Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What active boxer has the best resume at heavyweight?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Originally posted by -Tunney- View Post
    Shot Tyson was KOed by Danny Williams
    close decision win over Mercer, who Wlad STOPPED
    the mediocre Moorer actually beat Holyfield
    Foreman was OLD and was beaten by Axel Shultz (who was robbed)
    Holmes was an OLD MAN
    Ruiz would have been easily KOed by either Klitschko, was beaten by Chagaev
    and cruiserweights don't count, this is about heavyweights

    It's so obvious Megamerican is a racist supremacist who hates Wlad.
    What does a Tyson loosing to Williams in 04 have to do with losing to Holyfield in 96 in a major upset, that is beyond ******ed. Holyfield beat a near-prime Ray Mercer in 95 while Wlad fought him in 02, seriously these are incomparable wins on their respective resume, Mercer was 34 against Holyfield and 41 against Wlad. Seriously stop with the agenda its boring.

    Comment


    • #52
      Tunney i cant believe you are saying Wlad has a better resume then Holyfield LOL

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by Megamerican View Post
        Explain to me how Wlad has a better resume than Holyfield? Who did Wlad beat that was so good? Who did Wlad beat who was as good as Rid**** Bowe or Mike Tyson?
        Only in your eyes is Mike Tyson so good yet we already determined in the last thread that loosing to Douglas in your prime and then getting KTFO by Lewis and Holyfield in the middle of his career, and then topping it off with a loss to Williams and a disgraceful quittage against McBride, does not make Tyson great. Bowe was also not as good as you make him out to be, having wars against Golota is not such a great feat.

        Comment


        • #54
          Holyfield, ATG, not top 10 ATG, top 15, first round hof when he finally retires no doubt, but his losses are hurting him.

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by PACATTACK View Post
            Losses counts for something, especially losses that happens during a fighters legit career when hes supposed to be competing at close to his peaklevel.

            If Wlad keep fighting til hes almost in his fifties and start losing to a bunch of scrubs, most people will look past that and evaluate him as how good he was before he was shot.


            This is bs. Legacy in boxing is not about making the correct decision when to retire.

            Wladimir has ZERO competition for the top spot. It is like comparing ruling the cruiserweight division of today compared to the bantamweight. The level of competition is a big difference.
            The level of competition that you are talking about is very subjective, Wlad beats the best, look at how many world champs, undefeated fighters, Olympic medalists he has on his W column. He has 14 total defenses of his title and he is still fighting. By any measure, Wlad is an ATG, now it's just a question of whether he will retire a top 10 ATG or a top 5.

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by WladIsTheChamp View Post
              The level of competition that you are talking about is very subjective, Wlad beats the best, look at how many world champs, undefeated fighters, Olympic medalists he has on his W column. He has 14 total defenses of his title and he is still fighting. By any measure, Wlad is an ATG, now it's just a question of whether he will retire a top 10 ATG or a top 5.

              Now i know you are just here for a wind up!

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by WladIsTheChamp View Post
                LOL at the last sentence. How do you define when a fighter is "old" then and "past their prime"? Because your Tyson nut hugging @ss thinks he got old and past it at 21 when he lost to Buster.
                Losses do count, otherwise stats would be meaningless. 49-0 would be meaningless. Nobody would mention the Dolphins' undefeated season then.

                Also by your definition, coming back in the face of adversity and over-coming losses would be meaningless, and we would stop keeping track of things like "two-time champ" and "three-time champ", Vitaly and Holyfield BTW are only a handful number of champs who won the title back 3 times.

                By your definition then, Pac is no longer great because he lost in the beginning of his career.
                Oh was he?

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by IronDanHamza View Post
                  Oh was he?
                  Oh my bad, he was MUCH older, practically an old man at 24.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by WladIsTheChamp View Post
                    The level of competition that you are talking about is very subjective, Wlad beats the best, look at how many world champs, undefeated fighters, Olympic medalists he has on his W column. He has 14 total defenses of his title and he is still fighting. By any measure, Wlad is an ATG, now it's just a question of whether he will retire a top 10 ATG or a top 5.
                    Exactly.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Biased poll as usual.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP