When fighters are being compared who never fought each other or from two different weight classes we have to resort to comparing their resumes.
Now this could be a tough thing to do and can be based totally on opinion.
In these types of arguments you often he phrases like , "he was old and past prime" or "great win but his opponent was not in his natural weight class" or "good win but his opponent was just a good fighter and not a great fighter".
That being said I'm interested in seeing which win people give more credence to and value more.
1. A win over a great fighter but older and past his prime? Like say Calzaghe's win over Hopkins or Hatton's win over Kostya.
2. A win over a great fighter but naturally smaller and coming from a division or two below? Like Bernard's win over Tito and Oscar.
3. A win over a good fighter in his prime and in his natural weight class.
Which type of win do you give more value to when weighing a fighter's resume?
Now this could be a tough thing to do and can be based totally on opinion.
In these types of arguments you often he phrases like , "he was old and past prime" or "great win but his opponent was not in his natural weight class" or "good win but his opponent was just a good fighter and not a great fighter".
That being said I'm interested in seeing which win people give more credence to and value more.
1. A win over a great fighter but older and past his prime? Like say Calzaghe's win over Hopkins or Hatton's win over Kostya.
2. A win over a great fighter but naturally smaller and coming from a division or two below? Like Bernard's win over Tito and Oscar.
3. A win over a good fighter in his prime and in his natural weight class.
Which type of win do you give more value to when weighing a fighter's resume?
ha ha ha
Nice pic of Fatboy in your av Tua, I might go watch him KTFO of Ruiz..

Comment