were max baer and joe walcott all time greats

[Silencers]

i understand that he was a late bloomer and wasnt groomed for becoming a contender in the first place, but what you're saying is that because he beat ezzard twice (and also lost twice to him) and should have won a fight against already faded joe louis, it makes him an all time great? i strongly, and respectfully disagree.

It was also in part because he won the heavyweight title at 38 years of age, which made him at the time, the oldest heavyweight champion in history.

He also beat top ranked contenders like Jimmy Bivins, Lee Oma, Elmer Ray, Joe Baksi, Lee Q. Murray, Curtis Sheppard who were all ranked inside the top 10 by The Ring magazine.

[Silencers]

just to make it clear ive seen every available fight of joe louis. not just espn ****, but i have a collection of his films. i follow that era very well

and you dont have to tell me how much the heavyweight used to weigh back in 50s

i would never favor any fighter over someone like robinson, or armstrong (another one of my favourites), and i consider an old school fighter like duran to be the best light weight in the history of boxing

what bothers me though is the fact that people try to compare heavyweigths like marciano, jack dempsey, to fighters we have today above 200 pounds...it's a little extreme

We can only compare them pound for pound because the obvious size advantage of today's heavyweights would probably be too much.

[Boogie Nights]

Does anyone actually claim this though?

check the fantasy fights forum, i gurantee some of the stuff you'll read there will surprise you

[Boogie Nights]

We can only compare them pound for pound because the obvious size advantage of today's heavyweights would probably be too much.

yes i know P4P is people's favourite comparison. but it still doesnt change the fact that someone like buster douglas who was a lazy underachiver could be very talented. and douglas who fought tyson would have given a lot of heavyweights problems.
he beat tex cobb, greg page, mike williams, and oliver mccal, and of course tyson. he was a journeyman, but you dont see me jump on his **** and start proclaiming him an all time great

because walcott was a late bloomer that's his problem, not my problem, anyone else's problem, or any fighter's business except his own. in my view he was a good fighter, but not an all time great

it's funny how people hold an ideal view towards the old eras. and as soon as you show any kind of disagreement they always say something "you dont know about the sport" and quite frankly i did not expect this from you silencers. those opponents that you listed of louis, i broke them down and listed their own best wins in the other thread

and unlike many i dont need to use wikepedia or boxrec

[Silencers]

yes i know P4P is people's favourite comparison. but it still doesnt change the fact that someone like buster douglas who was a lazy underachiver could be very talented. and douglas who fought tyson would have given a lot of heavyweights problems.
he beat tex cobb, greg page, mike williams, and oliver mccal, and of course tyson. he was a journeyman, but you dont see me jump on his **** and start proclaiming him an all time great

because walcott was a late bloomer that's his problem, not my problem, anyone else's problem, or any fighter's business except his own. in my view he was a good fighter, but not an all time great

it's funny how people hold an ideal view towards the old eras. and as soon as you show any kind of disagreement they always say something "you dont know about the sport" and quite frankly i did not expect this from you silencers. those opponents that you listed of louis, i broke them down and listed their own best wins in the other thread

and unlike many i dont need to use wikepedia or boxrec

Read my previous post about Walcott.

Honestly, I've read your posts in the history forum and your posts in this thread and I think you're biased to the newer generation of boxing and not giving some of the older generation their due.

I didn't have to respond to your listing of Louis' opponents because Poet already did.

[Boogie Nights]

Read my previous post about Walcott.

Honestly, I've read your posts in the history forum and your posts in this thread and I think you're biased to the newer generation of boxing and not giving the older generation their due.

I didn't have to respond to your listing of Louis' opponents because Poet already did.

the older generation is my favourite one. check my other threads and post, where i clearly defend the old generation

like these


http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=175983

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=169594

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=171958

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=175740

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=178005

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=177273

just browse through them and then tell me how i feel about old time greats vs new generation

al these threads were created by me, and then you'll see what i mean. just to make it clear silencers, i dont think that you're a bad poster, but when people say **** like i dont give credit to old time fighters (when i clearly do, and hate anyone that doesnt) that's the greatest insult another fan can give me

[Silencers]

the older generation is my favourite one. check my other threads and post, where i clearly defend the old generation

like these


http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=175983

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=169594

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=171958

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=175740

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=178005

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=177273

just browse through them and then tell me how i feel about old time greats vs new generation

al these threads were created by me, and then you'll see what i mean. just to make it clear silencers, i dont think that you're a bad poster, but when people say **** like i dont give credit to old time fighters (when i clearly do, and hate anyone that doesnt) that's the greatest insult another fan can give me

It's probably because you seem to be discrediting Joe Louis and Joe Walcott, who were great fighters. You also said that Tyson has a better resume than Louis, which I think is incorrect and apparently so do Poet, slicksouthpaw and a few others.

[Boogie Nights]

It's probably because you seem to be discrediting Joe Louis and Joe Walcott, who were great fighters. You also said that Tyson has a better resume than Louis, which I think is incorrect and apparently so do Poet, slicksouthpaw and a few others.

i've been watching ali and louis ever since i was 11 years old, and that's a long time counting how old i am today

it's fans like Poet who bother me and think that anyone like rocky (whom i consider overated when placed into top 5, just to set the record straight) could walk on water. which is not true

i never said tyson's opponents were better, quote me where i said that, i said they were no worse than anyone louis ever faced. and i still maintain that despite what you and few others may think

it's fan boys like the ones in my signature who give aboloutely no credit to anyone like tyson (who was a great fighter) and think that 40 and 50 were the greatest heavyweight eras.

the 70s were, and i always believed that ali not holmes, beat the best heavyweights that ever existed.

i would also would favor holmes over lewis prime for prime

i dislike a modern fighter like floyd because of his principles and standards, and i dont make klitschko into the greatest thing since sliced bread

ive given louis and walcott enough credit. growing up (you may believe or not) louis was like a hero to me. over the years of watching the sport ive discovered other fighters.

if you read my thread carefully you'll see that i give ton of credit to louis while people like slicksouthpaw make up lies about tyson ducking somebody, and poet doing the same thing with his specualtions

[Silencers]

i've been watching ali and louis ever since i was 11 years old, and that's a long time counting how old i am today

it's fans like Poet who bother me and think that anyone like rocky (whom i consider overated when placed into top 5, just to set the record straight) could walk on water. which is not true

i never said tyson's opponents were better, quote me where i said that, i said they were no worse than anyone tyson ever faced. and i still maintain that despite what you and few others may think

it's fan boys like the ones in my signature who give aboloutely no credit to anyone like tyson (who was a great fighter) and think that 40 and 50 were the greatest heavyweight eras.

the 70s were, and i always believed that ali not holmes, beat the best heavyweights that ever existed.

i would also would favor holmes over lewis prime for prime

i dislike a modern fighter like floyd because of his principles and standards, and i dont make klitschko into the greatest thing since sliced bread

ive given louis and walcott enough credit. growing up (you may believe or not) louis was like a hero to me. over the years of watching the sport ive discovered other fighters.

if you read my thread carefully you'll see that i give ton of credit to louis while people like slicksouthpaw make up lies about tyson ducking somebody, and poet doing the same thing with his specualtions

Tyson was a very good fighter, never reached his full potential which was a shame.

You convinced me, no hard feelings.

[Boogie Nights]

Tyson was a very good fighter, never reached his full potential which was a shame.

You convinced me, no hard feelings.

fair enough, i just wanted to ask you one more question silencers

do you consider glen johnson an all time great? just wondering