Will both Klitschkos get in the HOF?
Collapse
-
Id say yes, particularly because both have been very dominant. The division might not be the most competitive but both have put in some very good performances against tough opponents. Nobody has really challenged them since 2004. Not bad at all but i doubt they will ever get the credit they deserve. It all gets a bit sad when opponents are just trying to survive the bout rather than win (safety pin)Last edited by MUNG; 03-03-2010, 11:19 AM.Comment
-
I didn't mean that he is the lineal champion of the division, but check this: Margarito dropped the IBF title to fight Cotto, so really that should have been a fight to unify, but even if it wasn't it still determined the man in the division. Then Mosley beat that man. My post didn't observe the fact that alphabet titles sometimes have to be vacated to make the big fights happen, true, my fault.
Again I ask, is Mosley considered the man at WW right now or not?Comment
-
So in other words, all that belt/title **** doesn't matter. You have to beat the top fighter, right?I didn't mean that he is the lineal champion of the division, but check this: Margarito dropped the IBF title to fight Cotto, so really that should have been a fight to unify, but even if it wasn't it still determined the man in the division. Then Mosley beat that man. My post didn't observe the fact that alphabet titles sometimes have to be vacated to make the big fights happen, true, my fault.
Again I ask, is Mosley considered the man at WW right now or not?Comment
-
Of course it matters, where did I say it didn't? But beating the considered to be the best fighter in the division is always better than picking a belt, wouldn't you agree? Imagine if, when Lennox only held the WBC title, someone else had came along and unified the WBA and WBO, what do you think it would be better at that time, beating Lennox or picking two belts? Or a more recent example, Pacquiao recently beat Cotto and picked up a WW belt, but what would have been better, beating Cotto or beating Mosley (considering he would only pick 1 belt in both cases)?Last edited by Pirao; 03-03-2010, 11:32 AM.Comment
-
What would be better? Beating Wladimir or beating Arreola and Johnson?Of course it matters, where did I say it didn't? But beating the considered to be the best fighter in the division is always better than picking a belt, wouldn't you agree? Imagine if, when Lennox only held the WBC title, someone else had came along and unified the WBA and WBO, what do you think it would be better at that time, beating Lennox or picking two belts? Or a more recent example, Pacquiao recently beat Cotto and picked up a WW belt, but what would have been better, beating Cotto or beating Mosley (considering he would only pick 1 belt in both cases)?Comment
-
Beating Wladimir, we have already established this, and I already said that they won't fight each other and that it's not necessary to get into the HOF so why do you keep insisting on this? Are you just being obnoxious?Comment
-
How is it not necessary?
Tell me. What has Vitali done to be in the HOF?
Been a beltholder?
#2 guy in a division?
Beaten Chris Arreola & Sam Peter?
This is HOF stuff?
Are you just being ridiculous?Comment
Comment