would simply praise every effort made....In 6th grade Elroy proved the earth was flat and that his tinfoil hat could harness special waves that gave him special understanding...his teachers said "good job Elroy."

Years later living in mom's basement he posts on these boards when ma can pay the internet charges. When she can't he assumes the fetal position and stays put. He subsists on a diet of vitamin packs and chips and hits the bag for exerscize with his good friend boxing champ Charlie Z.

Their hero is a fat turd of Utube fame known as the "watermelon man" because he can split a watermelon with one punch....the fact non withstanding that the watermelon man cannot move with a bum knee, back and a weight of over 300 pounds. But as Elroy says...people punch hard enough so they don't have to move now a days! They have evolved.

[Scott9945]

Dont ya see? Adamek is a modern fighter...brought from the ravages of a place where no American marketing can distort...Moorer on the other hand is a vapid production out of that boxing bollywood known as the Konk gym. Those fellows, like Hearns are nothng compared to the upright olmpic champions like lazlo pap!!!!!

Anyone who beats Chris Arreola earns Elroy's respect. For some reason he worships that journeyman. He thinks Arreola beats Ali and Frazier, to give you an idea of what we are dealing with.

The best solution is probably ignoring him just as we do most incoherent lunatics. He clearly has nothing to offer in a boxing discussion except shock value with his ludicrous opinions.

[Ray Corso]

..........................don't forget he's a JackAzz too...........

[Elroy1]

"would have" - How would he have beaten those guys, say Bert Cooper, easily when he struggled heavily and should have taken a loss against a one-armed eddie chambers? How? Bert Cooper was quick, powerful and vicious. He threw punches from every angle. Adamek wouldn't have gotten past him, nevermind Moorer.

Bert Cooper was a tough bum but basically, he was still a modern era bum. Still a "Super-Frazier" but a bum nonetheless.

It's just ridiculous that you suppose a joker like Cooper is a threat to Adamek although it is easy to see why when we see how your boys there performed against Cooper. he even knocked Holyfield down!! I suppose your next line of defence is that Holy wasn't PRIME or something? LOL Nah, so you opted to support a bum instead.

Anyway you then go on to try and FAVOURABLY compare to Eddie Chambers!!!



I am not even gonna read the rest of the post, because this first paragraph is enough to discredit you in the eyes of all non-OTNB viewers.

Suffice to say this much in response...

Eddie Chambers- basically a BETTER version of Chris Byrd by many accounts (Byrd, who ALREADY beat Holyfield btw!), possibly the fastest and one of the most defensively perfect heavies ever with a resume rich in top opponents would have treated Bert Cooper as nothing more than a better sparring session!

He was not in the league of Chambers at all!

As for Adamek? Yeah sure, Cooper would have given him a tough fight, just as he did Holyfield, except because Adamek is somewhat more agile and cerebral than Holyfield, I'd expect Adamek to maybe do even slightly better.

Let's get to the beef here...

There are only TWO opponents of Holyfield worth mentioning if your trying to build a Holyfield superiority case over Adamek.. Mike Tyson and Lennox Lewis...

All others can have holes blown in them (like Bowe obviously) or are handwavable garbage, like Moorer and Cooper- they would just be good names on Adamek's resume but nothing to write home about.

So to recap and spell t out clear...

What is being cited as a NEGATIVE for Adamek by the OTNB's "struggling with Eddie Chambers"- is in fact a hallmark POSITIVE feature about his career having perservered against such a top opponent.

AND

What is being cited as a POSITIVE for Holyfield "struggling with Moorer and Cooper"- is in fact a deep blow to the mythology of Holyfield for having struggled with such lowly opponents.

[boxingnut712]

Bert Cooper was a tough bum but basically, he was still a modern era bum. Still a "Super-Frazier" but a bum nonetheless.

It's just ridiculous that you suppose a joker like Cooper is a threat to Adamek although it is easy to see why when we see how your boys there performed against Cooper. he even knocked Holyfield down!! I suppose your next line of defence is that Holy wasn't PRIME or something? LOL Nah, so you opted to support a bum instead.

Anyway you then go on to try and FAVOURABLY compare to Eddie Chambers!!!



I am not even gonna read the rest of the post, because this first paragraph is enough to discredit you in the eyes of all non-OTNB viewers.

Suffice to say this much in response...

Eddie Chambers- basically a BETTER version of Chris Byrd by many accounts (Byrd, who ALREADY beat Holyfield btw!), possibly the fastest and one of the most defensively perfect heavies ever with a resume rich in top opponents would have treated Bert Cooper as nothing more than a better sparring session!

He was not in the league of Chambers at all!

