10 truths boxing fans should accept!

[beez721]

If Lamon Brewster can knock Wladimir out with about 10 good shots over 5 rounds, you bet your ass Frazier would get rid of him with a relentless body attack, followed by headshots in 2-3 rounds. Brewster landed like 4 body punches to set up his attack. I don't think any reasonable state athletic commission would let Wlad in the same ring with Joe Frazier.

lol,,,another ignorant person that thinks punches from brew was the problem. he gassed,,plain and simple. it was a fluke and the rematch showed that. frazier was 204 lbs in his prime and wlad would have taken him out within 3 rounds

[niceguy45]

5. Shane and Oscar are past their time primes and quickly slipping

In the past 6 years Shane is 5-4-1 with his biggest wins being a questionable decision over Oscar and two wins over a shot Vargas. Prior to losing to PBF, Oscar was 4-2 the last 5 years with a highly questionable win over Sturm. Oscar is almost 35 and Shane is almost 36. Neither fighter has been considered a top P4P fighter in years and they’re averaging only about a fight a year. Yet somehow people wanted to see Floyd fight Oscar and now they want him to fight Shane. I don’t understand it. These guys are past their primes and on their last legs. I don’t even think Shane could beat Cintron or Pwill and Oscar is trying to get 140lb Hatton to come up and fight him. Both guys are at least 5-6 years past their primes.

yes most def. agree on this

[Dirt E Gomez]

A recap...

1: Yes, Wlad, Vlad, and Lewis could go a good number of rounds with many all time greats. I'd say Lennox is the top of those 3 by a good distance and could see them beating some solid competition but they're somewhat tainted in our eyes by having such weak divisions to stand on top of.

2. Margarito is no bum... but he's what I would basically put as the definition of a B level fighter. He's no slouch and isn't a walk in the park but he's nothing special when compared to the people above him at Welter.

3. I don't think anybody with half a brain would suggest Paul WIlliams wouldn't give fits to anybody at Welter being over 6 feet and good stamina.

4. Floyd is an all time great. Yes he suffers ***** points for not taking some of the fights we want to see... He has had what... 2 close fights in his career? And by close I mean at a point it looked like he might lose. I blame the whole thing on Zab anyway. Had he not lost to Baldomir nobody would be saying this. Everybody wanted to see Zab vs Floyd.... then Zab ****ed it up.

5. While Oscar and Mosley are old and slipping fast.... when you have such a high amount of skill at your prime they have a long way to slip before they're bad. They might be over the hill but I'd still put money on them against almost any matchup (obviously a few exceptions).

Oh... and to whoever was saying Wlad would beat Frazier... hahahaha. Stop posting.

[guru]

Who did Tommy Hearns beat that makes you consider him more of a great than Floyd Mayweather? And again who has been the undisputed champ in 5 divisions(I know you weren't the one who said that). Fact is not many boxers in history of boxing have become 5 time champions in 5 different weight classes and none have done it as fast or younger than him. Now I got respect for SRL, Hearns, and Hagler but what makes their careers so much better?

hearn's biggest wins were the crushing KO of Duran, a win over benetiz and beating a young, undefeated virgil hill... you could also argue he should have gotten the win over SRL in the 2nd fight...


Right now, i just don't see floyd's resume as strong as the greats...

[niceguy45]

A recap...

1: Yes, Wlad, Vlad, and Lewis could go a good number of rounds with many all time greats. I'd say Lennox is the top of those 3 by a good distance and could see them beating some solid competition but they're somewhat tainted in our eyes by having such weak divisions to stand on top of.

2. Margarito is no bum... but he's what I would basically put as the definition of a B level fighter. He's no slouch and isn't a walk in the park but he's nothing special when compared to the people above him at Welter.

3. I don't think anybody with half a brain would suggest Paul WIlliams wouldn't give fits to anybody at Welter being over 6 feet and good stamina.

4. Floyd is an all time great. Yes he suffers ***** points for not taking some of the fights we want to see... He has had what... 2 close fights in his career? And by close I mean at a point it looked like he might lose. I blame the whole thing on Zab anyway. Had he not lost to Baldomir nobody would be saying this. Everybody wanted to see Zab vs Floyd.... then Zab ****ed it up.

5. While Oscar and Mosley are old and slipping fast.... when you have such a high amount of skill at your prime they have a long way to slip before they're bad. They might be over the hill but I'd still put money on them against almost any matchup (obviously a few exceptions).

Oh... and to whoever was saying Wlad would beat Frazier... hahahaha. Stop posting.

on #5 it makes a lil bit more sense for those who disagreed on that point,
tehy simply had too much skills in their primes, just like b-hop i mean he is a grand-pa

[cortdawg25]

hearn's biggest wins were the crushing KO of Duran, a win over benetiz and beating a young, undefeated virgil hill... you could also argue he should have gotten the win over SRL in the 2nd fight...


Right now, i just don't see floyd's resume as strong as the greats...

Hearns beat up a blown up Duran and benitez and Hill are no better than the some other fighters that Floyd has already defeated. I agree I think he should have got the win in the 2nd fight against SRL. But think about it with a open mind What makes Tommy Hearn an alltime great but Floyd isn't. Some could argue that Floyd has accomplished more

[guru]

Hearns beat up a blown up Duran and benitez and Hill are no better than the some other fighters that Floyd has already defeated. I agree I think he should have got the win in the 2nd fight against SRL. But think about it with a open mind What makes Tommy Hearn an alltime great but Floyd isn't. Some could argue that Floyd has accomplished more

you could argue that oscar was 35 and semi-retired when floyd fought him... you could also say that benetiz and duran were both way better than castillo or chico... ultimately, do you think floyd's level of oppostion is on par with SRL and hearns?

[Easy-E]

Aren't you contradicting yourself?

How can anyone be beat easily in a tough fight?

Say two fighters fight close competitive rounds, but one fighter clearly wins each round, pitching a shutout, but the fight was tough because he took 12 rounds of punishment.

[SpeedKillz]

you could argue that oscar was 35 and semi-retired when floyd fought him... you could also say that benetiz and duran were both way better than castillo or chico... ultimately, do you think floyd's level of oppostion is on par with SRL and hearns?

i think that by the time he actually retires and stops fighting, his opposition will have been better, cuz he's gonna fight all the top guys eventually...

[Easy-E]

you could argue that oscar was 35 and semi-retired when floyd fought him... you could also say that benetiz and duran were both way better than castillo or chico... ultimately, do you think floyd's level of oppostion is on par with SRL and hearns?

if by semi-retired you mean...not retired at all, then ya, youve got a point.
Oscar was an active fighter and theres no argument there.