Vitali's mythical poor resume pt 2

[LacedUp]

This is one of the best examples of the complete delusion of some fans. A 40 year old former champ and top fighter, now a shot veteran loses and because you can find examples of some heavyweights at 40 still being reasonably good, Wladimir beat a still excellent version because Mercer should have still been good at 40.

He wasn't, and you yourself imply that, but because he should have been, and maybe could have been if he'd lived a Hopkinsesque lifestyle, Wlad should get props for beating a top version?

It's Mercers fault that Wlad beat an old, shot version. Mercer should have been younger, better, still going strong at 40. After all, Vitali could still beat guys at 40. That means Mercer was still good.



I've seen it all now.

The same guy also wants to give Vitali credit for a top 10 rated fighter in Shannon Briggs. Because he was once rated in the top 10. :bukkake:

[LacedUp]

You have seen it all have you? Do Vitali Klitschko and George Foreman ring a bell dip****?

Or are you just willing to admit that they were an exception to the rule?

Or even, that the current title run Vitali is on at 42 years of age, is somewhat unprecedented?

That can't be can it, can it?

I seriously didn't think it was possible to be this ******ed.

I'm assuming we'll give Holmes credit for beaten Ali? I mean, he was only 38 or so at the time.

[Weltschmerz]

If you weren't such a total moron you'd realize you can check past contenders accomplishments against those of today and that its not a h2h comparison. It's about who they fought before and after their championship attempts.

Well of course it is. 'Who beat who', right? It's all about rankings, as if anyone gives a **** about rankings. You can't throw a comparison up like that and claim it to be factual basis for your wicked argument that past eras were so superior. Today's technology and sports science has improved fighters and will continue to do so. Athletes are faster, stronger, and more skilled today.

[MartinC]

Well of course it is. 'Who beat who', right? It's all about rankings, as if anyone gives a **** about rankings. You can't throw a comparison up like that and claim it to be factual basis for your wicked argument that past eras were so superior. Today's technology and sports science has improved fighters and will continue to do so. Athletes are faster, stronger, and more skilled today.

Shows what you know. Athletes today are lazy. Everything is done for them so they take supplements and hit the weight room. Today's technology is designed to make it easier not better. And even if you disagree or simply don't understand. All the modern training in the world does not excuse the careful matchmaking and timing todays fighters need to stay on top.

[LacedUp]

Well of course it is. 'Who beat who', right? It's all about rankings, as if anyone gives a **** about rankings. You can't throw a comparison up like that and claim it to be factual basis for your wicked argument that past eras were so superior. Today's technology and sports science has improved fighters and will continue to do so. Athletes are faster, stronger, and more skilled today.

Which fighters exactly are we talking about here? Who are faster,stronger and more skilled? Are the Klitschko's faster or more skilled than Mike Tyson, Larry Holmes or Muhammad Ali? No. Are the Chris Arreola's, Chagaev's, Chambers', Povetkins', Haye's, faster,stronger more skilled than the Frazier's, Foreman's, Norton', Lyle's, Shavers's etc? No.

So stop talking nonsense. You obviously don't know what you are talking about.

This is a 70's fighter without your sports nutrition and technology



This is a current fighter with all the sports nutrition and technology:

[Weltschmerz]

Shows what you know. Athletes today are lazy. Everything is done for them so they take supplements and hit the weight room. Today's technology is designed to make it easier not better. And even if you disagree or simply don't understand. All the modern training in the world does not excuse the careful matchmaking and timing todays fighters need to stay on top.

The careful matchmaking and timing you're mentioning is part and parcel of today's politicized game. It's business and marketing, promotion, sanctioning bodies etc. That's why the best don't fight the best all the time anymore. I disagree that athletes are lazy (there are exceptions of course, as there always was). The new crop of Eastern European hws for example are all dedicated top athletes.

[LacedUp]

The careful matchmaking and timing you're mentioning is part and parcel of today's politicized game. It's business and marketing, promotion, sanctioning bodies etc. That's why the best don't fight the best all the time anymore. I disagree that athletes are lazy (there are exceptions of course, as there always was). The new crop of Eastern European hws for example are all dedicated top athletes.

No they are not.

And boxing has always been a politicians game. There has always been the same problems as there are now. You would know that if you knew anything about boxing.

[Weltschmerz]

Which fighters exactly are we talking about here? Who are faster,stronger and more skilled? Are the Klitschko's faster or more skilled than Mike Tyson, Larry Holmes or Muhammad Ali? No. Are the Chris Arreola's, Chagaev's, Chambers', Povetkins', Haye's, faster,stronger more skilled than the Frazier's, Foreman's, Norton', Lyle's, Shavers's etc? No.

So stop talking nonsense. You obviously don't know what you are talking about.

This is a 70's fighter without your sports nutrition and technology



This is a current fighter with all the sports nutrition and technology:

Exception is not the rule.

[Weltschmerz]

Also, many of the past fighters you claim to be 'hw's were cruisers or lhw by today's standards. Fighters were simply smaller in the past, in shape or not.

[LacedUp]

Exception is not the rule.

No it's not.

Solis was a 200 pound amateur. Now he looks like this: