I want an old timer to reply to that very powerful statement I made, that K2 have 2 of the best HW resumes of all time?
Should be good for a laugh.
There are zero ATGs on the Klitschkos' resumes.
Haye might get into the HOF someday due entirely to his cruiserweight accomplishments. Besides him that's it. The next best win for either of them is Byrd.
Haye might get into the HOF someday due entirely to his cruiserweight accomplishments. Besides him that's it. The next best win for either of them is Byrd.
Neither Byrd or Haye will get into the hall of fame - unless Haye reclaims the heavyweight championship which I sincerely doubt.
Lewis is the only HOF that is on either man's resume, and we all know how that ended up.
Haye might get into the HOF someday due entirely to his cruiserweight accomplishments. Besides him that's it. The next best win for either of them is Byrd.
So the fisherman has caught himself a snapper ey. Or are you something bigger than your friend LacedUp who turned out to be nothing but a sea horse LOL.
So you want to bash Wlad's record on the premise that there are no fighters on his resume that are admitted as ATG's.
Firstly, what is an All Time Great? What if in the future there emerges fighters that could have beaten an ATG (as if that has not already occurred) Does that guy still get to be an ATG? Sure. The answer is that ATG is a measure of fighters achievements against the landscape of their day. It cannot measure h2h in any way and demonstratably fails to measure h2h accurately at all.
But there are some (very idiotic) ppl who think ATG is a good measure of H2H. Which is where I try to explain to them this...
In an era where there emerged several ATG's (like the 70's), none of the top guys could have really been that good, because if they were that good, they would not have allowed other guys to also appear so great. Ali, Norton, Fraizer were not significantly better than each other and because Foreman lost to Ali he didn't get a chance to excel either and so rather than consider them all just good but not special, they all got to be ATG.
Conversely in an era where there is a dominant champion like a Klitschko, no matter that the other fighters like Chagaev, Haye, Ibragimov etd are very good (better than 70's opponents by far), but because the dominant champion is so unbeleieveably good he cannot be defeated, no other boxers are allowed to shine and therefore only a single (ignoring Vitali for simplicity, the brotherhood has nothing to do with it because they didn't fight each other anyway) ATG emerges and of course, because he never allowed any other ATG's to emerge, he can't have any on his resume.
Even a small child can understand this logical conclusion.
But for some reason there are grown men with such walnut sized brains to actually use that WK doesn't have any ATG's on his record as a proof that it is bad, when in actual fact it's because he shut anybody out who had a ghost of a chance!
Seriously NSB, how did this fanbase not get more votes in the "Most Deluded Fanbase" poll? Read this ****ing thread and see what Klitschko fans say about them. Post 4 Post no one else comes close. They make as many deluded and outright wrong statements as the Mayweather and Pacquiao fanbases combined.
Comment