-
-
I have to ask you is English your first language?
Show me one time I've said Wlad was ducking Chisora or afraid of him. I have literally never said anything like that ever. It's just your simple mind with Wlad's balls in your mouth coming here "herp de derrp, Wlad's record doe". I clearly said: "both Wlad and Fury went for the money fight - Haye". Identical situations.
For the record, anyone needs to take a look at Wlad's record? *ahem* He let big brother take care of two of his crushers and only rematched the third one in a half blind, fat and out of shape version. Record doe.
Wtf are you talking about? I wanted Wlad to cancel the Chisora fight in April 2011 so he could fight Haye - the fight everybody wanted to see. You just don't understand boxing or logic man.
I don't care if it's a rare occurrence or not, you jumped in "You claim Wlad was scurrred" - And I had to correct your old ass and explain some logic.
And I have tried to reason with you multiple times, but you just don't get it man. You're a little too simple I think.
Your comments are tedious and predictable. Not the sort of comments you'd expect from a supposed 45 year old man I'd say. More like a kid akin to Scott Weiland.
I only ask because you either simply get confused when you have a conversation with more then one person or is it that your comprehension level is pretty low? I say that because you keep insisting that I talked about fighters ducking each other when I never made any such statements.
Again I only responded to a statement you made in a conversation that I was actually already a part of. Here is a thought, if you don't want other persons to respond to something that you say on a public forum can I suggest you start sending text or even an e-mail to them.
I also asked you the following question, "Whats next are you going to claim that Wlad was somehow afraid to fight Chisora?" How you twisted that question into a statement that I never made is beyond me. Is it possible that you simply don't understand the difference between a question and a statement? So once again I must question your comprehension level.
As far as the "for the record" comments concerning Wlad's loses at first I wasn't going to respond but what the hell I am tedious according to you. So why stop now? Lets start with Purity.
Wlad fought Ross in what I believe was his 26th fight in as many months and it was his first 12 round fight. Wlad had only fought one 8 round and two 6 round fights before that. He dominated Ross for 10 rounds and gassed and his corner stopped the fight. Wlad also wanted to rematch him but Ross was the one that was not interested. That is a detail that Wlad detractors never seem to talk about.
And if Haye not fighting Fury carries so much weight then the fact that Ross didn't want to rematch Wlad has to also count. But then again it doesn't fit your agenda so I am sure it doesn't count.
As for Brewster it was another fight Wlad was dominating and he gassed. Wlad was also hardly crushed in those two fights so I assume that the "crusher" statement you made was just you being overly dramatic. No surprise there.
As far as the rematch was concerned it was obvious that Lamont was not in the best of shape. But I don't believe that it mattered to Wlad. What I am saying is that it didn't matter to Wlad if Lamont only had one good eye or if had had 20-15 vision in both eyes I believe he still would have fought him.
After all, and for what ever reason, it is a well known fact that Wlad considered the Brewster lose the low point of his career and therefore the lose he really needed to avenge.
As far as Sanders is concerned he honestly wasn't very relevant when he beat Wlad. That is why it was deemed such a major upset and they happen. I am also not sure why a rematch did not happen but I do know what did happen. And what was that?
Sometime after Sanders beat Wlad he vacated the WBO belt. I pay no attention to alphabet ratings but I assume that is when the WBC ranked him in their top ten. As far as Vitali was concerned he wanted to rematch Lewis and that obviously did not happen. So why not take a revenge fight against the man who beat your little bro? But I am not sure if that was even his decision to make.
Simply because it wasn't as if Vitali was making a voluntary defense because he and Sanders fought for the belt that Lewis vacated. So I assume that the WBC saw a good storyline and ran with it and why shouldn't they have?
And after Vitali beat Sanders he once again became rather irrelevant. And I obviously cannot speak for Wlad but maybe that was enough for him. Or maybe he was truly scared 5hitless of Sanders or maybe he simply no longer cared. I don't know and either do you and really that the situation is pretty irrelevant at this point. That is to everyone except the Wlad detractors who always want to drag it up as the defining moment in Wlad's otherwise Hall of Fame career.
You also said something about me not having any logic. Well, I will tell you what is not logical and that is you trying to compare a fighter that has 24 fights to a fighter that has had 64 fights and a Hall of Fame career. That is at the very least way premature.
In closing I will ask this question. If you really do find my comments tedious and boring why do you even bother to take as much time and effort when you respond to them? I also find it amusing as well as a sign of weakness when you start hurdling insults my way.
By the way I am also no where near 45 years old and I have informed you of that on several occasions. But I guess it should come as no surprise that your math comprehension seems to be as bad as your reading comprehension happens to be.Last edited by Ravens Fan; 07-01-2015, 01:16 PM.Comment
-
Maybe, maybe not. But if he does, he won't fight like a twat then blame his crappy performance on a broken nail.Comment
-
I speak three languages fluently. Not that I would expect someone like you to understand what that's like.
I could ask you the same since you claimed I made Chisora out to be a serious challenger for Wlad. Never did, never have. I said he refused to fight him - that is just a fact. And I said I thought Wlad should have fought him instead of Vitali - because he signed to fight him previously.
No you weren't. You are welcome to respond, never said you weren't. But you jumped in and assumed, when the discussion was taken further from another thread on the same issue.
I clearly answered multiple times that I was happy Wlad dropped out of the fight (the second time) and never said he was afraid, which is what you're alluding to with such a ridiculous question that had already been answered.
Purritty remembered that rematches are only needed when you lose on cuts.
Those are not the same situations at all.
I beg to differ my friend.
He obviously became relevant after the just beating the no 1 contender in the world I'd say. Yes he became highly ranked and Vitali took over against Sanders which became for the lineal championship after Lewis retired.
“Yes, it would be nice to fight him [Wladimir] again. I do not know why he never wanted a rematch.” - Corrie Sanders
A guy called Joe Louis once refused to call himself champion before he avenged the defeat he had to Schmeling. Obviously this wasn't something Wlad cared much about.
I didn't compare their careers - I compared the opponents of each 24 first fights. You claim Fury hasn't fought anyone and whatever, but his resume is vastly better than Wladimir's was at the same stage in his career. That's just a fact.
Once again, you're not being very logical.
Because I find them so tedious and boring I wish to respond to them.
Yeah you really found my weak spot there. If you look back at your responses and see things like:
"Is English your first language?" "Your comprehension level is really low" <- multiple times, what's the difference? Other than I say it like it is and you try and wrap it up like a girl so you can defend yourself against it.
But you have claimed to be of that age before. Either you are lying now, or you were lying then.Comment
-
The following is a direct quote, "Regardless, he dropped out to make the fight everybody wanted to see. I don't blame him for that, but I do think he should have fought Chisora instead of Vitali."I speak three languages fluently. Not that I would expect someone like you to understand what that's like.
I could ask you the same since you claimed I made Chisora out to be a serious challenger for Wlad. Never did, never have. I said he refused to fight him - that is just a fact. And I said I thought Wlad should have fought him instead of Vitali - because he signed to fight him previously.
No you weren't. You are welcome to respond, never said you weren't. But you jumped in and assumed, when the discussion was taken further from another thread on the same issue.
I clearly answered multiple times that I was happy Wlad dropped out of the fight (the second time) and never said he was afraid, which is what you're alluding to with such a ridiculous question that had already been answered.
Purritty remembered that rematches are only needed when you lose on cuts.
Those are not the same situations at all.
I beg to differ my friend.
He obviously became relevant after the just beating the no 1 contender in the world I'd say. Yes he became highly ranked and Vitali took over against Sanders which became for the lineal championship after Lewis retired.
“Yes, it would be nice to fight him [Wladimir] again. I do not know why he never wanted a rematch.” - Corrie Sanders
A guy called Joe Louis once refused to call himself champion before he avenged the defeat he had to Schmeling. Obviously this wasn't something Wlad cared much about.
I didn't compare their careers - I compared the opponents of each 24 first fights. You claim Fury hasn't fought anyone and whatever, but his resume is vastly better than Wladimir's was at the same stage in his career. That's just a fact.
Once again, you're not being very logical.
Because I find them so tedious and boring I wish to respond to them.
Yeah you really found my weak spot there. If you look back at your responses and see things like:
"Is English your first language?" "Your comprehension level is really low" <- multiple times, what's the difference? Other than I say it like it is and you try and wrap it up like a girl so you can defend yourself against it.
But you have claimed to be of that age before. Either you are lying now, or you were lying then.
That is what you said and that is what I responded to, now you have changed what you said by adding more to it. I simply believe that any reasonable person would agree with me that based on what you said the first time that my response was more then adequate.
As far as the afraid comment is concerned you can read into all you want. But, once again you took a question that I asked and twisted into a statement that I never made. Honestly though that comes as no surprise because you really have a habit have claiming that I have said things that I had never said.
Such as you claiming that ducking crap conversation that never took place. Please point out were I have ever said anything about that and I will openly apologize. But again don't waste your time looking for something that was never said.
And whats with that ridiculous crap about my age? Let me straighten out your horse5hit lies for you. Since I joined this forum in 2008 I have never told anyone on here how old I am. I also have to wonder why you are so infatuated with my age, why is that even relevant?
I find no need to respond to the rematch based on cuts comment. Simply because I find it to be rather ridiculous.
Yes, it was different situations but Wlad wanted a fight that didn't happen and it was no fault of his own. So it was in fact a different situation that ended with the same result.
As for the Wlad-Brewster video I believe it helps prove my point. Because at the end of the round Brewster didn't even hit Wlad and then he proceeded to trip over the refs feet. And why? Because he was absolutely gassed and the ref rightfully stopped the fight.
