View Single Post
Old 08-03-2012, 05:18 PM   #19
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,605
vCash: 330
Default Re: Langford's ranking at LHW

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boilermaker View Post
So a 200 lb man is a heavyweight, but a 180lb man is a light heavyweight?

And a a 170lb man beating a 200lb man is a heavyweight.

but if a 170lb man beats a 180lb man he is a heavyweight.

what happens if a 160lb man beats a 170lb man? is he a light heavyweight? But if he beat a 180lb man he is a heavyeight?

and if the opponent is great then the opponent is great, unless he weighs over 175 in which case he is of no relevance.

This ranking system is getting crazier and crazier. Though sometimes i think Frakenfrank uses a similar system which dents to give it more credibility
you are pretty crazy today pal and not one your posts has made sense.

I'm saying for me the weight of the fighter has to be reflective of the times and/or divisions.

a man weighin 180lb fighting a man weighing 170 lb is a fight more relevant to the weight division.

when greb fights at 160 vs say walker at 160, I class it as a Mw victory. when greb fights at 160 vs say tunney at 175, I class it as a lhw victory.

why would a fighter not be great if he weighs above 175? are you saying Joe Louis isn't a great fighter?

Frank has a h2h based system.

I mean this in the best possible way, are you high or something because every post I've seen of yours today is way off the subject at hand.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote