Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

yahoo calls Klitchko and ex "CHAMP"! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by pbds
    ....Yeah, he was the WBC champ. I don't get the thread. Did this guy just start watching boxing?

    Title Holder, not Champion.

    Champion implies accomplishment.

    Comment


    • #12
      "WBC Heavyweight Champion of the Wooorld"

      Thus champion in one form of the word.

      Comment


      • #13
        Michael Moorer's reign didn't last very long. But he still accomplished more in the first 9 rounds of his championship than Byrd did in his WBO reign.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by EXIGE
          "WBC Heavyweight Champion of the Wooorld"

          Thus champion in one form of the word.


          They Also say Champion in front of a number of other titles.

          Bottom line is that at Heavyweight, the propper term for all of them over the last few years (since Lewis retired) is title holder.

          Comment


          • #15
            The WBC heavyweight champion is considered the best in the division in almost everyones eyes, end of story.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by paul750
              The WBC heavyweight champion is considered the best in the division in almost everyones eyes, end of story.
              Don't be naive.

              Look at the context. He won in it a vacted fight with Corrie Sanders and made one defense agaisnt Danny Williams.

              That's beyond weak.

              Comment


              • #17
                Lets face facts, fellas... that's boxing today. Title holders everywhere, few real champs... we have to deal with it.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by paul750
                  The WBC heavyweight champion is considered the best in the division in almost everyones eyes, end of story.
                  I like Lamon Brewster. He won his title.

                  Rahman= Got the belt handed to him

                  Valuev= Controversial wins in his last two fights

                  Byrd= Title was vacated just so Don King could make money from Byrd-Holyfield.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by Bozo_no no
                    Vitali won the titles from Corrie Sanders, and defended it once agaisnt Danny Williams.

                    You can try and spin/sugar coat it any way you want, it was a joke.
                    I'm not spinning or sugar-coating. I'm comparing it to Byrd's and Ruiz's "reign." What else can you compare it to but to a fighter's piers in his era?

                    Sanders and Williams were coming off of impressive upset KO victories. Sanders had KO'd the #1 contender across the board in brutal fashion. Vitali destroyed them. That's what champions do. So he at least "played the part" better than anyone else.

                    Byrd and Ruiz looked like jokes with the same level fighters, most of which were coming off of nothing performances and losses in their last major fight, and Byrd/Ruiz only kept their belts through luck, corrupt and/or incompetant judging- take your pick. So as unimpressive as Vitali's HW career was in the whole scheme of things, it was clearly the best of the post-Lewis era. And all you can do is be the best in your era. He begged for a rematch with Lennox and chased him for over a year. Not his fault Lennox retired without settling that score.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      I was so disappointed with Vitali as champ. I mean, it was up for grabs against Sanders so he took it-cant blame him for that but Danny Williams? He couldve found someone better than that.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP