i intended to add 'arguably' to my original statement, but then thought 'to blazes with it, i will state this emphatically to be in keeping with the trait of categorical statement-making this thread is following in!'
so, yes, we could argue about that.
Lennox being anywhere near the greatness of Ali and Robinson, however? that is not a defensible position. we can't just factor any impairments or ailments that a fighter may have carried over a portion of his career into a discussion of overall Greatness and award them extra points based on sympathy. so many fighters have carried some impairment/ailment or other through their career, but human beings adjust, adapt and compensate remarkably (ever hear of Django Reinhardt?) based on your thinking, Sam Langford should be declared the GOAT just for his win over Tiger Flowers alone.
so, yes, we could argue about that.
Lennox being anywhere near the greatness of Ali and Robinson, however? that is not a defensible position. we can't just factor any impairments or ailments that a fighter may have carried over a portion of his career into a discussion of overall Greatness and award them extra points based on sympathy. so many fighters have carried some impairment/ailment or other through their career, but human beings adjust, adapt and compensate remarkably (ever hear of Django Reinhardt?) based on your thinking, Sam Langford should be declared the GOAT just for his win over Tiger Flowers alone.
Comment