Originally Posted by frankenfrank
like what ?
Dude, you are like King Midas, nearly everything you touch here is (comedic) gold. Let's start with these gems:
- Chad Dawson and Antonio Tarver have a good chance of beating Archie Moore.
- Harold Johnson is below the level of Chad Dawson and Antonio Tarver.
- Chris Byrd, Orlin Norris and Jorge Castro are great but Harold Johnson isn't.
- If you don't prove yourself the best in your era you are not great. (Which carries the hilarious implication that you can be great if you are the best in your era, irrespective of how **** that era is. I mean, the fact you think Chad Dawson is better than Harold Johnson is so beyond the pale of rationality to be comedically absurd).
- James Toney is great despite losing EVERY round to Roy Jones and getting beat by Drake Thadzi, Dave Tiberi and Montell Griffin, but Johnson isn't great because he lost a series to Archie Moore and also lost to Jersey Joe Walcott when he had a back seizure, lol. The split decision win against Ezzard Charles seals the deal.
- Antotnio Tarver's resume is on par with Harold Johnson's and if we are talking quality wins, Tarver's resume is better.
- Glen Johnson is no where near Antonio Tarver in terms of p4p ranking.
- It's near impossible for Harold Johnson to go the distance with Vasilly Jirov, Paul Briggs, Roy Jones, Sebastiaan Rothman to say nothing of stopping Derrick Harmon and Imamu Mayfield.
- It's unclear whether Archie Moore is greater than Reggie Johnson.
- Harold Johnson is not better than Reggie Johnson.
- Wins against Henry Hall, Jimmy Slade, Paul Andrews, Wayne Bethea, Arturo Godoy, Gustav Scholz and Leonard Morrow are meaningless compared to wins against Glen Johnson, Eric Harding, Clinton Woods, Montell Griffin and Reggie Johnson.
- Your claims are based on a full historical perspective