How bad does a fighter have to be before you give up on him?

[leff]

And with your weak arguments that have no grounding, you've proven which of us is less bright.
Corrie Sanders has lost against much weaker fighters than either of the Klits.

It was Little Klit's camp that accused one of the most repected and professional cutmen in boxing of greasng their fighter. When he protested and no one bought it, they startedtalking about drugging. They have been full of excuses for his humiliating losses rather than just saying, "****. He got beat. Looks like we have some work to do."

The reason I pick out Little Klit for this, and this didn't just refer to him, as many beside you seem to have understood and responded to, is because of all the people making excuses, buying into these camp stories and still calling him a dominant heavyweight.

When wlad lost to purity they said he punched himself out and when he got ko by sanders they didnt make any excuse either sooo.

He has only excused his loss to brewster, which innded was very fishy, he looked a lot more tired in the brewster fight(5rounds) than in the purity fight (10) rounds.

Brewster didnt even hit im clean, it tok sanders fare more to knock wlad than it did brewset.

So the brewster fight just dont make any sense to me.

[hollister]

I don't offer any excuses for any of his losses, but have taken the stance that people are going to believe what they are going to believe, no matter how reasonable some of his fans may be, as I believe I have made every reasonable effort to have a reasonable and rational discussion about this. I believe he still has a chance, to me that is not that far fetched, and for him to be shot would require him not to have any concievable chance at being successful in the heavyweight division, but as one person said, He had his ass handed to him by Williamson". I adimit that Williamson shouldn't have been much of a test, but he clearly never had his ass handed to him, and to say that is to me irrational.