Unbeatable?

[MANGLER]

This thread will have a lot of Prime Tyson or Prime Jones Jr replies, no doubt.

Co-sign that ****. Not many guys I'd pick over either of em at their best.

[alza1988]

http://<object width="425" height="3...mbed></object>

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Rick Frazier? Who the F is that? Nevermind, I could not care less.
From what I hear, there is some guys who will accept some of my soldiers where you are as well. You may be one of them, since you hang on my every word.

As you see, Jones is the main fighter mentioned when talking about "unbeatable" boxers. I think that speaks volumes toward ending our last debate, would'nt you say............................Here we go again, I'm sure.

And you call yourself a Jones nuthugger? I suppose it makes sense though. That was most people's reaction at the time.

Hang on your every word? You're quoting my posts from other threads on here.

Oh right, a few people on a forum (mainly Jones' huggers like you) say he was unbeatable. Oh ****. Thats scientific fact right there.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

I don't think ppl are understanding the topic. If a fighter lost in their prime then how can they be considered near unbeatable? Thus the likes of Foreman, Benn and Hamed do not even enter into consideration.

But Tyson, who was KOed by a journeyman in his prime is cool right?

Oh wait, as soon as he lost, he was shot. Forgot that.

[Fenom]

Tye Fields vs. anyone named Monte...............unbelievable

[Dan...]

But Tyson, who was KOed by a journeyman in his prime is cool right?

Oh wait, as soon as he lost, he was shot. Forgot that.

I would certainly not include Tyson. Whilst he was a beast he was also, IMO, clearly beatable in his prime. I only acknowledged that some ppl have raised questions as to how 'prime' he was when he lost. I do not by any means consider him to have ever been unbeatable though.

Personally I would probably only have prime Ali (first version) and prime Jones at 168. There are a couple of other debatable ones such as Sanchez at Feather.

[TheGreatA]

I would certainly not include Tyson. Whilst he was a beast he was also, IMO, clearly beatable in his prime. I only acknowledged that some ppl have raised questions as to how 'prime' he was when he lost. I do not by any means consider him to have ever been unbeatable though.

Personally I would probably only have prime Ali (first version) and prime Jones at 168. There are a couple of other debatable ones such as Sanchez at Feather.

What about Ricardo Lopez at minimumweight and Holyfield at cruiserweight?

Robinson was never beaten at LW or WW. I think there are some boxers who could've beaten him but I wouldn't favour anyone over him at those weights.

Maybe more so at welterweight though since he was still a young man as a lightweight.

[Dan...]

What about Ricardo Lopez at minimumweight and Holyfield at cruiserweight?

Robinson was never beaten at LW or WW. I think there are some boxers who could've beaten him but I wouldn't favour anyone over him at those weights.

Maybe more so at welterweight.

Definately Holyfield at cruiser warrants serious consideration.

As far as Lopez is concerned I don't think I have seen enough of his fights or those of the other top guys in that division to make an adequate judgement, so I will take your word.

I forgot Robinson, he was previously mentioned in this thread as being near unbeatable at WW.

[Pico Hollywood]

mayweather @ 130
Joan Guzman @ 126
Mosley @ 135
SRR @ 147
Duran @ 135

[Dan...]

To people saying Mosley at 135 - would you favour him to beat Duran and Whitaker at that weight?