As for Adamek? Yeah sure, Cooper would have given him a tough fight, just as he did Holyfield, except because Adamek is somewhat more agile and cerebral than Holyfield, I'd expect Adamek to maybe do even slightly better.

Let's get to the beef here...

There are only TWO opponents of Holyfield worth mentioning if your trying to build a Holyfield superiority case over Adamek.. Mike Tyson and Lennox Lewis...

All others can have holes blown in them (like Bowe obviously) or are handwavable garbage, like Moorer and Cooper- they would just be good names on Adamek's resume but nothing to write home about.

So to recap and spell t out clear...

What is being cited as a NEGATIVE for Adamek by the OTNB's "struggling with Eddie Chambers"- is in fact a hallmark POSITIVE feature about his career having perservered against such a top opponent.

AND

What is being cited as a POSITIVE for Holyfield "struggling with Moorer and Cooper"- is in fact a deep blow to the mythology of Holyfield for having struggled with such lowly opponents.

You are drunk. Adamek would not have beaten Moorer at 175, and Adamek sure as hell would not have beaten Moorer at heavyweight. I am not sure Adamek could have beat guys like Vaughn Bean, Corrie Sanders, Hasim Rahman, or Dominick Guinn. Maybe Guinn.

[Elroy1]

You are drunk. Adamek would not have beaten Moorer at 175, and Adamek sure as hell would not have beaten Moorer at heavyweight. I am not sure Adamek could have beat guys like Vaughn Bean, Corrie Sanders, Hasim Rahman, or Dominick Guinn. Maybe Guinn.

You are drunk. Adamek would not have beaten Moorer at 175, and Adamek sure as hell would not have beaten Moorer at heavyweight. I am not sure Adamek could have beat guys like Vaughn Bean, Corrie Sanders, Hasim Rahman, or Dominick Guinn. Maybe Guinn.

Rahman and Sanders, fair enough, if Adamek couldn't beat those guys then THAT wouldn't be overly surprising. Still, Adamek would be among their signature wins, if they did win!!

However, Holyfield never even FOUGHT Sanders! Neither did your ridiculous walking knockout Michael Moorer. Want to know what would happen to Moorer had he faced Sanders.. See Tua vs Moorer!

And Holyfield was in fact LOSING to bloody Rahman you moron until that very unfortunate incident with the haematoma.

As for Guin and Bean, similarly to Moorer and Cooper, they are decent wins for Adamek but are clearly not in the same class.

The case of Bean is even MORE ridiculous since an opponent that Adamek could thrash EASILY gave Holyfield all KINDS of issues!

And of course Adamek could have thrashed Moorer at LHW also, look at the bloody depth comparison.

All you have proven is that you have never seen Adamek ever fight!

Me drunk???

Stand down nut bag!

[LacedUp]

Bert Cooper was a tough bum but basically, he was still a modern era bum. Still a "Super-Frazier" but a bum nonetheless.

It's just ridiculous that you suppose a joker like Cooper is a threat to Adamek although it is easy to see why when we see how your boys there performed against Cooper. he even knocked Holyfield down!! I suppose your next line of defence is that Holy wasn't PRIME or something? LOL Nah, so you opted to support a bum instead.

Anyway you then go on to try and FAVOURABLY compare to Eddie Chambers!!!



I am not even gonna read the rest of the post, because this first paragraph is enough to discredit you in the eyes of all non-OTNB viewers.

Suffice to say this much in response...

Eddie Chambers- basically a BETTER version of Chris Byrd by many accounts (Byrd, who ALREADY beat Holyfield btw!), possibly the fastest and one of the most defensively perfect heavies ever with a resume rich in top opponents would have treated Bert Cooper as nothing more than a better sparring session!

He was not in the league of Chambers at all!

As for Adamek? Yeah sure, Cooper would have given him a tough fight, just as he did Holyfield, except because Adamek is somewhat more agile and cerebral than Holyfield, I'd expect Adamek to maybe do even slightly better.

Let's get to the beef here...

There are only TWO opponents of Holyfield worth mentioning if your trying to build a Holyfield superiority case over Adamek.. Mike Tyson and Lennox Lewis...

All others can have holes blown in them (like Bowe obviously) or are handwavable garbage, like Moorer and Cooper- they would just be good names on Adamek's resume but nothing to write home about.

So to recap and spell t out clear...

What is being cited as a NEGATIVE for Adamek by the OTNB's "struggling with Eddie Chambers"- is in fact a hallmark POSITIVE feature about his career having perservered against such a top opponent.

AND

What is being cited as a POSITIVE for Holyfield "struggling with Moorer and Cooper"- is in fact a deep blow to the mythology of Holyfield for having struggled with such lowly opponents.

Eddie Chambers wouldn't last 4 rounds with Bert Cooper. And Michael Moorer would whoop Adamek with such ease that you would be forced to like a black fighter for once.

[boxingnut712]

Rahman and Sanders, fair enough, if Adamek couldn't beat those guys then THAT wouldn't be overly surprising. Still, Adamek would be among their signature wins, if they did win!!

However, Holyfield never even FOUGHT Sanders! Neither did your ridiculous walking knockout Michael Moorer. Want to know what would happen to Moorer had he faced Sanders.. See Tua vs Moorer!

And Holyfield was in fact LOSING to bloody Rahman you moron until that very unfortunate incident with the haematoma.

As for Guin and Bean, similarly to Moorer and Cooper, they are decent wins for Adamek but are clearly not in the same class.

The case of Bean is even MORE ridiculous since an opponent that Adamek could thrash EASILY gave Holyfield all KINDS of issues!

And of course Adamek could have thrashed Moorer at LHW also, look at the bloody depth comparison.

All you have proven is that you have never seen Adamek ever fight!

Me drunk???

Stand down nut bag!

Michael Moorer was not a walking knockout until he fought in the heavyweight division. Whether it is 175, or Heavyweight, Adamek would not knock Moorer out, but rather, Adamek would be waking up from a nap of his own. I'll bet you have never even seen a single Moorer 175 pound fight.

I have already wasted enough typing on you crack addict posts to know you over rate Adamek, and think that Adamek is great when he is not great.

[Elroy1]

Eddie Chambers wouldn't last 4 rounds with Bert Cooper. And Michael Moorer would whoop Adamek with such ease that you would be forced to like a black fighter for once.

I don't dislike black fighters, I like many black fighters. I am a proponent of Mike Tyson and Holyfield himself in actual fact and in this very debate am supporting Eddie Chambers who last time I checked was black!

You come off as absolutely moronic when you try to label me a racist as you will never find any indication in all of my posts.

As for the content of your reply..

Chambers would not last 4 rounds with Cooper..

Yet he managed to beat Brock and Peter and Dimitrenko and went the distance with Povetkin and Adamek and all the way right to the very end of round 12 against Klitschko????

Hmmm, but bum Cooper stops him in 4?

Doesn't quite add up does it!!

And then theres this doozy...

That Moorer would whoop Adamek real bad.

Yes we can clearly see that being the case with such Chambers, McBride, Grant, Arreola and Golota on his win record among others and making to round 10 vs V.Klitschko.

Meanwhile Moorer is getting sparked out clean by George "Send me a telegram to warn me of the punch" Foreman and David "I can't even box" Tua

Again.. Very su****iously doubtful!

[Elroy1]

Michael Moorer was not a walking knockout until he fought in the heavyweight division. Whether it is 175, or Heavyweight, Adamek would not knock Moorer out, but rather, Adamek would be waking up from a nap of his own. I'll bet you have never even seen a single Moorer 175 pound fight.

I have already wasted enough typing on you crack addict posts to know you over rate Adamek, and think that Adamek is great when he is not great.

Yes I've caught some, he was fair athletic but stylistically he was a squared up slugger mainly.

Not that I am supposing Adamek is far removed technically but he IS a notch above in the agility department obviously as evidenced by WATCHING his movements in his own fights. Moorer is more of an in your face fighter, which without the chin to go with it isn't all that smart.

OF course, you can get away with it at 175 a bit more and as we can see the main reasons for Moorer's success there is...

- Cherry picking weak opponents
- Punching power at 175 and the physical strength to bully his opponents there. (As we can see in his fights at this weight.

Unfortunately for Moorer, he did not adapt to the HW division like Adamek did. Adamek clearly fought more with his head and his agility there and perservered whereas Moorer was still stuck in his "175" ways which ultimately cost him.

This inability of Moorer was compounded by the fact that his chin was glass rated at HW whereas Adamek carried his strong chin up with him as did Holyfield which is why these guys performed so well (among other reasons).

On the KO question? I've thought about that and I certainly can see Moorer "surviving" Adamek, who was not a very hard puncher by any measure. But it must also be understood that Moorer HIMSELF is a featherfist at HW and Adamek has a hard chin (and a defensive agility allied to it). Therefore the chances of a shock Moorer KO in light of Adameks performance against truly hard hitting giants, is basically non-existent!

Adamek UD Moorer (close to no punchers chance for Moorer)

And again, I am not inferring triangle theory to suppose that Adamek could likewise thrash Holyfield also. But the fact Holyfield did struggle with Moorer is a NEGATIVE feature of Holyfield nonetheless!

Apart from Holyfield, the next best win on Moorers record is Botha and thereafter they are all humdrum wins like Smith etc who is prbably on the level of Adameks Travis Walker victory or something.

These are the facts.