Tweet
Originally posted by Yaman
rules are rules in different conversations. When discussing P4P, some rules dont count, wich you point out everytime when i tell you to stop kidding yourself. For example, Tyson had nearly 40 pounds on Wallcott, Charles etc. Sure they fought some heavyweights that were pretty big..but what does that have to do with P4P? Isn't it obvious that Mike is something more special when it comes down to speed? and when we're talking about the modern Heavyweights, they are ATLEAST over 215 pounds. Muhammad Ali just squeezes in there with those guys. Thats why i said that you cant compare those guys to Tyson, because 1: size difference that favors the oldies in many ways, and 2: Ali's and Tyson's era start out with diffirent kind of fighters. Thats why you cant compare them to Iron Mike.
Funny how you point out Roy Jones' fight as a heavyweight and compare them to Charles. But in the end, Roy was a heavyweight because he COULD have fought more fights at heavy. Since you dont care about pound for pound, i guess even this arguments supports mine
.
''Charles was a legit HW''. But hellfire, aren't we comparing him to Tyson? Oh yeah thats right. Wich means that Tyson was the bigger man, fought the bigger guys, and still is as fast as him. Wich means that you cant compare him to Tyson p4p.
Thank you. I was in a better mood this time
Good for you.
Funny how you point out Roy Jones' fight as a heavyweight and compare them to Charles. But in the end, Roy was a heavyweight because he COULD have fought more fights at heavy. Since you dont care about pound for pound, i guess even this arguments supports mine
.''Charles was a legit HW''. But hellfire, aren't we comparing him to Tyson? Oh yeah thats right. Wich means that Tyson was the bigger man, fought the bigger guys, and still is as fast as him. Wich means that you cant compare him to Tyson p4p.
Thank you. I was in a better mood this time
Good for you.I don't see what you're saying with P4P, I didn't even mention P4P in that post.
NOW you are saying "Mike is something more special when in comes to speed". NOW you say that, when you have been owned. Yes, he was "more special" in terms of speed because he was heavier. However, how "special" you are does not alter your ranking on a speed list. The fact remains, those guys were heavyweights, and Walcott in particular was as fast, if not faster (especially footspeed) than Tyson. Now you say Muhammad Ali only JUST squeezes in with those guys. Ok, Ali isn't a legit heavyweight everybody, because he weighed under 215 in his prime! At his peak, he was between 205 and 213ish. Wow Muhammad, all this time people called you the greatest HW, you weren't even a HW!!
I don't care if Jones COULD have fought more at heavyweight. The fact is.. he DIDNT!! Ray Robinson could have fought more at light-heavyweight, but he didn't... would you include him on LHW lists? Of course not! Then you said, "Since you dont care about pound for pound, i guess even this arguments supports mine". What the **** does that mean? You are talking out of your ass. Grasping at straws aren't we?
This is your last little quote: "''Charles was a legit HW''. But hellfire, aren't we comparing him to Tyson? Oh yeah thats right. Wich means that Tyson was the bigger man, fought the bigger guys, and still is as fast as him. Wich means that you cant compare him to Tyson p4p."
No, we are not comparing him to Tyson. We are talking about the fastest heavyweights. Not the fastest guys at heavyweight P4P. The fastest heavyweights. Is that too difficult to understand? I've already said Tyson was obviously faster P4P, but when was that EVER the argument? You really do suck at debating. And if you are going to use the "P4P faster" argument, I can turn it around on "P4P hits harder" any time. So, good day to you.
Comment