were max baer and joe walcott all time greats

[Silencers]

a guy like johnson beat top contenders too, of his era of course, roy jones was considered P4P the best fighter of his generation. johnson beat him and the guy who beat him twice too. he also beat another guy who had DQ win over roy, montell griffin. clinton woods was also a tough fighter.
like walcott lost to marciano, johnson also lost to hopkins. he beat huge names (in his era, which were considered elite fighters) how come he doesnt get an all time great status? i see a double standard here

Glen Johnson's wins:

Eric Harding
Clinton Woods
Antonio Tarver
Roy Jones Jr.
Montell Griffin

Joe Walcott's wins:

Jimmy Bivins
Lee Oma
Elmer Ray
Joe Baksi
Lee Q. Murray
Curtis Sheppard
Ezzard Charles x2

Second oldest heavyweight champion in history at 38 years of age.

[Boogie Nights]

Glen Johnson's wins:

Eric Harding
Clinton Woods
Antonio Tarver
Roy Jones Jr.
Montell Griffin

Joe Walcott's wins:

Jimmy Bivins
Lee Oma
Elmer Ray
Joe Baksi
Lee Q. Murray
Curtis Sheppard
Ezzard Charles x2

Second oldest heavyweight champion in history at 38 years of age.

i understand, im not comparing their resumes, or saying who was a better fighter of the 2

im simply pointing out that johnson, like walcott, beat some very good fighters and all time great (of our era) how come he doesnt get the praise as an all time great. walcott gets the credit for best wins in his ear, all solid wins, i wont dispute it, he was the dog of his era. johnson was also the dog of his era and beat the best our era had to offer in the repsective weight classes. he lost and he won some

point out if im wrong
glenn is not a young guy himself, and like walcott was robbed against louis, he was robbed against dawson

[Silencers]

i understand, im not comparing their resumes, or saying who was a better fighter of the 2

im simply pointing out that johnson, like walcott, beat some very good fighters and all time great (of our era) how come he doesnt get the praise as an all time great. walcott get the credit, solid wins, i wont dispute it, he was the dog of his era. johnson was also the dog of his era and beat the best our era had to offer in the repsective weight classes

point out if im wrong
glenn is not a young guy himself, and like walcott was robbed against louis, he was robbed against dawson

Johnson wasn't robbed against Dawson, it was a close fight but I had Dawson winning 115-113, close but clear.

Whereas, Walcott was blatantly robbed against Louis.

[Boogie Nights]

Johnson wasn't robbed against Dawson, it was a close fight but I had Dawson winning 115-113, close but clear.

Whereas, Walcott was blatantly robbed against Louis.

okay to each their own

im not after that, what im after is the question i asked, please dont avoid it

walcott beat the best conteders of his era, and has beat an all time great

so did johnson, both of them can be considered extraordinary journeyman, please break down the double standard for me

[Silencers]

okay to each their own

im not after that, what im after is the question i asked, please dont avoid it

walcott beat the best conteders of his era, and has beat an all time great

so did johnson, both of them can be considered extraordinary journeyman, please break down the double standard for me

Walcott beat an ATG in Ezzard Charles, a near prime Ezzard Charles.

Johnson beat a fighter that could have been great in Roy Jones who was on the slide.

[WLAD OWNS]

Wladimir Klitschko destroys both of them on the same night.

[Boogie Nights]

Walcott beat an ATG in Ezzard Charles, a near prime Ezzard Charles.

Johnson beat a fighter that could have been great in Roy Jones who was on the slide.

walcott beat charles who 2 years later, or arguably one year later after the second walcott loss, lost 2 fights in a row

also heavyweight was not his greatest weight, but okay

now answer this, do you consider roy jones an all time great a P4P best fighter of the 90s, and the closest thing that was compared to sugar ray robinson? many people do. roy still continues to win, and we dont know how he'll do in his next fight, let's not point fingers

bottom line johnson dominated roy, and knocked him out. he beat the great fighter of that era. he's shown how good he was once he got older. he beat legitimate contenders. he beat the guy who many consider another great light heavy of this era, antonio tarver

why is he not great?

[Silencers]

walcott beat charles who 2 years later, or arguably one year later after the second walcott loss, lost 2 fights in a row

also heavyweight was not his greatest weight, but okay

now answer this, do you consider roy jones an all time great a P4P best fighter of the 90s, and the closest thing that was compared to sugar ray robinson? many people do. roy still continues to win, and we dont know how he'll do in his next fight, let's not point fingers

bottom line johnson dominated roy, and knocked him out. he beat the great fighter of that era. he's shown how good he was once he got older. he beat legitimate contenders. he beat the guy who many consider another great light heavy of this era, antonio tarver

why is he not great?

Jones had just gotten knocked out by Tarver, brutally.

Jones could have been great and it could be argued that he was great. Who's comparing him to Robinson pound for pound?

Tarver wasn't and isn't great.

I'm not disrespecting Johnson, he is a very good fighter with a lion's heart.

[Boogie Nights]

Jones had just gotten knocked out by Tarver, brutally.

Jones could have been great and it could be argued that he was great. Who's comparing him to Robinson pound for pound?

Tarver wasn't and isn't great.

I'm not disrespecting Johnson, he is a very good fighter with a lion's heart.

i said people compared him to robinson, not P4P, but they said he was was the closest thing to robinson they saw. who? the public. the viewers, critics.

charles also lost 5 fights prior to facing walcott, one of those losses also was by ko, what's the point you're getting at?

even i by now would admit that i hold a strong point, but it's fine, im used to people discrediting my posts, and than accuse me of not knowing the sport that i loved ever since i was a little boy

i see a very nasty double standard here, but we can end it right now, i now that you sensing where im getting at but.....it would be pointless to continue

[Silencers]

i said people compared him to robinson, not P4P, but they said he was was the closest thing to robinson they saw. who? the public. the viewers, critics.

charles also lost 5 fights prior to facing walcott, one of those losses also was by ko, what's the point you're getting at?

even i by now would admit that i hold a strong point, but it's fine, im used to people discrediting my posts, and than accuse me of not knowing the sport that i loved ever since i was a little boy

i see a very nasty double standard here, but we can end it right now, i now that you sensing where im getting at but.....it would be pointless to continue

I have never heard anyone comparing Jones to Robinson.

Jones had gotten knocked out in the previous fight against Tarver, Charles was on a winning streak and hadn't lost in 4 years.