Now there is no doubt that Brewster also hit him with a couple of hard shots. But I believe that any unbiased person would say that Wlad was also beyond gassed. Even Brewster himself agreed, as quoted, "I knew he would get tired, he'd either get tired of hitting me or get tired of me coming forward and putting pressure to his face."
I also never stated that Sanders wasn't relevant I said that he wasn't relevant for very long. I will also not speculate on why Wlad did not rematch him. I will say again everybody has a boogieman and maybe Wald's was Sanders. Even with that said I believe in the long run Wlad has more then made up for a moment that many of his detractors attempt to define him by.
As for Joe Louis he was great champion and by all accounts he was also a great human being. But what I don't understand is why would Max would rematch him? After all he didn't stop him on cuts.
As for the statement about you comparing Wlad's and Furys career I was not referring to the first 24 fights comment. I was actually referring to you spouting off about Wlad having more of a reputation of ducking fights then Fury does. I have to ask who has Wald ducked?
So what was it? Wlad did not fight Chisora twice and Fury didn't fight Usitnov once. That is easy enough math and you may have even had a valid point. That is if it wasn't for the minor detail that Wlad has had 43 more fights then Fury.
So you really should come back when Fury has had more then 60 fights under his belt and restate your case. Because as of now its a rather ridiculous argument on your part. And since you mentioned the first 24 fights I will even go there.
Again if not for some minor details you may have a had a valid point. And what are those minor details? The most glaring one is the fact that Wlad fought in his 25th fight in his 25th month as a pro. That is exactly one more fight then Fury has fought in his entire seven year career to this point.
So, in my opinion the timeline has to be taken into consideration and if not then you have simply taken it out of context. Here is some more numbers to think on.
Fury has been a pro for close to seven years. At seven years as a pro Wlad had 40 fights and had already won and defended a world title five times. So at this point, and regardless of how you want to label it, you in fact can compare them. But Wlad easily wins out every time. I also believe that any reasonable person would say that my response was as logical as it could get.
As far as the rest of the nonsense is concerned. I can honestly say that I truly do not care if you are capable of speaking six languages. I also don't care or how old you are or what you do for living or how much money you might make or who you happened to be married to or how many kids you may have. I also don't care what kind of house you may live in. Simply because I am not impressed with you in anyway. Therefore I most definitely feel no need what so ever to defend myself when it comes to you and your nonsense.Comment
-
You're right that was a quote from me. I said that Wlad dropped out (of chisora) to make the fight everybody wanted to see (Haye). ?? Then you go into me making Chisora out to be a serious contender and ask if I am making Wlad out to be scared You said I have comprehension issues...
Well, when you directly say that I made Chisora into a serious contender, which I never said, you say it was laughable and pathetic. Then you say, "what's next, going to make out Wlad was afraid of Chisora?"
As any human being with a normal functioning brain can see, you are the one making incorrect comments about what I have said about Chisora and take it into Wlad being afraid etc. I never made that hint or comment that he was.
Not sure what you're referring to here.
Very convenient that Wlad gets a pass on all those accounts.
Touché
He ducked two rematches and dropped out of Chisora twice - Faking an injury in the second scheduled fight. He should have fought Briggs in 2007, but chose to fight the much weaker Ray Austin.
There are a couple of examples out there. However, once again - The whole Wlad/Chisora saga came on the basis of Scott Weiland saying Fury ducked Pulev, and then I reminded him that Wlad was doing the exact same thing to Chisora - except that he actually signed to fight him TWICE.
Yes, Wlad didn't fight Chisora twice, he didn't fight Sanders, he didn't fight Purritty and he didn't fight Briggs. Fury took Ustinov on a day's notice and dropped out because his family member and brother of his trainer fell deadly ill and died soon after. Hardly a 'duck' to anyone with a normal functioning brain.
So that proves Fury progressed a helluva lot faster than Wlad, reaching world #1 contention in 24 fights. Bravo Tyson.
The timeline does need to be taken into consideration of course - and why are we even discussing this? I haven't said Fury is better or greater than Wlad at all. But it's an absolute fact that Fury has a better resume after 24 fights than Wlad had and the reason why this even was brought up is because someone asked how many undefeated fighters Fury have fought.
I merely pointed out that after 24 fights he has fought 4 times as many as Wlad had. That's another fact. Wlad is 15 years Fury's senior - of course you can't compare his whole career to Fury's recent entry on the world stage.
With regards to "5 world title fights"... lol, sure.
And I truly don't care if you care. But you brought up the question of my linguistic capabilities, I didn't. So if you don't care then don't ask in the future. But it seems like you have some trouble understanding others as well as keeping track of your own questions. You are very confused.
A man who says other men are weak for throwing insults and then proceeds to do it himself, mustn't be the sharpest tool in the shed.
The most laughable thing about you is that you get into a complete woman mode when someone dares to criticize your beloved idol.
Now that's laughable and pathetic.Comment
Tweet
Comment