Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What makes Fury a special fighter?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by BodyBagz View Post
    You need somewhat ''elite'' opponents to test your skills.

    Fury has yet to fight an ''elite'' guy.

    No you don't.

    If elite opponents are there when you reach the top, you fight them to determine #1.

    If there are no elite names to beat, then that's not a knock on the fighter. All you can ask of a fighter is to beat who is in front of them.


    With Fury specifically, he dominated the one elite fighter of the last era, and the torch was passed.

    YOU rating the win over Wlad poorly means jack to us. Its overwhelmingly considered a historically outstanding victory. Doesn't matter that you disagree. So bringing up elite opponents as if he has yet to face one is laughable. Like I said elsewhere, that win over Wlad is better than most wins of any active fighter across any division!!!!! LMAO at calling a pure domination, a pure masterclass over an undisputed champ with a 10 year reign, someone unanimously considered a future ATG and HOF, anythingless than outstanding.

    Comment


    • #62
      What makes him special, is that he kisses men. Or is it because he is a steroids cheat? Or maybe because he married his third cousin? Or possibly because he has an atrocious resume and has never defended a belt? I can't decide...

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by LoadedWraps View Post

        No you don't.

        If elite opponents are there when you reach the top, you fight them to determine #1.

        If there are no elite names to beat, then that's not a knock on the fighter. All you can ask of a fighter is to beat who is in front of them.


        With Fury specifically, he dominated the one elite fighter of the last era, and the torch was passed.

        YOU rating the win over Wlad poorly means jack to us. Its overwhelmingly considered a historically outstanding victory. Doesn't matter that you disagree. So bringing up elite opponents as if he has yet to face one is laughable. Like I said elsewhere, that win over Wlad is better than most wins of any active fighter across any division!!!!! LMAO at calling a pure domination, a pure masterclass over an undisputed champ with a 10 year reign, someone unanimously considered a future ATG and HOF, anythingless than outstanding.
        If you are......oh never mind. We will not ever change the others opinion.












































        Tyson Dirty, though

        Comment


        • #64
          At the end of the day, a fighter is only as good as his resume (unless you're a super hardcore, can't tell you nothing kind of fan ).

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by BodyBagz View Post
            At the end of the day, a fighter is only as good as his resume (unless you're a super hardcore, can't tell you nothing kind of fan ).

            That's only one way to look at it, and not everyone only considers resume. Also a resume must be taken into context.

            And what do you even really mean to say here? Are you telling me the resume of a future HOF fighter, a guy who has a dominant win over a future ATG and undisputed champion, a man who has never tasted defeat, and taken all challengers, is weak? A man who's dared to be great? A man willing to die in the ring?

            Just trying to figure out if that's what you're saying here.

            Comment


            • #66
              His ability to fill his resume up with the likes of Sefer Seferi, Otto Wallin, Tom Schwartz and Francesco Pianeta and then get people to say you're great.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by LoadedWraps View Post

                That's only one way to look at it, and not everyone only considers resume. Also a resume must be taken into context.

                And what do you even really mean to say here? Are you telling me the resume of a future HOF fighter, a guy who has a dominant win over a future ATG and undisputed champion, a man who has never tasted defeat, and taken all challengers, is weak? A man who's dared to be great? A man willing to die in the ring?

                Just trying to figure out if that's what you're saying here.
                Fighter C (Tex Cobb for instance) has a pretty terrible resume BUT let's say he faced the best of the best and usually put on a good show.

                Then you have Fighter A who goes through life beating up guys like Cobb....Fighter A gets no credit from me.

                How do you rate Rocky's win over Louis ?

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by LoadedWraps View Post

                  That's only one way to look at it, and not everyone only considers resume. Also a resume must be taken into context.

                  And what do you even really mean to say here? Are you telling me the resume of a future HOF fighter, a guy who has a dominant win over a future ATG and undisputed champion, a man who has never tasted defeat, and taken all challengers, is weak? A man who's dared to be great? A man willing to die in the ring?

                  Just trying to figure out if that's what you're saying here.
                  Not weak at all.

                  But:
                  - hasn't yet defended a title.
                  - beat just two guys of any note, one of which is an incredibly limited boxer.

                  By any measure and even in terms of what's around in the division, it's not a great CV.

                  He could probably go out and beat anyone we might pick from the top 10, but he hasn't yet done it.

                  And I've still got a sense with Fury that if he takes 4 or 5 decent fights, he'll lose one. He might just drop his standards or have an off night and get done.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Toffee View Post
                    Not weak at all.

                    But:
                    - hasn't yet defended a title.
                    - beat just two guys of any note, one of which is an incredibly limited boxer.

                    By any measure and even in terms of what's around in the division, it's not a great CV.

                    He could probably go out and beat anyone we might pick from the top 10, but he hasn't yet done it.

                    And I've still got a sense with Fury that if he takes 4 or 5 decent fights, he'll lose one. He might just drop his standards or have an off night and get done.
                    I actually agree that it means little when compared to the resume of greats if he doesn't defend his title(s) and not one or twice, but on a good run.

                    Might be the best post I've ever seen from you. I disagree that his resume doesnt measure up to others in the division, I think it's the best, and I do think he will be considered that guy, when it's all said and done, but historically, his resume isn't the best yet, and time will tell how it will plays out.

                    I'm big on not crowing a guy ultimately until his career is done anyway.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by 15 Rounds again View Post
                      His ability to fill his resume up with the likes of Sefer Seferi, Otto Wallin, Tom Schwartz and Francesco Pianeta and then get people to say you're great.
                      Unfortunately for you and this take, his resume is more than 3 fights deep.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP