View Single Post
Old 10-08-2007, 07:36 PM   #64
Belt holder
ESB Addict
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,835
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Could Roland Lastarza have succeeded in other eras?

Originally Posted by hotti_killer
I know that but i don't class spinks,toney or jones as heavyweights do you? Also haye is only fighting at cruiserweight as he thinks he can get a title there before moving upto heavyweight, so he can be a two weight champion making him one of a few to have done this, thats if he suceeds. Also how do you expalin the loses that fighter's such as walcott etc had to poor competition as well as the obvious good wins and losses he had against good competition?
Why do I have to explain anything about Walcott. Haye has lost, after all, and Carl Thompson is not Joe Louis, or even Tiger Jack Fox. Everyone knows Walcott was a journeyman back in the thirties, with no trainer and no backing and holding a full time job.

Spinks and Toney fought or are fighting at heavier weights than Haye is fighting at now, and so for that matter did Moore. Jones fought at 193. What exactly is your point. As I said, you are playing ducks and drakes with the divisions but in fact the heavyweight is merely the unlimited division. If you want to claim modern giant heavyweights are better because they are bigger, stick to that claim. It does not prove any past era weak, though. But also remember that Haye has not in fact beaten bigger men than the fighters you are dismissing as small.

And by the way, these men could not use steroids or growth hormone.
OLD FOGEY is offline  Top
Reply With Quote