Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comments Thread For: Which Active Fighters Deserve To Be Called Great?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    comments on the article...

    1) this is the most important point...

    Larry Holmes (who deserves to be called "great") gets it right when he says... "What makes a fighter great is the opponents he beats."
    like I have always said, there is only one valid criteria for greatness... who did you beat, with consideration given to when/how

    2) Keith Thurman is not a HOF'er... wtf ?

    3) this comment was the funniest in light of recent "discussions"...

    Gennady Golovkin looked great until he was tested. Then he began to look exceptionally good.
    like I have always said... Golovkin is very good, just not as good as advertised

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by ShoulderRoll View Post
      Uh, I would take prime Benny Leonard over Lomachenko.

      He finished his career with a record of 89-6-1.




      a very difficult fight for Lomachenko

      put it this way, I would not bet 1 dollar on the Lomachenko who lost to Salido, beating Benny Leonard in a 15-round fight

      Loma is more conditioned to the pro ranks at this point, but still

      this reminds me of bread's comment in the latest mailbag

      a fighter can be BETTER than another fighter and NOT be able to beat him. I’ve watched all of these fighters lose to fighters they were better than..... (the eye test) is not a full proof method of assessment because grit, toughness, punch resistance, IQ and consistent training are things that don’t show up as glaring but they can have a bigger impact on a head to head fight.

      we know all about Benny Leonard, he is not secret

      the above, is exactly what happened to Lomachenko... mostly because Arum mis-managed the timing in that fight... you never put a rookie in there with a vet, especially not if the vet... a) is tough as nails and will DEFINITELY be there for 12 HARD rounds... b) could easily miss weight, without penalty

      Benny Leonard is way better than Salido

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by Bunch Pag View Post
        Why make age an excuse for Canelo?. Tyson was world champion at 20.

        Pacman is one active that's definitely earnt it. Let's see how the future pans out for many others...
        Can't argue with that. Pacquiao is the only standout for me.

        Though obviously a long way to go in terms of greatness, Fury's comeback from 28 Stone and on suicide watch to WBC Champion and (largely considered) the best HW was certainly great.

        Comment


        • #14
          tyson fury the gypsy king undefeated biggest earner in the sport P4P # 1 the greatest of all time nobody could beat him not joe louis not ali nobody to big to strong to fast to skilled

          Comment


          • #15
            ***** Whyte. Greatest ducker in history. Turned down every final eliminator ever offered to him, and even a title shot against AJ.

            He has proven no amount of belts or cash is a match for his ducking talent.

            3 world titles... duck....
            Career high pay day.... duck

            Comment


            • #16
              Hmmmm...Canelo did not "beat" GGG when he was past his prime? Or Kovalev. Stop this Canelo butt kissing, Hauser.

              The only 2 active greats are Pacquiao and Loma. Pacquiao can lose to a 134-5 coming out of 5 years retirement journeyman and this will do nothing to his legacy. Not quite the same with Loma, but he is HOF already, IMO.

              Comment


              • #17
                Only way to be great in this era is to be both extremely talented and Vegas' chosen. A few select fighters get groomed from an early age and given the opportunities to be great. The rest, no matter their ability get the scraps from the table.

                I'm noting Hauser doesn't even mention Inoue here, and brushes over Usyk... Why? Cos what he's talking about is just as much fame as quality. Did you beat the biggest names in the biggest market? Its a measure of greatness I guess, but in no way does it make for a level playing field.
                Last edited by Citizen Koba; 05-31-2020, 06:09 AM.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by Ant1979 View Post
                  Can't argue with that. Pacquiao is the only standout for me.

                  Though obviously a long way to go in terms of greatness, Fury's comeback from 28 Stone and on suicide watch to WBC Champion and (largely considered) the best HW was certainly great.
                  Agree, love it hate him, Be some feat should he remain unbeaten with a trilogy of wilder, a double over AJ and a couple of mandatories to his name....

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by Citizen Koba View Post
                    A few select fighters get groomed from an early age and given the opportunities, .
                    Now that is one key factor overlooked by many, especially by the ones within the sport imo.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Chocolatito, Fury, Canelo, GGG (arguably beat Canelo twice), Lomachenko isn’t the fraud some claim, Pacquiao.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP