Heavyweight division officialy dead

You are a genius, man. You just blew my 1850's point clear out of the water.

 

Genius, man, you are a genius.

Willie Pep's televised fights shit on Bernard's. In fact, that's what is killing boxing. More fighters these days, I mean back then. I mean it's not the number of fighters, it's the number of fights each fighter had. I mean I got a thumb up my ass and I'm a dogg, man. Genius.

 

You honestly, seriously believe that Ring is a "racialist" publication prejudiced against whites?

You weren't watching boxing in 1999 and didn't have your first dialup account until 2000 so you probably aren't aware, but the Klitschkos were hailed as the second coming back then.

Also, just because this makes me chuckle in the context of you calling Ring racist & your asinine whining about Khan being a superstar



oh and





2 white guys on the cover, and one of them is in the forefront!

In fact, there were only *2* covers out of 13 that year which featured a black guy, and both were Floyd Mayweather Jr. Based on that, I use euro-fucktard logic to conclude that Ring is "racialist" and biased against black people.

 

This thread, by the way, is an entertaining example of what happens when you start out with a pre-formed conclusion and abandon logic and reason in an attempt at perceiving circumstances and facts as such that they suit your conclusion.

 

Simple
ton.

USA has won 48 golds at the olympics.
Cuba 32 (and couldn't fight pro until the recent defections)
Soviet Union 14 golds (but never fought pro)
East German 5 golds (but never fought pro)

Add in Poland (8), Kazakhstan (5), Bulgaria (4), Yugoslavia (3)...

Now consider that the entire time the Soviet Union fought the reality is that they surely left behind gold medal winners who could have represented their country if it hadn't been a soviet union putting forth only one boxer.

Gold medalists are the closest thing there is to picking a future great fighter and the fact is, many gold medalists didn't get to fight as pros.

Now that they all do, the sport has gone downhill. hmmm

 

I tried to read through this thread, but like an obviously shit movie I walked out after the first five minutes (the 1st page). No diss to you guys, it's the subject matter that just holds no interest for me. Heavyweights? Yuck!

Is there any chance of creating a heavyweight forum where we can keep such useless discussion separate from the real boxing talk? ::

 

seriously, you are an idiot

BoxRec is likely missing about 70% of the fights that took place prior to 1980... this is a well known and easily discernible fact

you are a moron

 

Again, BoxRec has incomplete numbers by A VERY LARGE MARGIN

you are a fool

 

Cuban fighters were routinely defecting in the 60s... including Jose Napoles and Sugar Ramos

the vast majority of world champions were NOT, in fact olympic gold medalists

still, keep pulling numbers out of your ass, you moron

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ns-X7qUg6fQ&t=0m20s

 

Like people who believe in God.

I didn't "pre-form" any conclusion. I stood in a store and read those magazines and formed my "conclusion" over few years.

You may have missed this, but Kelly Pavlik was the All-American hero. Youngstown. Ray Mancini. Rust. Bruce Springsteen. Lap it up, America.

 

:: :Chainsaw:

What are you going to do lib for lib? Discuss the upcoming plaster-of-mexico rematch with Cotto? Discuss the latest chapter in the never-ending will-they-won't-they saga that is Congressman Pac vs 2Pac Floyd?? Oh, is it Ward vs Froch? Will that keep us entertained for hours??

 

nobody lapped it up, though

 

Not after he got shoe-shined by that Muslim jail-bird from Philly.

Tell me...what did Pavliks cornermen mean when they exhorted him, around the 10th round, to "Don't lose to these motherfuckers".......

That always caught my attention.

Sounds like Youngstown Dippers don't much pree-shee-ate dem other sorts.

 

I'm thinking that was definitely racial

 

So did I, the minute I heard it that how I felt. Could be wrong. It's probably Brother Richards and his tampon on his head that upset them.

 

:giggle: I always suspected that Norman Stone, the detestable little maggot who piloted The USS RUIZ was the type of guy who would say something like that as well

 

Stone had his 15 minutes, then Alton chocked him out.

 

which was great, by the way

 

Yes, it is a perfectly fair argument. Wladimir was a title holder at heavyweight at the time with nothing more than a win over Chris Byrd (who the Ring also didn't like to rate very high) and a KO loss to Ross Purrity. It was absolutely reasonable to question this guy's ability to be a great heavyweight champion at the time and it had nothing to do with his race, his origin or even his style.

 

Prove it. You are either talking about railroad fights out by the hobo stand which you have already decided shouldn't count or you are talking about 'world-class' fighters...which is bullshit.

Prove it either way and we'll move on. Oh...and while you're at it (but you won't be because you don't try to back up anything)...please don't cite any 1850's statistics, genius.

 

:dunno:

Him and Grant were contenders.

Rank Grant the higher contender...fine, no problem.

But to rank Wlad the most overrated and juxtapose that against Grant being the most underrated, is daft.

 

Fair enough - you did say it was before Lennox v Grant, my mistake. so at this point it would be both Wlad and Grant are contenders, let's say even all the way up to March 2000 after Wlad beat Wolfgramm and right before Grant's title shot.

This was the most overrated & underrated fighters in all of boxing? Or just the heavyweight division?

I do think there was a perception taken up by Ring magazine that people were discounting Grant for the Golota fight when he should have been praised for coming back from adversity. I certainly don't remember the hype around Wlad at the time, but if there was any hype I think it is completely valid to question his merits as a top contender based on his KO loss to a journeyman and lack of quality wins at the time.

It's a completley ridiculous point to bring this up to "prove" some conspiracy against Wladimir, especially when after Wladimir began to prove himself in the ring as a fighter he was RANKED PROPERLY AND HIGHLY BY THE RING as #6, #1, and #1 heavyweight contender in 2000, 2001, & 2002 respectively. Then ranked as #8 in 2003 after he was KO'd by C/Sanders.

 

you seem to be clueless about the fact that a ballroom card happening in nowheresville, Alaska in 1960 is EASILY lost to history because no one cared to mention it... today, the fight is EASY to recall because the data is immediately posted and verified

thus, you get the FALSE impression that there are more fighters and more fights and the even more preposterous impression that fighters fight more OFTEN... you are a FOOL

 

it's common sense, idiot

 

Agreed...

...but both Hatton and Calzaghe were genuinely world class, the latter arguably better than the first four guys you listed above (two of which are in my favourite fighter ever list so I hate to say so). Froch would also haven given all four tough fights and likely won at least one of them.

MTF

 

Prove it. You never back up anything. You just try to take credit for claiming something in advance that you never did.

 

:giggle: so fucking stupid... it's like arguing with Corky

 

Thats all very good, its also probably irrelevant. Its a question of overrating and underrating. There is no way Wlad was overrated. How could there have been, if none of them were rating him?? :dunno:

Likewise, you got a guy who parlayed a win over Savarese and Golota into a title shot....so they must have thought he was ready....which sounds like a bad case of overrating, especially considering what happened.

 

obviously someone was rating him - and it wasn't the Ring at the time, as they thought he was overrated. As I said it was absolutely reasonable to question his quality at the time due to the loss to Puritty. He clearly had some hype to him, we ALL knew who he was and he especially had hype leading up to the Puritty fight and then he was KO'd. A big heavyweight contender who showed some flashes of brilliance against lower level talent, undefeated then gets KO'd by a journeyman? That sounds like a guy that qualifies as winning an award for being overrated.

Grant had better wins that Wladimir did leading up to their respective title shots. Look back in hindsight all you want but that's the reality. Grant earned a title shot more than Wladimir did.

This conspiracy theory you have about the Ring hating Wladimir is the only thing irrelevant, because it is make believe. Hindsight is 20/20, clearly now we know who is the better fighter... even the Ring owned up to that and ranked him accordingly from 2000-2003