If you bothered to read my posts in the thread, you'd know that it's not what I'm saying. I want a defintion of an ATG or else it's not possible to answer the OP. I asked the question as early as post 6 and it took 350 posts before one was given.
If people voting that Vitali is an ATG has a cut off at 50 then it's perfectly reasonable and thats why all the ridicule is so hypocritical.
It's not about one win, but body of work and dominance. It's not like this era is great it's more like the era of Holmes, Louis etc.
Others, like Lewis, have losses that prevents them from getting the ATG tag in my book.
If people voting that Vitali is an ATG has a cut off at 50 then it's perfectly reasonable and thats why all the ridicule is so hypocritical.
I mean what's going on with that? No doubt you will either not answer or simply reply with a question as is usual for you. But how about just answering something for once?
What win on Vitali's record makes him indisputably an ATG? Come on just name one win that we can point to and 'say yeah you know what he's an atg'. If you can't do that or just answer this with another question, just give up because you aren't going to win the debate by answering questions with questions and talking about him being dominant against bums.
What win on Vitali's record makes him indisputably an ATG? Come on just name one win that we can point to and 'say yeah you know what he's an atg'. If you can't do that or just answer this with another question, just give up because you aren't going to win the debate by answering questions with questions and talking about him being dominant against bums.
Others, like Lewis, have losses that prevents them from getting the ATG tag in my book.


Comment